Methods of estimating: Clean fleece production
G. M. Spurlock, University of California
Stanley P. Davis, Department of Animal Husbandry
G. E. Bradford, University of California
California Agriculture 16(5):12-13. DOI: 10.3733/ca.v016n05p12.
G. M. Spurlock is Assistant Professors of Animal Husbandry, University of California, Davis; Stanley P. Davis is Wool and Mohair Technologist, Department of Animal Husbandry, Texas Agricultural and Mechanical College, College Station, Texas; G. E. Bradford is Assistant Professors of Animal Husbandry, University of California, Davis;
The squeeze machine method as evaluated for use on California and Texas wools, while not as accurate as the side sample method, is much easier, quicker, and less expensive. The animals can be rated in order of clean wool production more accurately than by grease weight, for high-shrinking wools. Rating of animals in this manner allows the breeder to choose those of higher productivity. The side sample method in most cases cannot be used by untrained personnel while the squeeze machine can. In high rainfall areas and with breeding stock producing high-yielding fleeces, grease fleece weight may equal or surpass the squeeze machine in accuracy. The machine does not appear to be of sufficient accuracy to determine shrinkage of wools for sales purposes.