CATTLE-BRANDING.

Hokitika Guardian, 11 May 1926, Page 4

CATTLE-BRANDING.

ANNUAL LOSS TO X.Z. FARMERS. WELLINGTON. May 7. A reliable estimate given by an official of the. New Zealand Tanners’ Association states that an ordinary ox hide weighing about oOlhs. will realise a penny or twopence per pound more if not branded than hides which have been branded on the rump. In 1924 nearly 700,000 ox hides and 800,000 calf skins wore produced in New Zealand, but from lilTy to 90 per cent, of ox hides were spoilt by branding on the rump, reducing the market value by -Vid to 73d each, equalling a loss of from £150,000 to £'200,000 annually through indiscriminate fire-branding. The Stock Act interprets a cattle brand as a distinct and ] lain mark burnt with a branding iron into the skin and not less than two indies in length, but nothing in the Act compels branding of horses, cattle, or

pigs running on securely fenced lands, nor does n't stipulate tho part of the animal on which the brand is to ho. placed. • Mr J. Pow, Secretary .» the New Zealand Farmers’ Union, stat’d to-day that a. large percentage of the cattle in New Zealand was branded nearly all on the rump and the loss was becoming so serious that the Farmers’ Union had taken the matter up and sent out a circular to the affiliated Associations, calling attention to it. The New Zealand tanners assert that it is an exception to got a single hide free"of brands or liorn scrapings, and for that reason had to import Hides from time to time, as conditions allowed, from Ireland and the Continent.

The Farmers’ Union’s letter to Une Association stated that this is ini sound business, as Now Zealand mo icy is going into the pockets - f foreigners, instead of those of the local farmers. Tn addition, the eo.vt of I ho article made from imported loath. : is naturally increased owing to freight from the other side of the world. The cost of tanning a bad bide is exactly the same as the cost of tanning a good one. Thoughtlessness in most cases in the cause of spoiling, pood hides by rump branding, but some owners assert that the brand would not. be casil seen on the neck or shoulder. From a com monsense point of view the best place for fire-brand-ing is that part of the hide which is least commercially valuable. HORN MARKS ON HIDES.

Another course of depreciation in the value of hides is that of born marks which ruin hides, both for upper and sole leather, and the tanning industry of New Zealand is feeling the effect of competition in leatliei' from England and U.S.A. without having local hides spoilt with those two forms of blemishes. The New Zealand Tanners’ Association is making a .strenuous endeavour to have the Stock Act amended by providing that the brand shall he burnt into the skin only on the shoulder or neck ; also that it .shall he compulsory that all calves horn if not registered pedigree cattle shall ho dehorned.