POULTRY-KEEPING INDUSTRY

Press, Volume LXXXII, Issue 24912, 27 June 1946, Page 6

POULTRY-KEEPING INDUSTRY

PROBLEM OF PRICES AND PRODUCTION COSTS

CANTERBURY-WESTLAND ASSOCIATION MEETS

A resolution that if the £250 allowance from the Internal Marketing Department proved insufficient, a voluntary levy be asked from producers, of not more than 2d a dozen eggs for any one week, was carried at a meeting yesterday of the Canterbury-Westland Registered Poultry Keepers’ Association, Discussing the intended discontinuation of the subsidy from the Internal Marketing Division from June, 1947, Mr T. S. Dove (producers’ representative on the New Zealand Poultry Board) said that an increase in the price of eggs would have to be made unless costs of production could be reduced. No further information had been received as to when the proposed diagnostic station for the South Island would be bU Mr J. W. McGlinchy advocated the holding of educational meetings and the circularising of information, in particular for the use of young farmers. It was made known that in the nock improvement plan a producer requiring higher prices for his chickens must write to the Price Tribunal. Mr Dove said that providing the applicant had suitable grounds for his request the Price Tribunal would not reject his application. It was extremely hard to stabilise prices, because of the varying situations at the four main centres. . , Mr A. H. Gosling (Timaru branch delegate) explained the difficult position of sub-branches. Except for one financial grant of £lO, no further aid had been given. The president (Mr A. H. Button) said that this was a flatter for the New Zealand Poultry Keepers’ Association. •Mr Dove: The financial position is not clear at the moment. It is a necessary step to see that there is sufficient finance to maintain the sub-branches and this matter must be clarified with the Minister concerned. , .

Mr C. A. Tritt: It is the policy of the executive of the association to assist branches as much as possible. If Timaru require further financial assistance it is up to them to apply to the council. The work carried out by the Egg Marketing Committee was discussed. A query was raised as to whether the committee had been formed for the one purpose of investigating all forms of marketing, or if the cost of production should be its first concern. Mr Button said that the cost of production was part of the committee’s investigation. Mr W. Waites asked Mr Tritt to explain his plan for making the activities of the committee known to poultry producers. “In no way should the meetings of the executive committee be curtailed,” said Mr Tritt. "They should meet once a month. Any longer period of time would tend to make producers lose interest in the organisation. Lack of finance should not stand in our way. The committee should if possible, meet once a month, and a comprehensive report circulated to all who are concerned.”

Mr Dove explained how the Christchurch members of Parliament had been invited to a meeting. Four had attended, and all had displayed a keen interest in ,the problems confronting poultry producers. As a result of this a memorandum was being prepared setting out the problems of the industry, so that all members of Parliament might understand the situation.

Asked whether there was sufficient feed in the country to keep the present stock for a year, Mr Button replied that he did not know, and that at present there were no means of finding out.

Members of the council for the Christ-* church area (within a radius of 20 miles) were elected as follows: Messrs C. Elements, A. Fazackerly, B. Petherham, C. B. Powell, C. A. Tritt, H. Watson, F. S. Vinicombe, A. Button, and H. Watson. Messrs Button and Fazackerly were elected representatives to the Canterbury Egg Marketing Committee.