Dáil Éireann díospóireacht -
Thursday, 4 Jul 1963

Vol. 204 No. 3

Ceisteanna—Questions. Oral Answers. - Clondalkin (Dublin) AI Station.

7.

Mr. Clinton

asked the Minister for Agriculture if his attention has been drawn to a statement, reported as having been made by the Chairman of the Dublin District Milk Board, who is responsible for the AI centre at Clondalkin, that at no stage would the board single out individual sires to excite excess demand in their direction, and further that the Board did not see how any useful purpose could be served by publishing the extent by which the average yield of a sire's daughters exceed those of their contemporaries; and if, having regard to the fact that his Department make an annual contribution towards the cost of progeny-testing to cattle breeding centres in this country, he will make a statement on the matter.

8.

Mr. Clinton

asked the Minister for Agriculture if, having regard to the fact that the early identification and subsequent wider use of proven bulls in AI centres is of vital importance in cattle-breeding in this as well as in every other country in the world today, he will take steps to avoid having a licensed secret society in AI, and ensure that, if and when proven bulls become available at Clondalkin and at all cattle breeding stations in this country, up-to-date information will be made available, as is the position at most AI centres at home and abroad.

Minister for Agriculture (Mr. Smith)

With your permission, a Cheann Comhairle, I propose taking Questions Nos. 7 and 8 together.

I have seen the reported statement referred to by the Deputy. Apart from any views any AI station may have about the publication of progeny test results, or the administrative problems resulting for a station from such publication, my Department—which cooperates with the AI stations in progeny-testing—is of the opinion that as results become available they should be circulated for the information of all concerned.

Mr. Clinton

Has the Minister taken any steps to show his disapproval of the statement by the Chairman of the Dublin District Milk Board in regard to his attitude to progeny-testing generally?

Mr. Smith

I have read the statement carefully. I do not believe that those who have expressed concern about the contents of that statement really understood what the manager of the concern had in mind. I do not violently disagree with many of the views he expressed. Neither do I suspect or find any attitude adopted by the individual concerned of concealing the results. However, there is something to be said in favour of not publicising unduly the limited results we have so far obtained.

Mr. Clinton

Does the Minister not agree that the purpose of the whole exercise of progeny-testing is to identify the better bulls and so induce the farmers to make wider use of these bulls? Is the hesitation here not due to the fact that little or nothing has been done in this progeny-testing station since 1948 and only a few bulls show merit and, consequently, we are afraid we shall be asked for them and them only?

Mr. Smith

I have deliberately set out to make my attitude clear on this matter. I am also conscious of the facts as they are known to exist. When you have only a small number of animals on test and when you get from some one of this limited number what seems to be an attractive result, then, if you unduly publicise that result, it can have the effect of turning public opinion very much in favour of using that animal, often resulting in introducing a nominated service which would be much more costly to those who use the semen from it. While you are doing that, there may, at the same time, be other animals of the same breed not under test who would be equally good.

Mr. Clinton

I believe that.