NEW ZEALAND FLOCKS.

Auckland Star, Volume XXXVI, Issue 45, 22 February 1905, Page 6

NEW ZEALAND FLOCKS.

STEADY INCREASE EXPECTED.

(By Telegraph.—Press Association.)

CHEISTciuECH, this day.

Iβ his address at the annual meeting of the shareholders of the Christchurch Meat Company held yesterday, the managing director (Mr Anderson) said, in regard to the future position: "As we , understand, it is as follows: The Government annual sheep returns give the total number of sheep in the colony as 15,250,506, or a decrease of 673,741 from the previous *year, but there has been an increase of 172,890 breeding ewes. In fact, there were 10,265,295 ewes, and as there were 4,923,749 lambs, half of which would be ewe lambs, we have the total of 12,720,169 of our flocks capable of breeding—nearly 75 per cent, of the total. Taking the low percentage of 75 per cent, for lambing, we could have a possible increase of 9,444-626, which would provide them ample supplies to allow for a large death-rate, local consumption, and leave abundance for export. But to come to the actual facts: Instated that there was an increase of 172,590 more breeding ewes, and as the figures published of the numbers killed at the freezing works are given as 975,465 less than in previous years, we can safely come to the conclusion that we have reached a point when we can expect a steady increase in our flocksThese figures are mainly taken from the Government returns. I would like to point out that April 30 is scarcely the proper time for these returns, and if it is the proper time the figures should be available within two months. The position o-f our flocks is of much importance to our farmers in determining the price at which they shall sell their lambs and buy their stores. One can see no sense in waiting for the sitting of Parliament and the presentation of the report to it. The interest of tne community should be considered before the dignity of members. It would, I am sure, be in the interest of all concerned if the sheep tax were abolished, and seeing that the companies pay more than the cost of inspection, this might well be remitted if for no other reason than the hope of obtaining correct returns. We believe that the high prices which we are able to give to the farmer for stock will of itself solve the problem of any shortage. That the farmers are Blow\to move is proverbial, but when they realise that on the cheaper priced land they can keep a ewe and get not only its wool, but a lamb also' to be sent on to the Canterbury Plains to be fattened, we cannot but expect considerable increases in our iloeks. We have only 15.250.25G sheep in this country, while they have 2G,C55,540 in the United Kingdom. Nothing but praise can be pv»n to the policy of the Government in cutting up for close settlement the front country suitable for cultivation. but it is open to- serious doubt whether

the subdivision of the IW~wT* stations .will not result in a diS? l ■orthe number of stores for brS^ 0 * fattening purposes. Oreed »« »a 4