Australian and New Zealand Mutton.

Te Aroha News, Volume XXVI, Issue 43102, 8 June 1907, Page 2

Australian and New Zealand Mutton.

SIR WILLIAM LYNE’S COMPLAINT,

Mr W. A Bonn, writing to the “Sydney Morning Herald,” says : —I notice that our old friend, Sir William Lyne, has visited Smitlifield, and has been much struck with the different appearance of New Zealand and Australian mutton. It is also reported that he proposes on his return to investigate the causes which make Australian mutton appear inferior to New Zealand, presumably with a view to making our negligent exporters adopt some method of making the' carcases appear more attractive. I venture to recommend Sir William Lyne to commence his reformation with the sheepbreeders instead of with those who handle the carcases. New Zealand breeds primarily for carcase ; Australia neglects carcitse and breeds for wool. Though there are certain flocks where the Murray type predominates, and the carcases are, therefore, better adopted for export purposes, yet the vast majority of merino flocks very unmistakably show that the symmetry and colour of the carcases (from a frozen meat export point of view) has not been the main consideration. It is admitted that the frozen mutton exports from New Zealand consist almost entirely of crossbred sheep, and that the exports from Australia of mutton consist almost exclusively of "merinos. It must ilso be admitted that it is simply impossible to make a frozen carcase of merino mutton appear as attractive in shape and colour as that of a crossbred. I have, however, always contended that the very wide difference in appearance, and, what is more essential, in value, between merino and crossbred mutton can bo to a certain extent bridged by breeding more on the Murray type than on the more fashionable strains. Radical improvement in Australian mutton is simply impossible unless the breeders find it to their advantage to breed for export as mutton. It is a question simply of what will pay them best, and this again may be dependent on locality, access to markets, and other reasons.

I consider that most of those engaged in the meat export trade have done their best with the material they have to deal \vi!h. The question of whether a more suitable export carcase will pay the breeders and graziers better is one of them to decide. I freely admit that the method of handling carcases before freezing and subsequent handling on shipment in Sydney leaves much to be desired as compared with New Zealand. Some of these difficulties are capable of amendment, but tho main point is that at present we have not the right quality of sheep to compete in appearance with New Zealand mutton. Merino mutton belongs to a different class from crossbred, and must always remain so. In considering the question of the most profitable sheep for graziers, the points in favour of the crossbred (half-bred) type are as under:— 1. New Zealand pickled pelts sell at up to 48s, i.e., 4s each, against Australian merino pelts at 10s to 18s, say, lOd to Is Gd, and many pelts are almost useless.

2. Runners from New Zealand crossbreds sell at about 25s per 100 sheep. They are practically valueless here. 3. Half bred wool sells at fully equal to merino price. 4. The crossbred lamb for export is worth fully 2s 6d per head more than merino lamb of equal weight 5. Australia, with her millions of merino ewes, need not go beyond the first cross, except for lambs for export. 6. First cross or halfbred mutton is worth more than the deeper bred mutton now commands in New Zealand, owing to the scarcity of merino ewes in that colony. Halfbred mutton is tho true “ Canterbury ” type which has always commanded top price. It remains to be argued what correspond-ing-advantages the pure merino type offers to graziers, especially graziers on properties in settled districts and with good rail communication.