HERD TESTING.

Hokitika Guardian, 5 April 1924, Page 1

HERD TESTING.

DAIRY DIVISION CRITICISED. DR REA’KES REPLIES. WELLINGTON, April 3. ; Criticism of the Dairy Division of 1 the Department of Agriculture, in connection with its herd testiilg methods, i was recently made by the president of - the Canterbury A. and P. Association, i It is answered by a statement which I)r C. J. Reakcs, Director-General of ; Agriculture, made to-day. “My ati tention,” Dr Reakcs said, “ has only i just been called to that portion of the address of the president of the Canterbury A. and P. Association in which be adversely criticises the dairy division of the Department of Agriculture for not approving and aiding a scheme put forward by himself for herd testing in the Canterbury district. The criticism is rendered especially Ungenerous by its being worded ill such a way as to suggest that tlic Dairy Division is not interesting itself in the welfare of the dairying industry. Surely the president of the A. and P. Association must have spoken without taking thought as to tlic really seruitis nature of his remarks, and this idea is supported by his further statement to lbo efl’cet that the Dairy Division is in a lethargic condition. “It is difficult to understand what could have been in the miml of the speaker in referring to lethargy in connection with one of the most advanced and up to date official dairying ser- \ ices in. existence at the present time. “Speaking particularly of these herd testing proposals in Canterbury, which, as regards the procedure set out to be adopted in connection with them were not approved by the Dairy Division, I should like-to make it clear that this decision was made with my entire concurrence after the whole matter had been fully discussed. It was a perfectly correct decision based oil the opinion that a system of testing dairy cows for yield to he of value to dairy farmers should he one which would reasonably well assure approximate accuracy, more particularly when sutli records of production wore proposed to form tlie basis of a certificate, ia ho used in the sale of stud dairy slock. .Moreover the department’s own system of herd testing was already‘in operation in Canterbury and was working satisfactorily, and there seenied to he no reason why a different system should he substituted for it. “Referring to the president’s comment that ‘if herd testing had been the Department's slogan for the last decade the Dominion’s average yield of butter fat would not have declined year by year,’ I accept it that the reference is made to the yield of the average dairy cow, If so the remark , is liable to create erroneous imp res- , sions. It- would have been correct to , state that the Department has been ( fostering the testing for a longer period j than a decade, and that New Zealand, as a result, I believe, is now herd- | testing for yield a larger percentage of her dairy cows than any other dairy country in the world, suve Denmark.

Furthermore, the production of New Zealand's average dairy cow lias been increasing rather than decreasing, and for last season a yield of 173.72 lb of butter-fat for all dairy cows in milk ami dry has been calculated, as contrasted with an average yield of 1-11.(57 lb butter-fat for the 1911-12 season, when herd-testing was getting under

“Still further statements of the president of the Agricultural and Pastoral Association were so remarkable that I can only assume that they were made under total misapprehension of the actual facts. He suggests, in

effect, l!iat tlie 15aIvy Division does not ‘help the struggling dairy fanner who 1-11111101 help himself,’ blit instead devotes its energies to ‘picking out and testing a low special cows of wealthy breeders who can well afford to look after themselves. As a matter of fact, during the 1922-23 season, 77,500 cows belonging to dairy farmers were dealt with under the Department’s herd testing system, 31,500 of these being tested by the Department’s own oflieors and the remainder by the dairy companies, which have adopted the same system and, so far as I know, find it quite satisfactory. In addition, 1031 cows were tested under the C.0.T1. system, these being purebred animals in those herds which assist to form the basis from which the animals required to still further improve the, farm herds of the Dominion are drawn. These, no doubt, arc the cows referred to as “belonging to wealthy breeders. *

“The number of cows being tested by officers ol the Dairy Division this season will exceed those above stated, for both association and 0.0.1 t. testing. AY herein lies the lethargy or failure to realise responsibility, attached to ‘Holding of a high office.’ “I cannot yet understand,” concluded Dr Henkes, “why this attacklias been made upon the Dairy Division, seeing that it is so unwarranted and opposed to facts. I regret that it is now too late to cancel, or turtlier postpone, a very short official visit J have to make to Australia, but ] trust that, in the meantime, the president of the Canterbury Agricultural and Pastoral Association will think the matter over and do the right thing.