Cheaper and More Permanent Fencing

New Zealand Journal of Agriculture, Volume 91, Issue 6, 15 December 1955, Page 569

Cheaper and More Permanent Fencing

By

G. S. WILSON,

Massey Agricultural College, Palmerston North THERE is no need to stress to farmers, particularly those in hill country, the increasing • need for subdivision fencing. During the recent war and afterward existing fences fell into disrepair through lack of labour and materials. This condition has persisted to some extent through the post-war years.

THE adoption of aerial topdressing and oversowing of hill country, now tried and proved and rapidly gaining in efficiency and popularity, has further complicated the problem of fencing by emphasising the need for further subdivision to enable efficient management of the resultant improved pastures. But lack of timber and the steadily mounting costs of all fencing materials, labour, and transport have made it impossible to meet the need for more fencing by following orthodox fencing practices. If by departure from the orthodox methods practised today fencing can be carried out as efficiently and much more cheaply, with the use of only the most durable materials above and below ground, the sooner knowledge of the new methods becomes widespread the better. In the first place only long-lasting materials should be used. The type of fence that has been accepted for generations is too costly to erect today and will incur a further enormous bill for depreciation over any long period. Replacement costs for materials plus labour and transport over 50 or 60 years might perhaps add £4OO to £5OO per mile for battens alone, and for posts a further £6OO to £7OO. If more lasting (above and below ground) and lighter materials of equal efficiency can be employed at similar or less cost, heavy depreciation may be reduced considerably. A good deal has been published hitherto in “The New Zealand Journal of Agriculture” on orthodox farm fencing. In the November 1950 issue a fencing technique known today as Hunter fencing, from its inventor Mr. C. Hunter of Waione, was dealt with. Though the popularity of this new type of fencing is steadily increasing, the old style still predominates, despite its cost. Several hundred miles of Hunter fencing have already been erected, and its efficiency for containing both sheep and cattle has been amply proved. * Air Transport Air transport of fencing materials was described in the July 1955 issue of the “Journal”. A very successful drop was made in April in hill country near Porirua, and the practicability of an all-metal fence was demonstrated

by the building of such a fence from materials dropped from the air. These materials had been adopted for lightness combined with strength and durability and. at a reasonable estimated. cost compared with timber. The galvanised steel angle units for posts were ingeniously used for stays, angles, or strainers by twofold or fourfold lamination of the units, which were shackled together as shown in the diagram below. In addition

galvanised steel plate units served a dual purpose, for breasting or footing as required. This considerably lessened the- problem of dropping from the air each unit of the fence just where it was needed on the line. Investigation of the type of all-metal fence demonstrated at these airborne fencing trials and successful experi-

ments with Hunter fencing make it apparent that; a combination of the two would provide an excellent fence:, a minimum of galvanised steel units’ and galvanised steel footing plates’ combined with Hunter chain droppers; and Hunter tie-down footing devices. The following are some of its main advantages:— Comparative cheapness (probably 40 ! per cent, cheaper than an orthodox, timber fence). Minimum bulk and weight of materials and less subject to damage from air drop. Tightness combined with resilience (ability to absorb shock from stock). Longer-lasting materials, entailing minimum maintenance and depreciation. Minimum resistance to wind or snow.

Wire can be more easily pulled out of slips and re-erected in country prone to slipping. A fence as above is compared in the table on page 572 with an all-metal fence of rigid posts and droppers erected according to the technique in almost general use in the North Island today. Costs of materials in both fences are as nearly as possible estimated on today’s Wellington retail prices to the farmer, except for steel standards, plates, and rigid metal droppers. These have been produced in small quantities by a Wellington firm of engineers for trial use, and the cost of whole-' sale production can only be estimated approximately. Retailers would add perhaps 20 per cent, to the wholesale cost for distribution. Hunter-type Fence Following is a description of components of the Hunter fence and their method of erection: —

1. Chain droppers: The use of these is probably the most unorthodox feature of the fence. They contribute

to give it resilience or ability to absorb shock. Made of 12-gauge galvanised chain (bought in 500 ft. coils) they can be cut to the required length for droppers at home or on the fenceline with a snip of the wire cutters. They are spaced approximately 3ft. apart in the fence. Patent fasteners, quickly and easily attached, keep the droppers in position and allow the wires to run freely through, making re-straining easy (see below).

2. Posts: 2 to 2| rigid posts per chain are needed against 4 or 5 in the orthodox hill country fence. Made of galvanised right-angled steel 6ft. 6in. x Ifin. x lfin. x 3/16in., they are very strong and weigh only about 141b.(about i or I the weight of a timber post). The diagram at the top of this page shows the probable economy in

CHEAPER AND MORE PERMANENT FENCING

posts on a typical 2-chaln section of fence erected in hill country in the Hunter style, compared with an orthodox fence over a similar contour. 3. Spreaders: Where the interval between posts exceeds, say, 24ft. an intermediate rigid metal spreader can be used. It rests on the ground to support sag in the wires from horses or cattle reaching over. 4. Tie-down footing is a galvanised steel 3/16in. plating unit as for breasting. It is buried, in the ground to the required depth with a patented, noncorrosive, stainless steel 10-gauge cable attached by a loop through a hole in the plate. This cable is looped

again just above ground to a length of 9-gauge galvanised chain (bought in 250 ft. coils) which ties the wires down to the required gauge (see diagram below). 5. Breasting: Unless breasted, narrow steel posts will not stand up to lateral pressure and will be pushed out of line. The same galvanised 3/16in. plate with an L shaped slot to take the angle iron is used to breast a post. 6. Strainers: Four angle-steel post units laminated and shackled together make a strong strainer, the back unit being sunk to ordinary post length, and each succeeding lamination sunk

* Galvanised standards, plates, and rigid distribution would add approximately 20 per c( are at present Wellington retail prices, approximately 6in. lower into the ground, thus giving a total length of Bft. The strainer is footed with the usual steel footing plate and stayed in two places' with single post units locked against the shackles as stays. 7. Angle posts: These are made from two angle-steel post units laminated together and footed and stayed in the same manner as the strainers. 8. Wire: 12-gauge galvanised hightensile steel wire may be used for the 6 plain wires. It does a first-class job, keeps tighter than No. 8, and is very strong, giving spring and resilience to the fence. However, over a long period this wire may prove to be less rust resistant than the commonly used heavier and softer No. 8 wire. For ordinary stresses. from cattle in hill country it has been proved efficient. It is suggested that 10-gauge hightensile wire, if procurable, might have all the advantages of both the lighter .and the heavier wire with none of their disadvantages, but at present practically none of this gauge is being imported. ’Use of High-tensile Steel Wire . A certain amount of prejudice exists .against use of high-tensile steel wire in a post and batten fence;, mainly criticism is that the wire breaks on ’being re-strained wherever it has to he re-tied or wherever it has been kinked when stapled hard home to a batten.

droppers are quoted at manufacturer’s (estimated) mt. on to these materials, that is, approximately In Hunter fencing steel wire is not open to such criticisms. First, there is no need to untie the wire. Lengths of 9-gauge chain are attached to each wire in the middle of the strain and any type of wire strainer takes up the slack link by link. Secondly, as the wires in a Hunter fence run freely through all posts and droppers there should be no risk of kinking the wire at any point. Ordinary No. 8 wire can be used, but it will need constant re-strain-ing, for it is essential to keep Hunter fencing tight. Its use will add approximately 10s. per chain to the cost of the fence. Barbed wires are commonly used at top and bottom. They keep the droppers in place and discourage stock, particularly horses, from leaning over and lambs from squeezing under the wires, especially in the longer spans between posts. In such places, if plain wires only are used, it is necessary to anchor the bottom wire lightly to the ground at intervals. If a barbed wire is not used, droppers must be attached with a special patent locking fastener to prevent lateral slipping. Timber is scarce and costly and is not durable enough to warrant its use in hill country fencing at ruling labour and transport costs. Concrete is too heavy and too

wholesale prices. Merchants' retail prices for £9O to A and £4O to B. All other materials brittle for steep hill country transport. The unorthodox technique of Hunter fencing can be no more subject to criticism today than were the first wire fences, which began to supersede stone walls, palings, and rails about a century ago. Since this article was compiled a questionnaire has been sent out to all known users of Hunter fencing materials. So far data for approximately 130 miles of fencing have been collected, and in all major respects reports have been strongly in favour of this technique for hill country. However, a number of farmers have criticised the quality of galvanising on the chain droppers. There is apparently a good deal of rusting already. This may be the result of second-grade galvanised wire having been used during periods of shortage, or it may be from strain on the wire going through the manufacturing machines. Farmers should insist on firstquality galvanised chain. Redipping of the chain after manufacture may be the remedy. Representations have been made to the principal manufacturers and it is expected that the defect will be rectified quickly.

’Materials Estimated quantity Estimated cost Weight A B 4 B A B £ s. d. £ s. d. cwt. cwt. Galvanised steel standard units 6ft. 6in. x Ifin. x l|in. x 3/16in. @ 13s. each 460 220 299 0 0 143 0 0 54 26 Galvanised steel plates for footing, breasting, etc. @ 2s. 3d. each 422 262 47 10 0 29 10 0 71 •5 9-gauge chain for fastening wires to posts, footing, etc. (850ft.) 3 2/5 coils i ■ @ £4 15s. each. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. • ■ • • — 850ft. — 16 3 0 — li 80 patent stainless steel footing wires @ 26s. 6d. per dozen — 80 — 8 17 0 — i 12-gauge galvanised chain for droppers and spreaders (5,250ft.) 10J coils @ £5 17s. 6d. each .. — 1,500 — . 62 0 0 — 4 4 1,350 galvanised rigid droppers @ £6 per 100 1,350 — 81 0 0 13J 30 shackles for stays @ 2s. (estimated) each 30 • 30 3 0 0 3 0 0 1 i 80 galvanised spreaders (for longer spans between posts) @ £6 per 100 — 80 4 16 0 1J No. 8 galvanised wire @ £67 per ton .. .. .. .. .. .. • • 23cwt. 30yds. 77 10 4 0 23 No. 12 galvanised steel wire @ £80 per ton . . .. .. .. .. — cwt. — 30 0 0 71 Galvanised barbed wire @ £80 per ton 3|cwt. wt. 14 0 0 28 0 0 3 J 7 B patent stapling attachments for chain droppers (10 bags) @ 30s. per bag .. — lewt. — 15 0 0 1 A stapling attachments for standards (lewt. No. 8 wire) @ £67 per ton lewt. — 3 7 0 — 1 1 B patent stapling attachments for standards (2| bags) @ £1 per bag .. .. — Jcwt. — 2 10 0 2 10 0 1 i 524 18 0 343 0 0 103 55 Transport: Rail £4 10s. per ton (estimated) 23 0 0 12 8 0 Road £1 per ton (estimated) . . .. • • ■ ■ .... 5 3 0 2 15 0 * Air £8 per ton (estimated) 41 4 0 22 0 0 Erection of posts driven, and footings, strainers, etc., dug in (estimated) . .. 180 0 0 . ISO 0 0 140 0 0 140 0 0 Total 771 5 0 520 3 0

COMPARISON OF COSTS FOR ERECTING ORTHODOX FENCE AND ALL-METAL FENCE A = 1 mile orthodox technique: 8 strainers (composite); 5 steel posts per chain; droppers, 3ft. spacing; 7 No. 8 plain galvanised wires and 1 barbed. B = 1 mile Hunter technique: 8 strainers (composite); 2 steel posts and I batten spreader per chain; droppers, 3ft. spacing; 6 No. 12 galvanised steel wires and 2 barbed.