asked the Minister for Agriculture and Fisheries if bulls which are known to be lowering yields are being described as satisfactory by his Department and are being retained for service in AI stations.

In rating bulls at AI stations in this country characteristics other than milk yield have to be taken into account. Milk quality, heifer conformation and the beefing qualities of male progeny also come into the picture. While some bulls at AI stations are shown by the results of progeny tests to be siring progeny with somewhat lower milk yields in comparison with the progeny of other sires they are nevertheless rated as "satisfactory" because of the other qualities which are taken into account.

Is it not a deplorable fact that in some AI stations, dairy bulls that are known to be reducing yields have been retained?

The Deputy is also aware that there are factors other than the milk supply factor.

Surely milk is the urgent factor? Surely it is deplorable in the extreme to be retaining bulls that are reducing production?

There are the beef qualities also.

When you are considering the merits of a dairy bull, how can it be said that he is satisfactory if he is reducing yields, and is known to do so?

These are co-operative societies over which you are objecting to the Minister having any control.

I am thankful for the Minister's comment.

There are bulls which are lowering yields.