LOSSES ON SKINS

Sun (Auckland), Volume III, Issue 916, 8 March 1930, Page 27

LOSSES ON SKINS

EFFECT OF TAR BRANDING GREATER CARE NEEDED Hundreds of thousands of pounds are lost annually by tar-branding and faulty flaying of sheep and cattle. Discussing the subject with a representative of the “Stock and Station Journal/* a well-known authority stated the matter was one which concerned not only the whole wool industry, but also to an extent the cattle industry, for it affected the value of hides and calfskins, which articles, taken together, represented in any average year fully 50 per cent, of the total exports from Australia. This year they would probably amount to over £65,000,000 exported, besides a large additional amount in clothing, boots and other goods in local consumption. In the distant past, tar was tlie most common material used in the branding of sheep, and it had a very deleterious effect on wool. There has been an outcry against it for at least 40 years, and it has been condemned in no measured terms by the whole manufacturing trade. Tar was highly detrimental in wool, and was altogether unnecessary. Its use, either as a branding or an antiseptic substance, for sheep, should b(5 ‘Stopped. Unfortunately, tar was still used frequently in branding sheep, both on stations and farms, and still worse at tlie saleyards and abattoirs. In the latter case the skins were frequently worked before the tar was fully dried, and in the* process of fellmongering the fresh tar was spread over a considerably larger quantity of wool, doing irreparable damage. Thousands of skins otherwise perfectly suitable had to be rejected because tlie wool had been spoilt by tlie application of tar. These reject skins were sold for ordinary fellmongering purposes at a reduction of from Id to 3d a lb., or, say, from 4d to Is a skin. The faults in flaying were of wider importance than even the question of tar-branding, as flaying affected not only the sheepskins, but also hides and calfskins, from all sources. ROUGH FLAYING Serious as the lire-branding of cattle was, it was probable that at the Present time the loss by flaying was as great as, or greater, in total than that caused by branding. Carelessness in skiuniug the animal materially affected the value of the skins or hide. Very often and average of Id a lb. on sheepskins, 2d to 3d on hides, and 4d to 5d on calfskins was lost by the bad take off, cutting and scoring in the process of flaying. In Nev.- Zealand there was a greater appreciation of the value of good flaying. This was not confined to meat works only, but it appeared to he general throughout the whole Dominion. The result was that there was a distinct preference shown by most of the Australian light leather tanners for New Zealand calfskins, as against Australian calfskins. It was not that the New Zealand calfskfns were of any better quality; it was simply thai. the take ofr of the skins was superior. Many local tanners would not buy Australian calfskins at a H. or would only take them wdien they could not obtain New Zealand skins. This preference for New Zealand skins was practically worldwide, a ud for export they were always quoted at higher prices than Australian calfskins.