§ Mr. W. Robertsasked the Minister of Food what are the comparative costs for road and rail transport of fat stock from Carlisle to a representative Lancashire town; and what are the losses in weight and the average casualty losses by the two methods of transport.
§ Dr. Summerskill, pursuant to her reply [OFFICIAL REPORT, 27th June, 1949; Vol. 466, c. 52] supplied the following information:
The charge for road movement is related to the class of stock concerned and the distance travelled; I am sending the hon. Member a copy of the schedule of charges.
Payment for movement by rail is not so related and is calculated at a flat rate of 4s. 10.69d. per animal for the entire journey. A direct comparison based on the foregoing is, however, misleading as the rail movements are rarely door-to-door and incidental expenses are normally incurred. But it has been calculated that if 705 sheep and 50 calves were moved between Carlisle and Liverpool (as actually happened in February last, partly by rail and partly by road) the movement would cost about £88 if entirely by road and over £185 if entirely by rail.
Records of liveweight losses are not maintained. An effective check on weight losses is achieved by comparison of the estimate of dressed carcase weight made in relation to the live animal with the actual weight ascertained after slaughter. Experience shows length of time in transit to be the principal factor affecting weight. In any movements involving rail transport, the time on rail normally accounts for the greater part of the travelling time. In the period from the beginning of 1948 until 25th June, 1949, casualties during transit by rail and road from Carlisle occurred only amongst sheep: one in 4,000 became a casualty on rail, and one in 6,000 became a casualty on road.