SHEEP STEALING

Hokitika Guardian, 4 March 1931, Page 5

SHEEP STEALING

FARMER’S HEAVY LOSS. SOUTHLAND COMPLAINT. INVERCARGILL, March 1. Southland is by no means free from slice]) stealing, according to a statement made by Air Walter Clarke, of Woodlands, at a meeting of directors of the Southland Agricultural and Pastoral Association on Saturday, to the effect that lie had no less than 350 good quality wethers and hoggets stolen from his property this season. He stated that the great difficulty in detecting thefts of this nature was that no farmer could adopt an exclusive firebrand for branding his sheep, and prevent liis neighbours or any other farmers in the district from adopting the same brand.

Air Clark stated that he bad consulted the police concerning the thefts, but in view of tin* fact that the sheep bad been purchased by him from several quarters, and bad borne the oai'brands of the fanners who had bred them, identification of the sheep would be impossible. Another factor was that be bad not discovered the theft until after shearing, by Avhich lime the stolen sheep would probably have been shorn, and there would lie no means of tracing them. It had been suggested, continued Air Clark, that he should adopt a special brand, but he had discovered that the regulations did not permit him to register any exclusive brand, and there was nothing to prevent every farmer in the district, or in the province, from adopting the same brand.

Several of the directors expressed the opinion that some alteration should he made to the regulations to prevent the practice from continuing, or at least to make detection of the thefts more .’simple. It was generally conceded that a good deal of sheep stealing was being carried on in Southland, but the risk of detection appeared to be slight. The practice of removing sheep under cover of darkness and conveying them to other districts was considered to be largely responsible for the losses sustained by farmers of late.