1 Jury, 1899.] QUEENSLAND AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. 89 
where the loss was 3 head, all cows. I cannot give you the exact number of 
cows in this mob of 216, but know there were over 100. With careful treat- 
ment and good blood, I am of the opinion the loss will not be more than 5 per 
cent. 
D. 
The necessity for careful treatment by leaving cattle severely alone after 
Inoculation cannot, in my opinion, be better shown than by drawing your 
attention in Paper A to the cattle treated on the 21st February (200 head) and 
9th January (850 head). The same calf was used on both océasions to draw the 
immune blood from. 1 took the calf out to the 350 head, but made the owners of 
the 200 head bring their cattle into the station yards, a distance of about 8 
miles, and they had to be driven back again. These cattle had a few ticks on 
them when they came, but they picked up a great number along the road. The 
comparative results were a loss of only 16 head out of the 350 operated on. 
in their own paddocks, and 40 per cent. in the 200 which were brought to the 
station yards. I find, on looking up my notes, the actual number in this lot was 
177, made up as under— 
(a.)—51 head inoculated, lost 14 
(b.)—25 ” ” ” 5 
(¢.)—35 ” ; ” ” 14 
(d.)—19 ” ” ” 1 
(e.)—47 ” ” ” 7 
177 41 
Such a mortality as this naturally made me most anxious to discover the cause. 
I was asked by a selector, living close to the owners of the above cattle, to 
operate on his cattle, so used the same calf again with the result as stated 
in Paper A ; but on this occasion sent the calf down to the cattle to be operated. 
on. We have therefore three separate mobs of cattle inoculated from the one 
calf, the heaviest loss being among the lot that were driven about after the 
inoculation. a : 
The report as to the mortality and inclination to abort amongst pregnant 
cows, | am unable to substantiate. I have made the most Seal inquiries 
amongst the dairy people whose herds I have inoculated, and can find no single 
case where such has happened; andin my own case amongst station cattle 
mentioned as being tailed (216 head), only one case was seen. Off camps 
inoculated in June and July, 1898, I branded up a healthy lot of calves in the 
following January in number equal to my previous year. It is true that in one 
case not far from here the number of cows that slipped their calves after inocu- 
lation was very heavy, but as I had nothing to do with this lot I only mention 
the fact. Amongst the Gin Gin stud cows 15 to 20 calves were dropped 
a fortnight after the operation, and they can all be seen to-day with their 
mothers. The mere fact of putting a cow fairly heavy in calf through a crush, 
even without inoculating her, is sufficient to cause abortion. The operation 
should, therefore, be postponed until after calving if possible. I have inoculated 
over 400 dairy cattle, and know of no single instance of a ereater mortality 
amongst pregnant cows over any other ordinary cattle. 
After a careful study of the whole question, T am certain the loss from 
inoculation can be put down at the outside at 5 per cent. ; and if cattle are 
treated before the tick comes, the losses will be less. Had I known as much a year 
ago as I have learnt since, the Gin Gin herd would have all been inoculated 
before the arrival of the tick. A great many theories have been put forward as 
to how the tick crossed the quarantine line when fixed at the Boyne River. In 
my own mind I blame the sheep that travelled overland from Gracemere; the 
worst places for ticks on Gin Gin were the spots the sheep camped on, 
