QUESTION OF "SHEEP-FAKING"

Wairarapa Age, Volume XXXII, Issue 10238, 15 May 1911, Page 5

QUESTION OF "SHEEP-FAKING"

OISCUSSEQ BY A. A,\3 P. ASSOCIATION.

! JUDGES ALONE CAN DECIDE. At Saturday afternoon's moetdng of the General Oonwnitte of the Masterton A. and P. Association, Mr D. McGregor, junr., speaking' to a motion of which be had given notioe, "That the Association's rule in connection with, the unfair shearing of j !;heep, wthieh. says 'the giving of a | prize to a sheep shall imply that the I judges are satisfied that such sheep is fairly shorn,' be reconsidered," said that he was absent when tihe question of "sheep-faking," following on some correspondence appearing in the Press, was discussed. He was sorry that the matter had not been gone more fi'ily into. Stud breeders j hadi been charged'with four separate things. The firab charge was that of ''stuffing." Of course sheep for Show purposes were well fed, but hf. would like to know whether this charge was any more justifiable [ against sheep-breeders than against | horse and, cattle breeders. Mr McI Gregor admitted that two wrong-r, ; did not make a right, ar.d the practise., if it was going on, should be stopped. It would be impossible for this Association to frame a resolution that would prevent it. On that account they could pass, over that charge altogether. The (second charge was that of "colouring," to which much the same remarks were applicable. He was much opposedi to the system which had crept in in England of- oiling and colouring sheep, and he hoped ifc wsuld never creep in in New Zealand, for so far there was no such practise. To prevent colouring would be to prevent breeders whose sheep were run on poor, clay land, or dry country from exhibiting at shows. Such breeders wouldS be justified in colouring their sheep in order to stand, a fair chance against breeders whose sheep run on rich. land. otter two charges', of trimming and unfair shearing, were not synonymous. It could not be detected whether siheep had been feraimed' or not. Some years ago a motion was brougjht before the Aesociatkm proposing to prohibit trimming. The motion was thrown out. owing to one of tihe biggest breeder? j in the district stating that if the j motion was carried he would ' again exhibit at tihe Masterton Show, j An Associationi could not fairly prevent a man from taking off the tips from sheep that had been running j on. rough ground and among thistles. Unfair shearing tos also a thing that could not be detected. It was very rarely that in open wool the judge could not see whether the wool was liable io produce tips or not. There was a suggestion that unfair j shearing was pracies?d' by exhibitors \ showing at both spring and autumn shows by leaving a few inch?? or I •wool on for the spring shows, and j shearing again in 'November. 'This was commonly known, as "blockshearing." The ordinary level of the shleep classes could not be kept up if block-shearing was prohibited. None of the best breeders would care to be debarred from the Spring i sihows. What everyone wished to i prevent was the making of the fleece I untrue, by shearing. The Committee j was accused of neglecting their duty I and oasttng 'the onus on the judge, j The Comimdttee were not in a position to judge the genuinenes of the sheep exhibited. Some were horse breeders, others cattle-breeders, and were quite incompetent of judging whether sheep were trimmed unfairly, or not. One wjuter spoke of the difference in the measMiraments of •" the wool on different parts of the body of sheep which were competing at-the Masterton show, stating that this was due to unfair shearing. Mr McGregor pointed put that such was not tiie case. He had seen machine sihorn sheep with a difference of two inches, and .there, was ..no, faking | about them. The judge was the man I on whom the responsibility should i rest. He had the rules to support , him, and the judges employed, at the | Masterton Show were on the whole very competent ones. In conclusion Mr McGregor said he felt sure that al mteanbens of the oommiittee wished to prevent unfair shearing, hut he considered the only way was to read the rule concerning- the matter to the judge, before he commenced bis work.

Mr W. H. Snick seconded Mr McGregor's nnotdon, stating that he fully endorsed the mover's remarks.. Mr E. Harper agreed with Mr McGregor, and thankied him for his aihjle address-.

Mr Perry stated that Mr McGregor's suggestion was practically the only thing that could be done. Those who had acted as judges could realise the position the judge occupied. Be was not anxious to. tread on anybody's corns, but he wanted to give the prize, to the beat animah Mr Perry quite agreed that faking matters might go too iar. To draw thle line between a sheep in its natural condition and one got up a. little was an impossibility. If the rules were read to the judge he would understand that a sheep was not to get a prize if it had been very much tampered with. With regard to block shearing, Mr Ferry said he had invariably found that early-shorn sheep defeated blocks3ik>rn sheep. He himself bad experimented, but he wonld not repeat the experiment, nor did he think anybody else would who had once tried it. If it. was decided to have a committee to decide which sheep were tampered with, the committee would find they would have a very difficult duty to perform. With regard to colouring, the speaker said that h© himself had had to do some on account of bis sheep running on clay land. He though* it would be a good idea to provide four extra open classes for sheep in their natural condition, and throw the onus on C£ZX— - ■.- -.- -■■:-

the accusers to prove whether xaey | lad been coloured or faked. He was prepared to donate the prize money. Mr H. Morrison said he thought that a good deal of faking was done, but it did not do the harm that people thought. In 99 cases out of 100 'the best sheep won. With regard 'to stiifiLng, Mr Morrison said he had had a wide experience witfc all descriptions of land, and he had found that the condition of sheep changed according to the qual- ! ity of the land. A man on good, rich country could produce his sheep ■ in good condition without stuffing, while a breeder on bad land had to do a bit of stuffing to make his slieep suitable for show puirposes. Rape- : grown sheep diid bet/fcer on the hills , than sheep well stuffed with grass. 1 The whole matter must be left to I the judge. If the judge was not j capable of giving a fair decision, he ought not to be judging. Mr J. Strang said he fejt there were a good many sheep men who would not be able to say whether a sheep had been tipped or not. He himself had been very nearly caughs on one occasion. The public were considerably misled on the question. v The whole trouble was that beginners thought they benefited by clipping, but they had made a hash of it. (Laughter). Sheep had originally come to New Zealand, from En? - ' land, and the speaker said he w.' -• 'sure that New Zealand breedcui could compete favourably with Home breeders. He failed to see what harm resulted from block-shearing. Mr McGregor, in reply, said he was pleased to find that the Committee was so unanimous, but he would like to have seen a little opposition. He disagreed with Mr Morrison that a good deal of faking went on. Mr Pilmer said he supported Mr ' McGregor in all he had said. Mr Perry said the question was one that generally cured itself. The motion, on being put to tihe meeting, was carried' unanimously. A committee consisting of Messrs J. 0. BidwL-1 and H. G. Williams was appointed to consider and report upon Mr Perry's offer of the prize money for four open classes or sheep in their natural condition.