Public Opinion.

Putaruru Press, Volume XI, Issue 268, 7 September 1933, Page 5

Public Opinion.

(A COLUMN FOR THE PEOPLE) FOOT-AND-MOUTH DISEASE. (To the Editor). Sir, —I was interested to read that a Farmers’ Union in Wairarapa had discussed the importation of stock from Great Britain and had passed a resolution that the Government be asked to reduce the restrictions and make it easier to bring animals here.

Surely they cannot realise the very grave danger of foot-and-mouth disease, or they would not only demand that the restrictions be increased but that we, like Jersey Island, absolutely prohibit the importation of ali animals. The island of Jersey has only 11,000 head of ! cattle, and has not permitted any importation since 1783, that is for 150 years. Last year on the Windsor estate, in Devon, there was an outbreak, and all the stock on the place, which included cattle, sheep and pigs, was destroyed. The animals were put into specially-dug pits, and nine tons of coal and a similar amount of wood was used in the burning. When leaving the infected area the wheels of vehicles had to be driven through a liquid mixture, and people had to walk through it, before being allowed to enter a clean county. It is quite certain that in time the disease would be brought here by some “ carrier ” beast, and what would be the result when it got among the deer and wild pigs, for they could not all be shot and burned?—absolute ruination to all, both in town and country. It would settle one question without any discussion—quotas, for nothing could be exported.

Waldmann, experimenting with 500 recovered cattle, showed the virus to be present in six of them at varying intervals from 6 to 246 days after infection. Loffier (the discoverer of the virus of foot-and-mouth disease in 1892) considered that cattle could excrete the virus up to seven months, and in an exceptional case ah infected guinea pig was excreting virus 198 days after infection.—l am, etc., R. HALDANE COOK.

FARM ECONOMICS. (To the Editor.) Sir, —I would like to warn those of your farmer readers who may not be well versed in farm economics against the “ tripe ” that, is being dished up to New Zealand at the present time about winter dairying. It may seem like presumption on my part. to describe as “ tripe ” the findings of such experts as Professor Riddet and his associates, but I contend that when such a reversal of the natural order of things as an attempt to spread ..the flush of dairy farm production evenly over the whole twelve months of the year is suggested, then those making the suggestion should first of all produce authentic and detailed figures to show that their scheme is financially practicable. I do not deny that we should all endeavour, by improved methods, care and attention, to get the absolute maximum production from our cows in autumn and winter months as well as in the spring and summer, but I would point out that the cost of producing butterfat in the winter is much greater than it is in summer, and unless it can be shown that the problematic increase in prices, which it is claimed would be obtained through winter dairying, will substantially offset the greatly increased cost of winter production, it is extremely wrong to urge unthinking people to make costly efforts to transpose the seasons, thus, running the risk of further financial embarrassment for the Sake of a hazy promise of a slight marketing gain.—l am, etc., H. M. GOUK. Turanga-o-moanu.