WOOL.

Hawke's Bay Times, Volume II, Issue 51, 19 June 1862, Page 3

WOOL.

Tt wfl l <-e-meelr- M-iof- iq. nnd is long I' l -"It to continue, the most important produce of \mv 7ont:v'rT. ' or '■• n there tip nnv doubt tint the w' mmv.-, in tbis country is very faTPiivilii’T regarded in Thi-pne. An investment of capital in '’mm rni-Vr ordinary o'rpnin c fan'’ n s may bp pnn='’riofo/-1 g snip and prefifatilo invcstmont. Po far nil is clear. But what still appears a inoct imWnat pmot anrl oiip winch is vptv pprnlpx?n«r to those having no practical knowledge on the cnbippt is—What description of wool is the most profitable 9 "Vow it mar bp finite possible f"” nponio V-ioirino nothing whatever about sheep, and ve"T bttle about wool, to estimate the value of argument based op acknowledged facts. Those ■who have thought op the subject suggested in the foregoing question -will have found that it leads to two other questions. viz. :—Which is prefenalfe lorn wool or short wool 9 —Ts it possible fo eUtgin a ryr,od of slrppp Ky pressing? Before an answer is given to the first of these two it will be neepssnrv to make a few preliminary inaniries. Tt mav however be as well to clear the yr-liT sar-’niT fl'pr w'mt f 'Hmro is intended to ann’v evelnslvclr to woo l : that mutton. is not taken into account: it is not b~ the sale of mutton, but bv f>>c PTnorto*!pn of wool that the wealth of New Bea’aml w’l 1 ho ippmjrepd. It mnv, no doubt, he wise fo" t l ip farrppr living in thp vie?nitv of a good market Tor mutton to attend rather to the size of tire shpp’i’s eorpasp than to either thp quantity or the qnniit-y of its wool. But that is the subject now undpr considpration. The fir=t thing to be ascertained is the nature of the ms'-nrp on which sheen arp to bp fpd. Speaking' pppprallv, large sheep earrv long wool, while .email stmr.p ppriw short wool Bor large sheep to tlrr-i.-p Vro-'l freely and produce a good clip of wool, they mud bp depastured on land that is tolerable Tpve l , fp-ti l p apt n~pdn-inir rrood grasses. To plan’ sneb sbrep on uplands, where they are obßcP-l f o travel much IP owW *e oh*-a?.r tbpjp food, would be to cusup the’r rapid deterioration. Small sheen on the contrary thrive quite as well in every respect on billy country, and in fact maintain health better than on lower lands and in richer -a.-t-nres. The nature of tbe nastnre, then, ought to determine the breed of sheep to be kept on it. Another inquiry is. as to the relative weight of the fleeces of the long and short wooled breeds. Assuming that they arc not fed artificially, but each on tlm pasture most sui’able to the breed, there can be little doubt that the former carry the heavier fleeces. But let it be distinctly noted the fleeces of the larger breed, if allowed to deteriorate by being depastured on uplands, will not, after two or at most three generations, be so heavy as those ef the smaller breed on the same pasture. A further consideration is the price of each description of wool. This is a question easily answered bv reference to the London Wool Reports. The wool realizing the highest price is the fine short wool. It is not improbable that on low rich lands producing the best grasses the difference in the weight of the fleece of the largo breed would mone than compensate for the higher price of that of the small breed. But regard being bad to the actual quality of the natural pastures of New Zealand, and even with some allowance made for

their possible future improvement, there can be no reason for supposing that the fleece of the long wooled sheep will be so valuable as that of the short fine one. There are pastures of an iatemiumadinte description which may be (bought suitable to either breed ; in which case it may be more difficult to decide betwecu their respective claims But even sucli pastures may deteriorate, in which case the larger breed would. It may be as well to notice a common fallacy connected witlr this. It is sometimes hastily assumed that a run will carry the same number of large as of small sheep. This is a mistake. Not only does the large sheep require more food than the smaller one to enable it to maintain its condition, but it is not so rough a feeder, not so active in procuring its food, nor will it so well bear being on a run that is close fed or overstocked. In a country where sheep runs are not of unlimited extent this may be worth noticing, as it is likely that in a given space a much heavier clip of wool may be obtained from the smaller breed. It is frequently asserted that the demand for long wool is increasing, and the supply of short wool is equal to the demand. But the tendency in Europe now is to cultivate long wooled breeds, the effect of whick will be to increase the demand for fine wools. At the Royal Agricultural Society of England, ProlVstor Wilson said:—“They (foreigners) also see that whatever fine wool the market requires cun be supplied from Australia and New Zealand at a far cheaper rate and far better in quality than any that Saxony, or Silesia, or Moravia can supply.” * * “Well, that at once showed that the foreign powers could not successfully compete in the wool market witli England and her colonies ; and I believe that the tendency is for the foreigner to give up growing these fine class wools upon small animals, and to substitute for them the large frame sheep carrying more wool at a lower price.” Is it possible to obtain a good brood of sheep by crossing ? This question is suggested by the discussion of the previous one. Some are inclined to ask—Whether it is not possible to obtain a breed of sheep by crossing the two breeds above referred to which shall in a great measure combine the merits of both ? There can be no answer to this question : such a breed cannot bo obtained. It may be objected to this that good cross breeds have been established in England, such as the Hampshire and Wiltshire downs. It is wellknown that those breeds are t he result of crossing the old Hampshire and Wiltshire white-faced horned breeds with the Susses downs. But let it be observed that it was not for the purpose of obtaining an intermediate breed combining the good qualities of both that this cross was resorted to ; but in order to change dad breeds already existing in millions in those two counties, * and which could not be got rid of, into a good breed possessing the qualities of that good breed; and that this was ultimately accomplished bv the persevering efforts of a majority of the fanners of those two counties during the space of sixty or seventy years, who used none but pure rams, until their flocks were not distinguishable from pure Sussex downs. This is evidently a very different tiling from the formation of an intermediate breed. It may be advisable to fortify (1m opinion here so strongly stated. The Economist (in a very able article on Mr. Spooner's paper on cross-brecdiim) says , —“There is probably more misapprehension in agricultural circles on the subject of crossbreeding than on any other branch of practical husbandry. Cross-breeding is merely a plan of p r j educing meat, for cross-bred animals are only profitable when bred for the butcher. They cannot he perpe.ti.ated. They are quasi-hybrids, ami if used at all for the purpose of breeding thev must be freely coupled with one or other of the pure breeds from which they were produced. A first cross, where both parents are good of their respective kinds, seems to be the most certain mode of breeding for the butcher ; and if the matter rested there it would be well. But not a few agriculturists, finding their first crosses prove profitable, suppose they can perpetuate animals of the same character by breeding from such crossbred stock. Every attempt of the sort has proved a failure as a reasonable attrition to the main principal of breeding, that ‘like will produce like,’ will readily show.” Again, “ We recommend the following remarks, with which Mr. Spooner concludes his paper, to the attention of those who resort to cross-breeding with any other view than tlnit of feeding the first produce of that cross : ‘ W here equal advantages can be attained bv keeping a pure breed of sheep, such pure breed should unquestionably be preferred ; though crossing for the purposes of the butcher may be practised with impunity, ami even with advantage; yet no one should do so for the purpose of establishing a new breed, unless he has clear and well defined views of the object lie seeks to accomplish and has duly studied the principle on which it can be carried out and is determined to bestow for the space of half a life time his constant and unremitting attention to the discovery and removal of defects.’ And we may add, that there is no instance of one establishing a new breed which has attained a perfect type.” Where new breeds have been established it has been the result of the co-operation of all the farmers of a certain district working in one direction ; but after all, what is produced is but a suhvarietg of a pure breed gradually more ami more approaching to the characteristics of that breed, —not a breed intermediate between two other breeds. But there is another condition far more essential to anything like success ; it is that in any cross breeding the female should be of a larger breed than the male. There is no point on which scientific breeders are more unanimous than this. No greater blunder can be committed than that of using a male of a larger breed than the female. The late 11. Clive, Esq., surgeon, fully established this fact in a work published on the subject of breeding. It would be easy to give physiological reasons to account for this fact. It may be sufficient to say that the powers of the dam being overtaxed, her offspring will necessarily be deficient iu symmetry and vigor of constitution. An illustration may bs supplied from the fact familiar to all who have lived in countries where mules are in common use, namely, that whereas the produce of a mare is almost universally a valuable animal, the

offspring of a shc-ass is invariably a worthless brute. To cross, therefore, with any prospect of avoiding absolute and ruinous failure, the ranis should be of the smaller breed. There is another fatal objection to a cross. The chief object to bs arrived at by tho breeder should be the uniform character of his wool; but a cross will occasion innumerable varieties, and not unfrequently several on the same sheep. The well-known rule mentioned above that “ like will produce like” is the safest guide to all breeders, and cannot be too strictly observed. All violent crosses should be strictly avoided); “ unlike” will produce nobody knows what. The improvement of a flock can only he attained with any prospect of success by using rams as nearly nspossible resembling the ewes, though they should be the best of their kind. It may be almost needless to add that breeding in-and-in, that is from near affinities, is highly objectionable, and should never under any circumstances whatever be resorted to.— Spectator, June ■!.