The Mankato free press. [volume] (Mankato, Blue Earth County, Minn.) 1879-1924, 1922-11-03
PRESENT OUTLOOK
! FOR SHEEP RAISING
Strong Strategic Position
Of Grower Today
EFFECT OF THE TARIFF.
Federal Reserve Agent Rich Dis.
cusses Subject In Monthly
Report
tAssociated Press Dispatch. ]


Minneapolis. October 31-"The
Outlook for the American sheep
Grower" is discussed by Federal Re-
Serve Agent John H. Rich OF the
Ninth District OF this city, in the
October survey OF crop and business
conditions for mis- district just is
sued. Mr.. Rish says:
The sheep grower in the United
States is today in the strongest
strategic position which he has ever
attained. The United States con-
sumes considerably more wool each
year than is produced in this country
and the balance has been made here
toIore by importation On Septem-
Der Il the FOrdney McCumoer Law
went into effect, placing tariff on
WOOL and sheep products which gives
the United States sheep grower a
great advantage. The sheep grow =
ers best move, Low, appears 70 be TO
increase production as rapidly as
possible In order that the price OF
wool may not go to exorbitant
heights
Recent Decline In Sheep Raising
Between 1910 and 1922 the mum $
Der of sheep in the United States
declined from more than 81 million
head to 80 million head or a decline
of about third. This decline
was from two causes. In the first
place, the spread OF agriculture has
been westward into the range coun-
try and the pressure of the farming
population and the consequent rise
in the price Of Land has caused the
breaking up OF the ranges into small
| lalIns on which il was impossible to
raise the enormous flock OF sheep.
i The second cause OF the decline in
Sheep holdings was the severe COM
petition from the sheep growers in
the newly developed parts OF the
world such as Australia and, more
! recently and more extensively, Ar.
gentina. Land was practically free
TO the sheep grower in these new
territories, forage was plentiful. and
the cheap sheep Which could be
raised there were sold in our mar
kets below the cost of production in
this country between 1913 and 1921
when there was no tariff On wool
and other sheep products.
There has been a corresponding de-
cline in the production OF wool. The
annual clip OF wool in the grease
amounted to 321 million pounds in
1910 but was only Pa million pounds
! in 1921, At the same time, the con.
sumption OF wool iii the United
States increased from 451 million
( pounds in the year ending June, 1911,
/ to $50 million pounds in the year
endingJune 1921. The increase in
CONSUMPTION had to be met by a
pronounced increase in imports Of
wool. In the year ending June, 1911s
wool imports amounted to more than
129 million pounds and in the year
ending June, 1921. The incease in
/ Amounted to nearly 313 million
pounds, or more than oneh half of the
consumption in 1920-21 as compared
with little more than one fourth In
the year 1901.
Tariff Rate On Wool
After eight years of free importa-
ton of wool, there was put into eff
feet on May 81 1921, an emergency
tariff of Is cents per pound on un-
washed wool, 80 cents per pound on
washed WOOL This tariff was in eff
feet from that date until September
2, 1922, when the Fordney McCum- :
Der Act went into effect, lowering
the tariff to II cents per pound on
mwashed WOOL, Is cents per pound
| on "dSuSu WOOl, dnu "a SOhlo pO1
pound on secured wool. The effect
pof the new tariff can not be deter
mined by statistical methods. 1t is
possible, however, to see some of
| the effects on imports of the emer-
gency tariff of 1921. For the first
six months Of 1921 before the emer
gency tariff went into effect, wool
| imports amounted.to more than 245
million pounds. During thel first six
months of 1922, while the emergency
tariff was in operation, wool imports
amounted to not quite $50 million
pounds. While it is probable that
not all of this decline in imports was
due to tariff restrictions owing to
the large stocks of wool held in 1919
which were gradually being worked
off during 1920 and 1921, it is prob \
able that the tariff was the most i'm
portant cause Of the decline. This
seems to be proved by the fact that
wool stocks declined by June 80, 49,
| %. to a point below the normal
amount which dealers and manufac-
turers think it advisable to hold. To
assure proper grading and steady
supply for the wooden mills, it Is
customary to hold in commercial
hands about one years supply of the
! raw material As consumption in
the United States amounts to nearly
600 million pounds of raw wool each
year, the stock, on June 80, 1922, OF
479 million pounds was considered
too small. In consequence there was
a rise in the price of wool to-the
producer from Is cents per pound to
36- 40 cents Der pound instead OF in :
creased importations.
Effect of Tariff on Mutton and Lamb
| imports ~
From 1913 to 1921 live sheep, lamb
and mutton were on the free list.
The emergency tariff of May 81, 1921
imposed a duty on mutton and lamb
of 2 cents per pound and duty on
sheep, except for breeding purposes,
of two dollars per head IL one year
old or over, and of one dollar per
head If less than one year old. The
Fordney McCumber tariff raised the
duty on mutton to 21s cents pen
pound and on fresh lamb to 4 cents
per pound. Live sheep carry duty
of two dollars per head. This tariff
legislation imposes barrier on i'm
ports Of sheep and mutton and lamb
similar to that imposed on wool I'm
ports. Before 1913, when sheep and
sheep products went on the free list.
there were very small importations
Of mutton and lamb. In the year
ending in June, 1914, almost mil
lion pounds OF these meats Were i'm