HIDES AND SKINS

t

This report is not to be published nor may it be quoted as representing the Bank's views.

No. E-214

INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOPMENT

HIDES AND SKINS

March 17, 1952

Economic Department Prepared by: Paul F. Craig- Martin

Flora White

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

Pub

lic D

iscl

osur

e A

utho

rized

TABLE OF COO TEN TS

In troduction.

I. Summary and Conclusions.

II. General Aspects of Production, Trade, Consumption and Prices.

A. Production of Pddes and Skins. B. International Trade. C. Utilization and Prices.

III. Cattle Hides and Skins.

A. Hides. B. Calfskins.

IV. Sheep and Lamb Skins.

V. Goat and Kid Skins.

Appendix: Explanatory Notes of Teohnical Terms.

TABLES

I. Estimated World Cattle Numbers.

II. Hide Production as Percent of Cattle Numbers.

III. Estimated Slau.ghter of Cattle and Calves in Certain Countries.

IV. Estimated World Sheep Numbers.

V. Estimated Slaughter of Sheep and Lambs in Certain Countries.

Page

1

2 - 6

7 - 15

16 - 25

26 - 32

3.3 - .36

37 ... 38

VI. Average Annual Prices for Hides and SkinS, iJnited States.

".

HIDES AND SKINS

n~TRODUC TION

No major study of hides and skins on a world basis appears to have been written since 1925 y, nor does FAO employ an expert in these commodities. Consequently, we considered it advisable to embark on a study of hides and skins because of their very considerable interest to the Bank in six particular respec ts:-

(1)

(2)

(3)

All countries are producers of hides and skins and contribute in different part to world trade.

Many underdeveloped countries have extensive livestock indus­tries which do not but could contribute very considerably to their development, and thereby, earn or save increased quanti­ties of foreign exchange.

Fides and skins, although rarely the main purpose of animal husbandry, provide a return sufficient to reduce materially ~~e costs and hazards of production of the main commodity in view.

(4) Development of agriculture causes distinct changes in live­stock husbandry practices which in turn influence the quality and quantity of livestock products in differing degrees.

(5) Industries such as tanning and footwear manufacture are par­ticularly suited to underdeveloped countries, being labor intenSive" and require only moderate capital and skills.

(6) Hides and skins compete as raV/' materials for manufactures 'dth rubber, natural and synthetic fibers, plastiCS, etc.

The scope of the study has been confined to the hides and skins of cattle, sheep and goats; these account for 95% of all varieties in terms of weight. Numerous other hides and skins such as those of buffaloes, horses, reptiles and fish arE produced in considerable volume but have too specialized a use or too restricted a market to be included here.

11 Arnold, J.R., Hides and Skins, A.W. Shaww & Co., 1925.

- 2 -

HIDES AND SKINS

I. StwIvIARY AND CONCLUSIONS

Hides and skins account for about 60% of the cost of leather production; labor varies from 15% to 30% and tanning adds only a moder­ate addition to the cost of the basic material. About 80% to 85% of the leather produced in the world is utilized in the manufacture of footwear. Heavy cattle hides are used mainly for sole leather whereas light hides and calfskins go into uppers. Linings are made from sheepskins and goat­skinS, both of which are also used in the rr~ufacture of bags and gloves. The demand for hides and skins varies primarily with the demand for foot­wear, which fluctuates with changes in national income.

Statistics on world livestock are incomplete and in many cases inaccurate so that estimates of total world production of hides and skins are largely a matter of guess work. It seems, however, from the available statistics that since 1909 livestock have increased more slowly tbanworld populations. Taking 1909 as 100, the index of population in 1951 would be 146 but for cattle it would be 131, for sheep, 108, and for goats, about 94.

The hide or skin of every animal is not normally utilized. 1kmy animals die where their skins camot be recovered or are recovered only after they become useless through putrefaction. Further, the skins of many animals deliberately slaughtered are so badly mutilated that they have no value. Many animals die or are slaughtered in remote places and the col­lection and marketing of their skins is often uneconomic. It has been es­timated that of the total nurr~er of cattle hides or sheepskins produced some 6% to 25%, depending on demand, are wasted or unrecovered. No esti­Ll8.tes are available for goats but the figures must be somewhat similar.

After allowance is made for wastage or non-recovery, the annual "production" of cattle hides on a world basis appears to run about 15% of cattle numbers and of sheepskins about 25% of sheep numbers. Goatskin production appears to be around 55% of goat numbers. These figures var,y considerably for individual countries, depending on the accuracy of esti­mates of hide and skin production and the season at which livestock enumer­ations are made. In the case of cattle hides the figures for economically advanced COillltries and meat exporting countries run well above the world average whereas figures for underdeveloped coun tries are well below. Esti­mated world production for consumption is as fo1lows:-

World s/ Production of Hides and Skins

Average 1938/40 1948/49 1949/50 1950/51

Cattle Hides and Skins

(million pieces)

1.48 156 162 165

!I Exc lUding USSR.

Sheep Skins (million pieces)

165 166 155 160

Goat Skins (million pieces)

115 112 115 115

- 3 -

Since hides and skins are a by-product of animal husbandr,y changes in demand for them do not, in general affect livestock numbers. Cattle are kept for milk and meat and as draught animals, while sheep and goats are raised chiefly for wool or hair, meat and milk. All are sources of fertilizer for crops and in Asia their dung is also used as a fuel for cooking and heating. In general countries t end to raise animals for one main product. Thus India raises cattle for draught, Argentina for meat, and Denmark for milk. Australian sheep are raised mainly for wool. The goat, however, is somewhat of &1 exception because its skin is of proportionately higher value than that of cattle or sheep and, conse­quently some countries, such as Pakistan, maintain herds for their skins as much as for their other products.

Hides and skins are a relatively unstandardized commodity and interchangeabili ty of types in use is somewhat restricted. Changes in the tvpe of livestock raised may appreciably change the supply of differ­ent hides and skins. The type of livestock kept is to a large extent de­termined by the level of development of the producing country. Progress from extensive to intensive agriculture is usually accompanied by an in­crease in dairy cattle for milk, producing heavy hides and calfskins, and a decrease in range cattle for meat, prodlJ.cing lighter hides. Similarly there is a change from hair or low-wooled sneep, producing the finest quality skins, to merino or dual purpose sheep, producing n~diocre or poor quail ty skins. In the case of goats the change is from goats to sheep and from general purpose goats to especially fine skin t~~es. Tne long-term effect of agricultural development, therefore, is to reduce the volume of lighter hides, of better quality sheepskins and of goatskins. At the Saille time it increases relatively the volume of heavy hides and calfskins, of poorer quality sheepskins and better quality goatskins. In addition more highly developed a~ricultural systems are reducing the number of defects, such as tick and goad holes, and thus reducing the amount of cutting out wastage by processors.

No reliable estimates are available of the number of skins pro­duced from animals which have died a natural death but their number must be very considerable. The quality of the skins of such animals is normally inferior. Statistics of slaughterings are available for a t:ew countries but are insui'ficient to deterrr~ne the proportion of world supply of hides and sk~ns from this source. In general, slaughter hides and skins are of much higher quality than fallen stock and expansion of scientific slaughter-ing and skin take-off have been steadily iIr.proving the general quality of hides and skins. Although direct comparison of sIaughterings to total livestock numbers is not possible between countries because of differences in the season at which livestock enumerations are made, some broad differ­ences can be noted:-

Estimated Slaughtered Proportion of Tbtal Livestock (percent)

'Nestern Europe and North America Eastern Europe and South America Asia and Africa

Cattle

20 - 25 12 - 20 Under 12

Sheep

30 - 60 15 - 30 Under 15

-4-

World exports of hides and skins amounted to 167 million pieces around 1937 which was 10% below pre-Wol'ld War I but 3% above 1950. On the other hand world exports by value in 1937 amounted to 202 million U.S .. dollars while in 1950 they were ,348 million U.S. dollars.

TWo important changes can be traced in the composition of world trade in hides and skins over the past 40 years. Firstly, with the im­prove men ts in slaughtering, curing and handling which have been occurring the proportion of wet hides in world trade has been increasing slow~. Several countries, of which Siam is an example, have changed over from Shipping dr.y hides to wet hides. SecondlY, since the proportion of wet hides in world trade has been increasing by a switch to that form of cure by underdeveloped countries producing main~ light weight hides, the average unit weight of wet hides in world trade has fallen. After 1945 this feature was accentuated by the shortage of European wet hides enter­ing world trade, which are the heaviest hides produced. This basic change, which has been occurring and recentlY been aggravated has produced an ap­parent distortion of the trend in the value of world exports where measured by the piece. Unit values of world -cra(ie per piece have only doubled since prewar, compared with an increase per lb. of 2.5 times. The following figures indicate changes in the volume and value of world exports:-

Estimated World !I Exports of Hides and Skins, Quantity ~nd Value

Goat Cattle and KiE bL . {million (million (million

SheeE and Lamb (million ~mil1ion {million (million

pounds) pieces) US $) pieces) US ~n pieces) US $)

About 1911/13 (l,LhO) 36 216 78 46 72 39 About 1919/21 (961) 25 250 60 51 72 88 About 1937 (1,091) 30y 120 64 40 73 42

1949 ~ (413) 14 91 52 46 60 60 1950 "§j (830) 28 224 65 59 70 65

!I. Excluding USSR. §! Calfskins are excluded from the above figures because statistics of trade

are not available but world exports of calfskins normal~ account for one-ha.lf to two-thirds of production. About two-fifths of the total ex­ports of calfskins normally come from Europe but these supplies have been drasticallY reduced during the postwar period.

y IBID guess-estimate; 1937 based on U.S. Department of COlllmerce figure.

Because interchangeability of types of hides and skins in use is· somewhat limited, virtual~ every country in the world contributes to world trade in these commodities. Before the war about two-thirds of world exports of hides came from countries having a surplus over domestic requirementa and one-third from countries which had deficits on balance but a surplus of a particular type. For instanoe, Western Europe exported

-5-

heavy hides and imported light hides. Western Europe was the chief ex­porting region for calfskins. Because of the marked postwar decline in Western European exports, while herds were being rebuilt, world exports now account for a much su~ller proportion of world production as followst-

Prewar 1949 1950

Estimated World Exports as Percent of World Production

Cattle Hides and Skins Shee;e Skins Goat Skins

.35 - 40 45 - 50 65 - 70 10 - 15 30 - .35 55 - 60 20 - 25 40 - 45 60 - 65

Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and India account for around 7ct!o of the ex­portable supplies of cattle hides and skins, while India, the Union of South Africa, Australia and New Zealand account for 60% of sheep and goat skins. On the import Side, the United States, the United Kingdom, France, and Germany take 55% of the exportable surplus of cattle hides, 75% of the sheepskins and 85% of t.he goatskins.

Prices for hides and skins did not rise between the wars in spite of contracting supplies; in fact, in the five years before World War II they averaged 22% less than for the five years prior to wlorld War I. After 1940 hide prices were relatively much lower than wholesale prices generally and although they rose after the war, the increase was less than for wholesale prices in general. This situation has undoubt­edly arisen as a result of the increaSing use of leather substitutes, particularly in footwear. In the United States, for instance, the pro­duction of shoes increased by 50% between 1926 and 1948 but the output of shoes with leather sales was unchan~ed. Since leather substitutes, such as plastics and synthetic rubber, are popular for use in children's shoes and workmen's boots and shoe manufacturers find these substances easy to handle the trend towards their use can be expected to continue.

Although the long range supp~ of hides and skins changes slow~ because of the long-term nature of livestock husbandry, prices are subject to very wide fluctuations. In the very short term the supply of hides and skins is inelastic because these are on~ by-products of animal husbandry. In the medium term, however, the supply of hides and skins is highly elastic in response to price, because additional supplies become available from remote corners of the earth when prices are high enough to encourage collection. Such supplies disappear under the influence of low prices. Between June 1950 and January 1951 they showed an average increase of approximate~ 110%. Hide prices then began to fall fairly rapidly. They broke sharply in November in the United States where prices for light native cows at Chicago were 58% of January 1951 prices. In the United Kingdom prices at the end or 1951 were 70% of those ruling at the beginning of the year.

-6-

In conclusion, it appears that no special surplus or shortage of hides and skins can be foreseen for the next few years, particularlY with the rapid recovery of European herds and the limitations on in­creased consumption imposed by unsettled conditions in Asia. However, in view of the wide area in which substitutes can still be used for leather and in spite of the increase in leather processing and the use of footwear in underdeveloped countries, prices for hides and skins can be expected to rise less than other livestock products or at any rate be relatively low over the long term. Because of their peculiar supp~ conditions prices for hides and skins can also be expected to continue to show sharp fluctu­ations. Under these circumstances efforts should be made to improve the quality of hides and skins marketed. Losses due to poor take-off and cure should be minimized through better slaughtering facilities and improved curing practices. Not much can be done of a direct nature to increase the quantity and improve the quality of the world's supply of hides and skins but indirectly the development of agriculture, slaughter houses, processing establishments and communications can have considerable effect.

- 7 -

HIDES ~D SKINS

II. GENERAL ASPECTS OF PRODUCTION, TRADE, CONSU11PTION AND PRICES

It is difficult to give an accurate estimate of world production of hides and skins. In many countries statistics of livestock numbers are incomplete and often inaccurate. Many returns do not estimate numbers as a whole but only in part, e.g. only animals on fanns are reckoned and the animals kept in towns are excluded. Further, livestock censuses are often taken only at long intervals so that it is difficult to follow the develop­ment and to deduce any trend from the figures. Also, returns are made at different seasons in different countries making direct comparisons invalid. Figures are less reliable as they date back. This is often due to census returns referring only to animals subject to tax; improved tax collection may be reflected in an increase in livestock numbers, which may not in fact have occurred.

The expansion of livestock numbers has been irregular and has been determined by advancing agricultural tecrn1iques and the opening of new lands. Early nineteenth century improvements in agricultural prac­tices brought about substantial increases but by the middle of the century a plateau had been reached. The advance was not resumed until new lands were opened in the Western Hemisphere, Australia, and Africa. The first World War caused losses of 20% to 50% in European countries but livestock numbers increased again within 7 or 8 years of the close of hostilities and at the outbreak of the second ~forld War they had reached a new peak. The second series of war losses in Europe have not yet been replenished but world (excluding USSR) numbers in 1950 were estimated at 1.1% above 1938 and 11.5% above 1909. Continuing improvement in agricultural prac­tices, particular~ in underdeveloped co~~tries, can be expected to prolong the upward trend in livestock numbers, which have not, however, tended to expand in the past at a rate equal to the growth of human population. Taking 1909 as 100 the index of population in 1951 would be 146; cattle 131, sheep 1081 and goats about 94.

There has been a rising trend in total world cattle numbers during the past 40 years and, apart from the recognized cyclical changes, sheep numbers appear to have increased also although to a less extent. Cyclical chanJes covering 14 to 16 years have been recognized for cattle and for sheep covering 7 years. These changes reeult from the different reproductive cycles juxtaposed to economic cycles. Changes have been as follows:

World a

Cattle SheeE Goats

1909 515 625 214 1921 560 564 202 1938 630 663 200 1950 664 652 200 1951 675 676 200

!I Excluding USSR.

- 8 -

~batever the changes in livestock numbers ~~y be, only the most far reaching causes can be considered here because changes result from the complex influence of numerous factors which may affect small regions, whole countries or groups of countries.

Hides and skins represent only part of the utilization of cattle, sheep and goats. Thua, in respect to cattle, utilization for draught, and for meat or milk is predominant, while for sheep and goats the primary purpose of their husbandry is wool, hair, meat or milk. All are sources of fertilizer for crops and in some countries dung is used as fuel for cooking and heating_ In the Argentine, cattle are raised for meat; in India, for draught; and in Denmark, for milk and fertilizer. Sheep are raised in Australia for wool, in Eastern Europe for milk also, in New Zealand for meat and wool. In Egypt and the East livestock manure provides an important source of fuel. Changes in the various totals of livestock numbers are accordingly not always in relation to changes in demand for any single livestock product and probably least of all to hides and skins. However J long term crlanges in the total supplies of hides and skins are the result of slow cnanges in livestock numbers. In general, therefore, the demand for hides anti skins has no substantial effect on livestock numbers.

On the other hand, changes in regional livestock numbers are often closely related to the supp~ of a single livestock product. This may be true of different regions at the same time (e.g. Australia, sheep­wool; Argentina, cattle-beef; and Denmark, cattle-milk) and of the same region over a period of time because changes in tbe economic condi tiona (sometimes edaphic conditions through irrigation) of &!y given area may have widely differing effects on anilnal husbandry. 'The general economic factors which influence the development of the various branches of animal husbandry also bring about changes in the relative importance of livestock products; one or other produ.ct will be stressed to a greater or lesser degree, or even, in extreme cases complete~ abandoned. lbe following broad generalizations, which can be traced in an historical analYSis, in­dicate stages of development of 8.griculture ir. certain countries or regions (often different within the sanle oountry) together with possible lines of future development:-

(a) Pioneer Stage - Range cattle and goats with small crop (meat) acreage.

(b) Second Stage (wool)

(c) Third Stage (ger.eral)

- Sheep for wool follow cattle. '!he rate of increase in cattle slows and goats decline while the crop acreage increases wi th small amounts fed to stock.

- Cattle anL crop acreage increase rapidly with feeding of cattle becoming general. Sheep lose either relative or absolute importance.

(d) Fourth Stage (milk)

(e) Fifth Stage tm1lk and

pig meat}

- 9 -

- Stability is reached in cattle and sheep decline. Crop aCI'eage increases slightly or land is more intensively cultivated. Dai~~ng develops.

- Both cattle and sheep decline. Crop culti­vation becomes more intensive. Dairying and pig keeping increase rapidly.

TWo internal changes in livestock husbandrY appear to have caused a different ratio between types of hides and skins produced. Firstly, the rapid development of dairYing which has occurred mainly in the relative­ly more advanced countries has resulted in a net gain in stock. Pasture and other feed supplies have been limited and, under dairying conditions, deliberate slaughter has been increased while the fattening period has been reduced. A larger proportion of the slaughter is of immature animals and these increases have provided larger supplies of calfskins, for which these areas are the main source of supply. Secondly, the trend towards dual purpose sheep has produced results similar to those brought about for cat­tle by increased dair,ying. Considerably increased slaughterings, parti­cularly of lambs, for meat have appreciably increased the number of lamb­skins. The following figures illustrate the changes in the last quarter of a century:-

Ce.lf and Lamb Skins as Percent of Slaughter Supplies of Total Cattle P~des and Skins and Total

Sheep Skins

Calfskins United Kingdom Netherlands Denmark New Zealand

Lambskins Australia New Zealand

192$ (percent)

33 60 20 $8

29 !I 59

!/l929/30.

A. Production of Hides and Skins

1950 (percent)

39 67 $8 6$

46 72

As with livestock numbers, statistics of hide and skin produc­tion are incomplete and inaccurate. Not every skin of every animal count­ed is utilized while the skins of many animals not counted are utilized. Changes in world production of hides and skins have been as follows:-

- 10 -

~.or1d a of Hides and Skins pieces)

Cattle and KiEs Calf Shee!! and Lamb Goat

About 1911/13 86 51 182 124 About 1919/21 84 32 161 107 Average 1938/40 96 52 165 liS

1949 109 47 EI 166 li2 1950 .!¥. 110 52 155 115 1951 Y 112 53 160 115

a/ Exc luding USSR. §I IBRD guess-estimate.

Source: Arnold, J.R., Hides and Skins. Tanners' Council of America.

The production of hides ~~d skins occurs in either of two ways, slaughter or natural death of the animal. Even in the case of deliberate slaughter the prospect of the skins being counted is on~ fair, as n~ny skins do not leave the place of slaughter because of extensive damage in take-off or because delay in curing has made them worthless. There are few national statistics of slaughterings and still less of take-off and cure; most slaughtering statistics are limited to those of important establishments in towns or cities ~dth occasional guess-estimates for the remainder. In the case of hides and skins of anim.e,ls which have died naturally (fallen stock) the prospect of aCCUl'ate counting is even more remote. Livestock husbandry is often conducted in areas subject to droughts and floods, which have difficult mountainous terrain so that many animals die where their skins cannot be recovered or where they putrefy before they can be recovered. Even though many skins of fallen stock are recovered and cured, Virtually no statistics of these are compiled as the buli( of such production occurs in remote regions of under­developed countries isolated by lack of transport or other communications.

No figure is available for the proportions of total supplies of hides and skins coming from slaughter and fallen stock, but it is generally agreed that the latter is very considerable. In underdeveloped areas oon­di tions of husbandry are such as to make the maintenance of herds and flocks difficult and consequent~ deliberate slaughter is reduced to a nu.nlJllum. Further, in these areas ovmersnip of large numbers is often a n~rk of prestige and in some areas religious beliefs hinder slaughter. In more advanced countries the strong demand for meat makes for high slaughter rates. In geneTa1, the proportion of t.he cattle population slaughtered in the Cfnited States, Western Europe J the Plate Area and Australasia varies between fair~ narrow limits and averages about 20% whereas in Asia and Africa slaughter varies from 4% to 20% and averages about 10%.

- 11 -

B. International Trade

The first reasonably comprehensive statistics available are those of foreign trade in hides and skins but even these cannot be ac­curately grouped for different countries or varieties. Some countries record figures of pieces traded, whether whole skins or part, while others use measures of weight. Since records by piece rarely specif3T the method of cure or whether -the wool or hair has been left on !I and since records by weight rarely indicate the cure or separate whole skins from parts, con­version to a common base must be arbitrar,y. World exports of cattle hides and skins by pieces normally account for between 35iS to 40% of world pro­duction, wi1ile sheepskins account for 45% to 50% and goatskins for 65% to 70%. The world exports of hides and skins amounted to 167 million pieces around 1937 which was 10% below pre-World Vvar I, but 3% above 1950. On the other hand world exports by value around 1937 amounted to 202 million US dollars while in 1950 they were 348 million US dollars.

Exports of hides and skins have been made from virtually every country in the world, including both advanced and underdeveloped countries. In general, hides and skins are relatively unstandardized commodities and quality differences and special characteristics for end use abound, apart from considerable disparity in the demand and domestic supply ratios of almost all countl~es.

Two important changes in the composition of YfOrld trade in hides and skins over the past 40 years can be traced. Firstly, with the improvements in slau5htering, curing and handling vvhich have been occurring the proportion of wet hides in world trade has been increasing slowly. Several countries, of which Siam is an example, have c:1anged over from shipping dr,y hides to wet hides. Secondly, since the proportion of wet hides in world trade has been increasing by a switch to ths.t form of cure by underdeveloped countries producing mainly light weight hides, the av­erage unit weight of wet hides in world trade has fallen. After 1945, this feature was accentuated by the shortage of European wet hides enter­ing world trade. These are the heaviest hides produced. This basic change l has produced an apparent d:j.stortion of the trend in the value of world ex­ports where measured by the piece. Unit values of world trade per piece have only doubled since prewar compared with an increase per lb. of 2.5 times which is to the same extent as raw materials and foodstuffs in gen­eral. The following figures indicate changes in the volume and value of world exports:-

1/ Wet cured hides weigh roughly twice dr,y cured and wooled may weigh - tVlrice de-wooled.

- 12 -

Estimated World a/ Exports of P~des and Skins, Quantity and Value

About

Sheep and Lamb (million (million pieces) tI'S $)

Goat (million (million pieces) US $)

1911/13 (1,440) 36 216 78 46 72 39 About

1919/21 ( 961) 25 250 60 51 72 88 About

1937 (1,091) 120 64 40 73 42 302/ 1949 s/. ( 413) 14 91 52 46 60 60 1950 Y ( 830) 28 224 65 59 65 70

!I. Excluding USSR. EI Calfskins are excluded from the above figures because staUs­

tics of trade are not available but world exports of calfskins normally account for one-half to two-thirds of production. About two-fifths of the totel exports of calfskins normal~ come from Europe but these supplies have been drastical~ re­duced during the postwar period.

21 IBRO guess-estima te; 1937 based on U. S. Department of Commerce figure ..

Source: Arnold. J.R., Hides and Skins United States Trade Accounts.

Before the war the producing areas began to develop their own leather industries. ~ith the increased leather production shoes were worn in many of the underdeveloped areas for the first time and leath­er exports from the producing B.reas expanded; exports of leather from Argentina and BraZil are noY{ 12 times greater than a decade ago. In 1923 about 70% of the world's output of leather was produced in the United States, the United Kingdom, France and Germany, and in 1934 only 55% of the total was produced in these countries. This resulted in a slow decline in the volume of world exports of hides and skins. Frices of hides and skins, however, did not rise as a result of this contracting export supplY, even though world population was rising faster than livestock numbers; in fact, prices in the five years before World Viar II averaged 22% less than for the five years prior to World War I, compared with a decline in the general index of raw materials and foodstuffs of 9%. This situation was undoubtedly caused by the use of substitutes for leather, particularly in footwear but also in bags and gloves; reduced demand for harness and allied leathers as a result of the introduction of automobiles and farm mechanisation also has been a contributing factor. A measure of the importance of the use of leather substitutes in footwear can be had by reference to United States use, although such substitution was probably more common in the United States than elsewhere:-

- 13 -

United States Civilian Shoe Production

Total With Leather Sales (million pairs) (million pairs , lPercent)

1926 323 305 94 1930 304 260 85 1935 384 305 79 1940 404 295 73 1945 444 255 57 1947 468 340 73 1948 462 300 65 1949 459 260 57

Thus during the past quarter of a century while United States production of civilian shoes rose by 50% the number vrith leather sales remained at best unchanged and showed signs of falling. Since leather substitutes such as plastics and s~nthetic rubber have high abrasion resistance and imperrneability to water they are particularly popular for use in children's shoes and wor~uen1s boots. In addition, shoe manufacturers are not averSe to the use of leather :;iubssti tutes because of the ease with which synthetics can be handled at th~ factory. In general, therefore, the trend tORards leather substitutes can be ex­pected to continue and become more widespread.

Four countries, Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and India account for around 7($ of the exportable surplus of cattle (ddes and skins, while India, the Union of South Africa, Australia and New Zealand together ac­count for 60% of the exportable surplus of sheep and goatskins. '!he value of exports of raw hides and skins in relation to the value of total exports of each of the principal exporting countries is as follow5:-

1934 1949 1950 (percent) (percent) (percent)

Argentina 6.0 11.0 12.0 Brazil 3.0 3.0 2.0 Uruguay 13.0 13.0 11.0

1.4 1.5 India tY South Africa c/

3.0 ~ 2.2 5.1 4.1

Australia b/ -1\1 ew Zea land £/

3.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 4.0 4.0

a/ April/March 1933/34, 1949/50 and 1950/51. h/ July/June 1933/34, 1948/49 and 1949/50. c/ 1949 and 1950 may include some tanned skins. ~ Includes Pa~istan.

S,:>urce: Compiled fronl official trade statistics.

-14-On the import side, the United sta tes, the United Kingdom,

France and Germal'\V normally take 55% of the exportable surplus of cattle hides, 75% of the sheepskins and 85% of goatskins. All three European markets had important re-export trades in hides and Skins and Germany, through the port of Hamburg, acted as the main export outlet for supplies drawn from all over continental Europe. All four countries have extensive export trades in finished leather and other products.

The value of imports of raw hides and skins in relation to the value of total imports of each of the principal importing countries is as follows:-

1934 1949 1950 (percent) (percent) (percent)

Uni ted states 1.9 0.8 1.1 United Kingdom 1.0 2.0 2.0 France 1.7 1.0 1.5 GermaI\Y 2.5 1.8 1.9

Source: C.ompiled from official trade statistics.

The direction of trade in cattle hides is to a large extent governed b,y the proportion of heavy or light hides in the domestic pro­duction of the importing country. Thus, the United states is predomin­antly an importer of heavy hides, ldth the United Kingdom half and half and western Europe an importer of light hides. On the other hand, Europe prewar accounted for 40% of \vorld exports of calfskins. The United states has no independent felimongering industry so it imports dewooled skins, but Europe takes wooled skins. The volume and direction of goatskin trade is influenced largely by changing fashions in wOl~n's shoes and gloves.

c. Utilization and Prices

Hides and skins account for about 60% of the co~t of leather production; labor varies from 15% to 30% and ~~g adds only a moderate amount to the cost of the basic material. About 80% to 85% of leather produced is utilized in the manufacture of footwear and the cost of leather represents about 50% of the total manufacturing cost of shoes. The output of footwear varies only slightly with changes in natioIW.l income, but changes in the value of output have been sharp owing to the introduction of leather SUbstitutes. Thus with prices for footwear showing marked fluctuations which are reflected in leather prices, the outstanding char­acteristic of the trade in hides and skins has been the very wide fluctu­ations in prices; in the 60 years 1891 to 1951, United states hide prices fluctuated, on a monthly average, between 5.70 cents and 41.20 cents per lb.

In general, the supply of hides and skins is inelastic in res­ponse to price in the very short term and in the longer term; in the med­ium term additional supplies become available from remote corners of the earth when prices are high for a continuous period, and disappearing when prices are low. The actual production is unaffected but the collection

... 15 ...

intensity changes. On the other hand, very short term supply is sub .. ject to great variation in response to non-price factors. Because hides and skins are relatively minor by-products of animal husbandry wi th meat and milk the main products, hides and skins represent, ac­cording to circumstances, from 8% to 12% of the total gross value of the animal products. Fine-grained goatskins are an exception because they represent a very high proportion of the total value of the goats. products.

In addition it should be noted that several of the principal -qypes ot hides and skins are not ordinarily interchangeable in use" so that at times prices of different types bear different relationships to each other. When cattle herds were being reduced in the United states between 1934 and 1936 heavy steers sold at a differential of 10% over light cows, while in 1940 the opposite price relationship held. Heavy hides for sole leather could not very well be employed for light uppers.

In spite of the relatively' small value of hides and skins in the total value of the products of the animal, the efficient treatment and market5.ng of them can make a measurable difference to the net real­ization accruing from the conversion of the animal into salea'.:>le products at the point of slaughter.

- 16 -

In. CATTLE HIDES AND SKINS

The important differences among types of cattle hides and skins has been noted in the Appendix; in gel1eral 1ndi vidual countries produce mainly one 'GYPe. western and Central Europe produce the heav­iest commercial hides 1n the world, fOUOlTed by the River Plate district. The United states a.rx:l Canada also produce heavy hides but they are lighter than those of Europe and the River Plate district. The ma:ximum wet weight of heavy United states hides is 95 to 100 Ibs., compared with 130 to 140 for Eruopean heavy hides. The main heavy hide producers are also the Chief world suppliers of calfskins. The principal producers of light hides are Latin America outside the River Plate district, Scandinavia" Australasia, and the eastern and southeastern borderland of western Eur~ ope. "Extreme" hides come from Russia, southeastern Europe, all J4rica north of the Union of South Africa except Egypt" Olina. and Japan, while kips are produced in India, Siam" Irxio-China" IndoneSia" and southwest Asia and Egypt.

About 40% of total world cattle numbers are in oountries pro­dUCing heavy hides and calfskins, while 30% are in kip producing coun­tries with the remainder equally divided between producers of light and. extreme hides as is shown in Table I. World cattle numbers have increased during the past 40 years by 31.% according to available estimates, but mun .. bel'S w"ithin the foregoing groups have developed differently. The follow­ing figures indicate recent changes in numbers.

year

1921 1938 1949 19$0 1951

Changes in Cattle Nu.'llbers According to General Classification of Hides Produced

(1909 = 100)

Heavy and Calfskins Light Extreme -- Kips Total

107 110 102 108 108 111 160 127 US 122 129 145 126 116 127 12S 147 128 118 128 129 152 130 118 131

A. Hides, Excluding Calfskins

Hide (including heavy, light, extreme and kips) production in relation to cattle numbers furoughout the world averages about 15% as shown in Table II. Production in the main heavy hide producing countries runs about 25%, for light hides between 10% and 20% am for extrelileS under 10%. These figures coincide very largely with the stages of economic de­velopment of the countries concerned. and indicate something of the magni­tude of the increase in supply of hides which might result from development of agriculture and efficient slaughtering in umerdeveloped countries. The case of kips is exceptional in that the bulk of supplies come from 1rxiia, where religious beliefs as well as economic bac-kwardness limit production.

- 17 ..

The production ot cattle hides and kips bas been estimated as tollows:­a/

World-Production ot Cattle Hides and Kips (million pieces) -----

About 1911/13 1919/21 1938/40 1948/49 1949/50 1950/51

86 84 96

109 110 b/ 1l2y

a/ Excluding USSR. £I IBRD guess-estimate.

Source: Arnold, J.R., Hides and Skins Tanners' (bunci! of Aiiier!ca. .

No estima te is available tor the proportions obtained trom slaughter and from tallen stock. Although the latter must be very con­siderable, hides trom slaughter are basically the more important both in terms of quanti W and quality. The slaugh tor ot cattle in certain countries is sh~ll in Table III.

The percentages of slaughter to cattle population are reasonably uniform in the more economically advanced countries where they run at be­tween 20% and 25% annually. In the less advanced countries and meat ex­porting countries the percentages fall to between 12% and 20% while in the underdeveloped countries less than 12% are slaughtered. The rels.tionshtp between slaugbterings and cattle numbers in certain countries has been as follows:-

Heavy Hides -United States

Ge!'lllal\r Netherlands Argentina Brazil Uruguay

Light Hides Czechoslovakia Poland Australia New Zealand

Extreme Hides --rt1geria a/ KiP! -

ndia

s/ 1947 figure.

Ratio of Total Slaughtered to Cattle NUmbers 1938

(percent)

23 22 11 21 11 13

16 14 19 13

8

3

NOTE: Figures for individual countries should not be dir­- ectly compared because of difterences in dates or

livestock enumerations.

- 18 -

There are no aocurate figures available for world consumption of hides; Arnold estimated that the figure lay between 74 and 87 million excluding some 6 to 13 million hides wasted or unrecovered.

A sharp distinc tion can be drawn between countries having hide deficits and those having surpluses. Table i, giving cattle numbers, is divided to show the surplus and deficit countries according to the type of hide produced. The deficit countries consist mainly of the industrial nations while the surplus areas are predominantly agricultural coun~'1es.

The major surplus e:iiporting countries are Argentina" Brazil, Uruguay and South Africa for heavy hides, Australia for light hides" Africa for extreme hides, and India for kips. Before i;.Iorld \,lar II the abovementioned countries accounted for 80% of world e:iiportable surplus by weight. On the other hand a number of countries, mainly Western European, which on balance were net importers of hides contributed large­ly to world exports during that period. Thus" the world exportable sur­plus 2/of hides prObably did not exceed 20 million but actual quantities entering world trade 3/ran to around 30 million. This si tua tion is due to the fact that cattle hides are onJ.y broadly interchangeable, that is" sufficiently to establish measures of relative value in terms of price.

After 'World War I the United Kingdom" United States" France and Germany consumed approximately 70% of the world production. During the next 20 years their conswnption fell to about 44% of the world pro­duction. Immed.ia tely before t-lorld 1flar II they were the chief importing countries accounting for about 50% of the world exportable surplus. Dur­ing the war United States and. United Kingdom imports accounted for 80% to 90% of the exportable surplus" which offset the decrease in demand from the European countries. Since the war the recovery in world trade of cattle hides has been slow. In 1949 imports into the four principal importing countries were, very approximately" one-half their prewar quan­tity but have since shovm some recovery.

After the war cattle numbers in Europe were 10% below the prewar level but better pastures and adequate feed supplies restored cattle num­bers by 1950 to wi thin 1% of the prewar level. All countries" except Hun­gary and Yugoslavia" are maintaining or expanding their herds but only half of the Eruopean countries have reached or exceeded their prewar cattle numbers. Numbers in the United Kingdom and France are respectively 24% and 2% above the prewar levels. These conditions have increased the demani for hides upon the surplus countries, since Europe exported heavy hides be­fore the war. In spi te of increased demand for hides, however" particu­lar13 light ones" in the absence of European heavy hides, world exports have declined largely because of the increased tanning of hides in the pro­ducing areas.

2/ Exports minus imports of net exporting C01U1 tries. "5/ Sum total of exports from both net exporting and net importing - countries.

- 19 -

Wi th the development of dairying throughout the 'WO!' Id and the wider distribution of leather industries l it might be expected that world supplies of light hides will decline while those of heavy hides and calf­skins should increase. However, the overall volume of trade in hides can be expected to decline but the trade should become more competitive nth greater physical comparability in the product.

The changes in the interns. tional trade of ea ttle hides are shown in the following table:-

Estimated Trade in Os ttle Hides ¥ (million 115s. wet basis jJ)

. Importers Uni ted sta tes

Exporters ~3r~ 1949 19$0 ---Argentina 29 • .3 Brazil 13.1 Uruguay" 0.7 Mexico 1.7 Other ,runer-ieas 0 • .3

Canada 16.9 France 2.2 Other Europe7.0 South Atri ea -Other Africa ... Australia 0.1 New Zealand 0.5 India 0.1 Siam -Others 0.3

TOTAL ~

3.8 61.8 2.5 7.6 0.5 5.0 5.7 2.3

1.4 4.4 10.3 19.7

a/ 1.3 0-;, 2.0

0.2 0,2 2.7 0.3 0.2 21 0.1

1.5 2.5 1.8 1.7 2.7

w.u ro:J

&/ 91 thousand Ibs.

United ~dom 1934 1:9 19515 ---

-

France !9j4 1949 1950 ---

26.0 1.L.

15.2 ..,. 0.4 ~

16.7c/15.5f/29.2h/ 9.1 116.1 2~198.4 ;o:Ii'y!O'!o."U

'0/ Included. in others, it arr:r. -al InCludes 10.8 from Eire.

Ge~ i9~4 1950 ---70.1 6.1 58.3 24.2 11.9 7.5 21.1 1.6 16.0 .3.9

8.3 0.4

11.0 58.6 0.8 0.7 0.1 0.5 5.6

1.4 8.9 0.6 0.4

0.5 2.9 13.11/

5.0 0.1 4.3

1.6 0.8 1.5

1.1 0.1

14.8 5.2 2.1 227.1 ~ 121.0

al Includes Denmark 9.4; Netherlands 8 • .3; Italy 9.1. i/ Total only, wet and dry not shown separately. African figure may be - 7.1 wet basis. f/ Includes British countries 8.1 and foreign countries 7.L. which may in­- clude Europe I if a:r:s:r. d In converting to a wet basis the average 2 dry to 1 wet was used. 11/ Includes British countries and Ireland 9.7 and foreign countries 19.5. 1/ Includes Belgium 3.0 and Italy 3 • .3. 11 Includes kips when shown in trade accounts.

NOTE: - The year 1934 for the United States should not be considered a normal year since imports iiere about one-half of the 10 year average 1929/38. Drought conditions increased the production of hides because slaugh­ter and fallen stock 't'-1as increased, l-J"hich resulted in exceptionally low imports.

Source: O>mpiled from official trade statistics of importing countries.

- 20 -

Because hides and skins are a by-product resulting from unusual supply factors, price fluctuations in the hide market are among the most extreme of the commodi~ prices.

On the demand side, since hides are used mainly in the manufacture of footwear and represent such a large proportion of their cost, the in­nuence of shoe demand is paramount. On the supply side, because hides are a by-product, t heir supply over the long term and the very short term is governed by factors remote from any relationship to the demand for leather. In additionJ during the very short term beef-feed ratios and beef-other meat ratios exercise a marked influence on hide supplies from slaughter. The long term trend towards increased milk consumption and smaller outs of meat for smaller families has affected adversely the sup­ply of sole leather and faoilitated competition from rubber and syntheticse Over the medium term, however I the supply of hides is governed by the faot that the bulk of the cost of marketing hides is in the cost of collection and transport. Since at the same time a very large part of the total po­tential supply is from fallen stock , it can be readily appreciated that the supply in response to demand can vary vddely. This should tend to minimize fluotuations in hide prices but because there is a very marked lag in the response of supply to changes in demand.1' variations in hide prices are extremely vade. The courae of the cycle is roughly as followa:-

A. On the fall:--1. National income and the demand for footwear turns do'WtlVfard;

the proportion of leather in product declines.

2. ~~rith falling off in demand for livestock products generally, slaughterings decline and hide supplies are reduced (wet hides).

3. On the other hand, since prices for hides remain for some time appreciably above the cost of collection and transport of sup­plies from remote sources, these supplies of hides continue to increase (dry hides).

4. This initial inelasticity of supply is f'ollO\"l9d by a rather sudden and marked cont.ract.ion as price falls belovT the cost of collection and t.ransport for remote areas.

s. Thus hide prices fall not only very steeply but also excessive­ly, so that when the supply of dry hides contracts sharply, price reaction is violent.

B. On the rise:---....... ..;..-.~. --1. National income and the demand for footwear turns upward; the

proportion of leather in the product increases.

2. 1;ifith rising demand for livestock products generally, slaughter­ings increase but the grovring demand for hides can only par­tially met from this source.

- 21 -

3. A very considerable and steep rise in hide prices occurs before producers of dry hides materially increase collec­tion. This is due to the same factors which delayed con­traction of supply on the fall.

4. Once prices have risen attractively above costs of collec­tion and transport from remote sources, t he supply of hides increases rapidly and l as already noted, continues to ex­pand after prices have reacted to the new situation.

With the recovery of transport after World lYar I prices for hides came rapidly into line with wholesale prices generally and by the middle twenties hide prices became relatively attractive. During the depression low prices led to a considerable cont.raotion of supplies which, aided by a strong demand for leather in the ilm'lediate prewar and early war years, caused in turn a sharp recovery in prices. After 1940 hide prices were relatively much lower than 'wholesale prices generally, in both the United Kingdom and the United states. After the war, with the removal of price controls and de-rationing of shoes, the demand for leather was great. Conseque1tly, the price of hides increased but the rise in hide prices after the termination of hostilities was less marked than for wholesale prices generally, particularly after 1947. This reflected the rapid ad­vance in the use of leather substitutes.

Devaluation in the fall of 1949 did not stop the upw'ard movement of prices, largely because of the recovery of United states demand. The trend of prices in the United Kingdom is illustrative as shown in the table on page 22.

In 1950 the upward trend in hide prices was accelerated during the last half of the year because of war conditions in the Far East. From June to October 1950 hide prices in all markets increased 15% to 65% according to type and market and by January 1951) they had gone up 60% to 140% or an average of approximately 110%. The upward trend continued for the next two months during which the average increase was 117%. In April prices began to fall and by rJay they were about 20% below the peak period but still 75Y; above June 1950. During November and December the sharpest break in prices took place since the 1919/21 period. In January 1951 light native cows U.S. were Ll.2 cents and in December they had declined to 23.8 cents or less than the average price for any year since the War.

It seems at first sight surprising that the price changes affected export supplies very little before 1950. This situation was due largely to the considerable increase in domestic utilization in surplus countries and to the low level of European exports during the postwar period of herd re­construction. With the rapid increase in prices in 1950, exports approxi­mately doubled over the previous year but were still not up to the prewar level in spite of an increase in cattle numbers of 5%, and in hide produc­tion of 15;6, since the outbreak of World War II. Recent high prices should have greatly intensified collections of dr.1 hides but appear to have failed to do so. Therefore, it seems lilcely that higher transport and handling costs than prewar, together with recent imposition of much heavier export taxes and internal welfare levies, have siphoned off a very large part of postvmr high prices so that the price to the collector is relativelY un-

~ Jan/March

191!2 Jan/March Oct/Dec. (a)

.l25Q J an/!/iarch Oct/Dec.

19C)1

Argentina Frig. Ox

5-5/8

20-5/8 22-7/8

24 5/8-25 1/2 36 5/8-39 1/2

- 22-

UNITED ICINGDOP( RA~I CATTLE HIDES SCHEruLE OF REPRESENTATIVE C.I.F. PRICE MOVmENTS

(pence per lb.)

Brazil Dry ~a­

banos

6-7/8

17-1/2 21

20-22 27 1/2-37

Type and Origin ot_Iilde ___ ~~__ __ .. ___ _ South Africa East Africa West Africa New Zealand Dry Cape I Heavy Light Salted Ox Freezer Cow

Heavy 40+

7-1/2 6-3/4 9 5-l/e

26-1/3 19-1/2 21 22-7/8 26 19-1/2 21 2: - 24

2'1-29 22-23 5/8 23 - 35 25 37-43 37-4, . 39 - 47 29 - 37 31 - 37-1/2

Jan/March 1~O-1/2-5l-l/l6 37-48 46-55 45-60 56 - 6h 37 - 51 39 - 51 26 - 32-1/2 Jul/Sep. (b)

End Oct. (b) 35-40 36-1J.6 3e 40 30

End Nov. (b) 38 34 28 End Dec. (b) 38 32 28

(a) These prices were subject to the following maximum discounts for p~ment in free dollars: -10% from October 1949 to July 1950; -15% from July 1950.

(b) Three types only shown; wholesale prices.

Source: OEmC. Miscellaneous Products Committee. Report on Problem Concerning the Supply of Raw Hides and Skins, Paris. 24 November. 1950 and 14 June,195l.

Records and Statistics Supplement to the Economist.

- 23 -

attractive. A continuation of high consumer prices and low producer prices provides little inducement to improve the quantity or quality of supplies. Unless the taxes levied on exports are applied at least in part ~vards im­provement of the hide collection system, of take-off practices and of pre­servation methods, high priced leather in deficit countries vlill be increas­ingly replaced by alternative or synthetiC products.

B. Q.alf Skins

The different types of calf skins are as follows:

(i) Veals - milk-fed skins. (ii) Calfskins proper - animals not yet weaned.

(iii) Grassers - skins from animals that have ceased to be fed on whole milk.

(iv) Slunks and Deacons - stillborn skins.

It is impossible to give accurate calf numbers or slaughter figures because the number of calves living or slaughtered at a given time is large­ly a matter of definition, varying from one production area to another. Changes in demand for dairy products over a considerable period of years tend to cause changes, moderate in range, in the size of dair,y herds and1 consequently, in the number of calves slaughtered. This is true especially in northern and western Europe and" to a less extent, in the United States. On the other hand" if beef prices are high for a long period, calfskin pro­duction declines slightly. After both the great wars, the rebuilding of dairy herds in Europe has temporarily kept calfskin production low. An attempt has been made to estimate calfskin production, as follows:'"

worlda) Calf Skin Production (m:i.llion pieces) - --

About 1911/13 About 1919/21

1938/40 1948/49 (b) 1949/S0(b) 1950!5l(b)

(a) Excluding U.S.S.R. (b) IBP~ guess-estimate.

51 32 52 47 52 53

Source: Arnold, J .R.) Hides and Sk.ins" Tanners I Council of America ..

The world's supply of calfskins varies in quality according to economic regions, rather than from one country to another. The best quality "calfskins" are produced in western and central Europe, where the demand for veal predominates over that for cream and a large proportion of the Whole milk is fed to calves whioh are raised beyond the age of a calf proper. In Denmark and Svdtzerland, which have a large butter production, however, a considerable portion of the take-off of skins is calfskins proper. In the

- 24 -

United Kingdom" Australia and New Zealand calfskins proper also are pro­duced in conjunction with the butter industry, while in the United States and Canada the production of calfskins is in conjunction with the use ot cream by the ice cream industry. In the Netherlands slaughtering of calves is subject to competition between the dairy industry and the demand for veal.

Spain~ Portugal and Southern Italy are not calfskin producing areas and in the River Plate area the production of skins is mostly restricted to slunks and deacons.

During a normal year about two-thirds of the production of calf­skins enters international trade. Before the war Europe 1 s share of total exports from the principal supplying areas was 60%.; while France's share of the European total was 65%, the River Plate area 20% and Oceania 11%. Germany was the principal importer followed by the United States and the United Kingdom. Since the war world trade has been drastically reduced beoause the European countries have been rebuilding their herds. The trade in calfskins is shown on page 25.

The demand for shoes infiuences the price of calfskins, because 90% of all calfskins are used in making upper leather for shoes.

-25 -

TRADE IN CALF SKUrS (million 1bs, wet basis)

_ Importers United States United Kingdom German.y Netherlands France ---Exporters -- 1934 1949 1950 1934 1949 1950 1934 1949 1950 1934 1949 1950 1934 1949 1950

Denmark 0.2 0.8 France 3.7 0.8 1.7 0.8 28.1 0.7 0.3 6.4 0.6 0.6 Italy 0.4 0.5 0.8 0.2 0.9 Czechoslovakia 0.4 1 • .5 Poland 1.4 0.3 Norwq 0 .. 2

lUre 1.0 0 Q) CD Q)

New Zealand 1.4 0.2 1.9 0.6 ..... ..... 0.3 0.2 0.7 0.4

..... ,-I

~ ~ i ~ Australia 0.3 ..... ,-I 0.4 ,-I ..... Argentina

.... Q1 5.8 0.3 0.8 1.2 0.2 G1 Q; aI 1; ~

po ~ U~ 1.7 0.4 0.6 0.2 III

Canada 1.1 2.7 3.6 +> +> +> +> 0 ,g 0.9 0 0

\2i ~ :z;

French N. Africa 3.7 French W. Africa 1.6 Other Africa 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.8

Others 9.5 2.9 2 • .5 2.1 17.9 1.9c) 0.9c) 6.7b) 1.3d) 1.4d) 4.0

TOTAL 13.0 4.3 12.2 6.1 .5.7 5.2 56.0 4.2 3.0 13.1a) 3.8 4.1 10.1 0.7 1.6

a) Wet and dry, not wet basis. b) Ge1'Dl8llT 1.6 and Belgium-Luxembourg 1.1. c) United States 1.2 in 1949 and 0.3 in 1950. d) United States 1.2 in 1949 and 0.2 in 1950.

Source: Oompi1ed from official trade statistics of importing countries.

- 26 -

IV • SHEEP S1{n~S AND LAMB SKINS

Sheep, perhaps more than all other domestic animals, thrive in almost every region of the world except damp, tropical areas. Sheep are not kept primarily for the commercial value of their skins but for their wool, meat and sometimes milk. The different utilizations have a direct bearing on the quality of the skins produced; in general, poor skins are associated with mediocre meat and the best wool, mediocre skins and wool go with the best meat and the best skins with medioc~e meat and poor~ if any, wool. The chief merino areas are Australia (70% of total fiock), South Africa (60%)" United states (,O%)J Argentina (16%), Urugu~ (13%), and New Zealand 0%).

The main producing areas of coarse-wooled sheepskins are North America) the River Plate countries, New Zealand, Southern Chile and all Europe except for the eastern parts of Poland" Czechoslovakia, Austria" Hungary, Spain" Portugal and Balkan countries.

The prodUCing areas for low-wooled sheepskins are the higher, drier and hotter parts of the temperate zone covering the Mediterranean countries of Europe and Africa and eastward through Asia Minor to south­western Siberia and through Afghanistan to northwestern India. Peru and Central Chile are the only producers in the western Hemisphere.

Hair sheepskins come from tropioal America and Africa" Egypt, Arabia, India, Siam" Indo-China and Indonesia.

In spite of the shortcomings of livestock enumerations already noted, it is probably fairly safe to trace certain broad tendencies from the available statistics.

The total number of sheep in the world, excluding those in the USSR, increased 'by around 7% between the two world wars. In 1948, sheep numbers were only 2% below the average level of 1934/38; in 1950, 1% above; and in 19,1 .. 5% above) as shown in Table IV. \I~·orld totals" hOW""'" ever, conceal significant changes among sheep types as f'ollows:-

SheeE !l~~U~!!i!.»L4b.!.!..!02.

Averjie 1909 3 1941 1948 19,0 1951

• 4 - - -Fine"!"WOoled 82 89 94 99 104 Open-wooled 107(a) 88 89 91 9$ Low-wooled 87 99 99 88 99 Hair 89 111 III 92 90

a) Overstated as the bulk of the decline occur.red 1n Ar,_t~ between 1909 and 1913. Taking Argentina numbers as at 1914 the figure would be 101.

- 27 -

The reduction in fine-wooled sheep numbers, when 1947 is compared with 1934/38, appears to reflect the influence of the enormous wool stocks collected during the war. In the last few years, the rapid depletion of stocks together 'with very high prices have brought fine-wooled sheep num­bers above the preViar level. In spit,e of these same influences and the additional stimulant of high x:l3at prices, open-wooled sheep numbers have not shown the same rapid recovery; this is largely due to the decline in United states numbers, which in 1951 were only 60ib of those in 1934/38. B-.r 1948 low-vrooled sheep nurnbers had fully recovered but this was mainly the result of a 73% increase in Turkish numbers over prewar. However, in 1950 nU!nbers had declined to 12% below prewar as a re~lt of reduced nU!1l­bel'S in China. Hair sheep nu.lJ1bers are now slight~ below 1934/38 figures after being well above in 1947. It is interesting to note that, if the influences of United states and Turkish figures are removed, the effect of wool and meat market factors on the level of recovery is pronounced on the different types of wooled sheep numbers as follows:-

~djusteda) She!p Numaers: Average 1934/38 =.100

12k.? 1948 1950 1951 -Fine-wooled 89 94 99 104 Open-wooled 94 98 101 106 Low -WOOled 93 93 81 95 Hair 111 111 92 90

a) Vdnus United states and Turkey.

Like cattle hides, sheepskins are obtained through actual slaughter or the natural death of the animal. Statistics of slaughter­ings are o~ collected for a f~v countries and are genera~ inccinplete; thus, figures (as shovlJU in Table V) often exclude slaugh terings by small establishments in towns, by country butchers and on farms. Statistics of fallen stock are almost non-existent. Sheep are comparatively hardy ani­mals but many areas raising them are semi-arid or much subjeot to drought, 'while others are mountainous a.'I1d have very severe winters. The natural death rate" therefore, is not only heavy on the average but is subject to severe fluctuations. Consequently" it is virtually impossible to estimate with accuracy the actual production of sheepskins in any single year. The absence of these statist,ics, however, loses some of its importanoe when we consider the enormous losses to commercial output which oocur from the fact that :many animals fall where their skins oannot be recovered, from wastage through bad take-off and ineffective cure and from pulling opera­tions in the case of stock wi to a high wool and low skin value.

For the world at large the proportion of sheep and lamb skins produced is close to half and half. However, in individual countries the proportion varies greatly. In the United states and Canada there is a very much larger proportion of lambskins, while in Australia it is about equal, and in the Near and Far East and in Africa the proportion of lambsldns is small. Changes in the produotion of sheep and lambskins together are as follows:-

- 28 -

\

Worlda ) Production of Sheen and Lamb Skins [million preceS)

About 1911/13 About, 1919/21

1938/40 1948/49 1949/50 (b) 1950/51 (b)

a) Excluding U.S.S.R. b) IBRD 2uess-estimate.

182 161 165 166 155 160

Source: Arnold, J.R., Hides and Skins Tanners I CouncIl of America.

In spite of difficulties in estimating the nQ~er of sheepskins derived from slaughter and fallen stock, it is ~~rthwhi1e to consider such infor:nation as is available.

(i) Slau~htering of She~" an.~_L~

Changes in the volume of slaughterings and the take-off and curing practices of slaughtering establishments have important effects on the quality of sheepskins produced. On the whole, but not invariably, the output of sheepskins by slaughtering establishments reflects more careful take-off and better and more careful cure. In the United sta"'Jes the take-off by pack­ing companies is satisfactor~" but the country take-off is mostly poor. Ski.'1s turned out by the large pacl{ers are picl{led(4), by the small pa-::kers are green salted(5) , and country skins are air cured (6) • Thus the growth of large packing companies has materially improved the quality of United Sta-c,es commercial output of sheepskins. Similar conditions hold good for most important producing countries. In South Africa, on the other hand, the take-off in towns and cities is only fair, whereas in the country it is gcod; city cure, however, is better than country cure. Changes in the rela­tionship between slaughterings and sheep numbers in certain countries have been as fol1ows:-

_______ ~~ ____ c.~_ (4) Thus, good ke~ing quality. (5) Thus, poor keeping quality. (6) Thus, need harmful soaking before use.

- 29 -

Average Average 1..9?.2 1909-13 1J~~.-}..§. 1947 12!!2. ...... _ ' .. ' ~--.r.,,,,,

New- Zealand 30 45 55 53 54 United States 37 41 54 42 43 United Kingdom 40 43 33 33 34 Argentina 9 17 23 16 n.a. Australia 16 17 17 18 13

n.a. - Not available.

NOTE: Figures for individual countries should not be directly compared because of differences in dates of livestock en~~rations.

(ii) !§lIen stoc~

This source of sheepskins is of ver"J considerable import­ance, firstly because of the volume involved, and secondly, because of the extremely low quality of such stock.

Fallen stock in many countries provides the main. source of supply of sheepskins for domestic utilization. A guess­estimate of the domestic utilization of sheepskins by primi­tive tanning industries might be around 35 - 40 million pieces a year; unrecovered and vvasted skins probably a ccoun.t for a further 10-30 mi1lion. Thus the importance of fallen stock in r e1easing supplies for international trading cannot be accurately known but must be very great. Some idea of the importance of fallen stock can be obtained from the following figures:-

~mated :i'allen Stock .... c~ual Slau~l!t~.!..a) (i'nillion sheep)

India and Pakistan (1934/38) Union of South Africa (1932/3.3) Uruguay (~9~)

3 4 5

Australia (1945) 18

(a) Excludes farla slaughter. (b) In 9 iIDpOrtant cities only.

l(b) 4 1

18

Much of the fallen stock is of extremely poor quality, owing partly to eamage in collection and partly to delayed take-off and cure. In India(7) skins from slaughtered sheep are generally sold at a premium of 33% over fallen stock.

(7) Report of the ~icultural Marketing Adviser to the Government of India" 1943.

- 30 -

Because of the widespread distribution of sheep over the earth's surface, a great n~~er of countries contribute towards the ,vorld's export trade. rlowever) the 5 chief wool and mutton exporting countries, AustraliaJ

New Zealand, Union of South Africa, Argentina and Uruguay together account for about 90% of world exports of sheepskins by weight. Since 81; of the exports of sheepskins from those countries are 'WOoled and of medium to largest in size and thickness, their contribution to the world1s exports of sheepskins by n~!Jher probably does not exceed 65%.

~orts of Shee~~kins from Chief ~pprt~g Countrie! (by weight and by number)

1949 1950 Average, ~934LJ8 Ijj] .lbi. ;/il.pieces lilil.lbs. Mil. pieces j{;il.lbs. Mil. pieces

Australia{d) De-wooled 2.2(b) Wooled 78.6(b)

New Zealand Dewooled 26.4(b) \I~ooled 12.7(b)

Argentina Dewoo1ed 9.7 WOOled 30.1

Union of S.Africa Dev.'Ooled 6.6 lVoo1ed 25.7

Uruguay Dewooled 0.9 VTooled 10.0

Spain (all) 11.1(a) Chile (all) 7.4

(a) Average 1934/35. (b) By conversion. (c) 1948.

0.8 12.0

11.0 2.1

4.8(b) 5.0(b)

2.3(b) 4.0(b)

0.4(b) 1.7{b) S.O(b) 1.2(b)

2.2(b) 0.8 87.4(b) 11.2

39.8{b) 16.6 4.7(b) 0.8

5.6(f) 2.8(b) 30.2(f) S.O(b)

8.4(e) 0.3(b) 30.6(e) 4.6(b)

2.0 0.7(b) 14.3 2.5(b) 1.7(c) 0.8(0) 3.9 0.6{b)

n.a. 116.2(b)

45.1(b) 4.1{b)

n.a'e) n.a. (g)

n.a.(h) n.a. (h)

4.1 19.0 n.a. 2.6

19.0 0.7

1.4(b) 3.3(b) n.a. 0.4(b)

(d) Figures shown are f'isoaJ. years 1948/49 and 1949/50. CaJ.endar years show wooled skins as fol1~qs; 1949, 13.9 and 1950, 12.0.

(e) Year 1946. (f) Year 1947. (g) Sintesis Estadistica Mensual shows total exports as 31.1 in 1949 and

49.3 in 1950. (h) Other sources show total exports as 32.9 in 1949 and 29.2 in 1950. n.a. - not available.

Source: Gorari1ed from official trade statistics of exporting countries.

- 31-

-YVorld imports, on the other hand, are heavily concentrated :in a tew countries. Four countries alone, France, the United K:ingdom, the United states and Germany" account tor 80% of world imports by weight. S:ince these countries import all varieties of skins, wooled, dewooled and hair J t heir combined share of world imports by number must be similar to that by weight. The table on page 32 shows the changes in imports since the war.

nle minor importing countries, chiefly Belgium, the Netherlands, Czechoslovakia, the Scandinavian countries and the USSR obtain the bulk of their supplies from other European countries and from the re-export trade of the United Kingdom and France. Almost all the imports ot these countries are in the form of wooled sk:ins.

Sheepskin prices are influenced by similar factors to those affecting hides and have, in general, followed the same course.

- 32-IMPORTS OF SHEEP ABP LAMB SKIliS

(million Ibs.)

F ran c e United Kingdcm 1934 :. 1949 1950 19;4 194.9 1950 1934

Wool- :1'001- :'1001- 'Wool- : Woo1- Wool- t Wool-

United Statel G e r man l 1949.: 1959 1934 1949: 1950

:~o~ :.o~ t~~_ :~o~ :~o~ .~ter8 ------Exporters . Other: ed Other: ed Other' ed Other: ed Other: ed Other ed Other: ed Other: ed Other' ed Other: ad Other ed Other' ed

Australia New Zeala.nd Union of

South Africa Argentina Brazil Chile Urug~ Spain Others

1'0 TAL

44.6 3.5

17.3 23.5

7.4 2.4 1.9

100.6

a) Br.West Africa Sudan

b) Br. Vest Africa SUdan

c) JJurope China USSR Others

0.5 0.6

0.9

0.1 0.5 0.5

3.1

Wooled

10.0 1.3 4.9 6.1

22.3

f 11.4 0.3 19.9 18.9 - , 2.1 0.-1 5.3 2.0 : 8.0 8.0 t 0.7 0.2 G) G) G) G) t 10.9 10.5 4.1 7.4 3.2 5.4 t 1.7 9.1 0.4 25.5 0.) JO.) • 0.4 0.7 0.1 .... .... .-I .-I , ~ ~ ~ ~ , 13.8 7.8 11.5 I 0.4 2.9 0.9 0.8 0.4 I 0.2 0.2 .... ,..-l ..... M .... ..... . .... .,... I 3.4 0.7 7.6 2.5 2.9 5.4 3.) , 0.6 0.1 g ~ cd f2 ~

, 1.6 0.2 cd cd Cd t 5.0 0,1 2.4 1.6 1.1 0.1

~ ...,:. ...,:. ...,:. I 0.8 0.8 0.2 1.3 2.4 0.6 0.1 0.1 0 0 0 ~ t::i l2; ~ I 0.7 0 .. 8 , 0.1 0.5 0.2 • - 0.1

___ t 8.6 3.4 2.0 12.9a) 4.5 ~b)1 1.6 ~ 0.6 ..14 -1.J:. .2Q. '22.30) 2.2c) 1.9d)b2.d) 8.2e) 1.8e) , I t

88.2 2.6 113.8 2.9 I 53.8 15.7 34.6 20.3 38.9 15.1 1 5.9 29.4 13.4 34.4 19.4 47.9 '25.3 3.4 1.9 1.5 8.6 1.9 t

Other Wooled Other -1.0 d) Iran 0.9 0.8 1.8 Europe 0.6 0.1

Peru 0.3 0.9 Others 0.4 Q.,J. 0.9 1.9 1.5

1.9 e) Iran 2.9 0.3 Europe 2.1 0.4 Peru 0.2 0.3

0.) Others ...1.& ...QJi

2.2 8.2 1.8

Source: Oompiled from Official trade statistics of importing countries.

- 33 -

V. GOAT SKINS ---..... ~-...............

The world t s commercial supply of goatskins comes from many regions. The primary products of the goat are of low value compared with those of other livestock and the skins are of proportionately high value. The milk and meat of the goat are used locally while the skins alone are important in international trade. Goats cost little to keep and are usually pastured on land unfit for any other use. Th~ are usually raised on small farms and by the poorer classes in native villages and not in herds like cattle and sheep. It is difficult to give any reliable information on goat num­bers, but estimates have been attempted as fol1ows:-

~stimated worfda)GOat ~Jumbers <m<1. Goat Skin.f£29!!.ction and ~2!.~

About 1911/13 About 1919/21

1938 1948/49 1949/50

Goats

(million head)

214 202 200 200 200

(a) Excluding U.S.S.R. (b) !BRD guess-estimate.

Goat Skins PrOduCtion ... Exports

(million pieces)

124 107 11, 112 ll5(b)

72 72 73 60(b) 65(b)

Source: Tanners' Council of America. Arnold., J.R... Hides and S~ins.

The principal use of goat and kid skins is in making upper and lining 19 ather for shoes, mainly '!fIOmen IS. Changes in fashion regulate the demand. If the skin is over 2.;t lbs 0" it is too coarse-grained for shoe leather and is then used for fancy upholstery or bag and oase work. The young kidsldns are used for better grades of women's gloves.

Fine grained skins are produced in tropical areas around the Red Sea~ East and West Africa, Brazil, Pakistan" China" France and Spain. Coarse-grained skins are produced in areas of high latitudes or altitudes of Northern Europe, South Africa, Turkey" Pakistan and India" while the medium-grained skins come from Argentina, Chile, North Africa and India.

India is one of the important l'JOrld producers of goatskins. The breed and size of goats varies in different parts of India but the major­ity of the skins produced a:,e medium-grained. Approxi.lllately 85i~ of the goatskins come from slaughtered animals because there is a steady demand for goat's meat. The majority of the skins a:ce cured by dry salting. Before Partition .. undivided India IS produotion was about 27.5 million skins, of which 65% were exported to the United states and 23% to the United Kingdom.

- .34 -

In 1949, Indian production was 22.9 million skins and the United states' share of Indian exports was only 41% while the United Kinsdom's share increased slightly to 27%. Pakist.an IS produotion of goatskins is about 2.1 million pieces. Of this total $6% are fine-grained small skins which are used for glazed kid leather.

Africa is the second largest producing area for goatskins in the world. South Africa is the largest African produoer of skins; three breeds of goats are raised in this area (straight haired producing the ooarsest grained skins in the world, Angoras, and orossbreds). The take­off is generally good throughout the oountry and the poor qualit,y of the Angora goatskin is more than offset by the excellent qualit,r of the mohair produced. The skins produoed in Algeria and Tunisia are medium-grained ones which produce good and sometimes excellent leather. Most of the skins are oured by dry salting and are important to the kid industry of France, together with the French Vi"est African fine"'gra1ned skins which are referred to as Senegals and Konakrys. The British Territories, partiou­larly Nigeria, produce an excellent grade of skin which is used in the United States.

The Red Sea Area's skins are divided into two main categories: Africans and Arabians. In order of quality they are as fol1ows:-

1. Batis (Ethiopia) 2. Mogadisoios (Italian Somali1and) .3. Berberas (British a."'ld Frenoh Soma1iland) 4. Addis Ababa (Ethiopia) 5. Harraris (Ethiopia) 6. Hodeidaba (Yemen) 7. Ghizanis (Asir) 8. Dunkalis (Eritrea) 9. Katabi (Aden ProvinCe and Southern Yemen)

10. Kumfida (Southern Hejoz)

There are primes" seconds, thirds, and rejects in each grade. The best goatskins from Aden are used in the manufacture of glazed kid and the poorer qualities for shoe linings.

Most ot the goatskin production from 'l'llrkey is the coarse-grained type and take-otf is generally poor. On the other hand, Turkey is the most important mohair producing country in the world.

China, the third largest goatskin producing area, has two well defined regions of production. In the northern part, centering in the Province of Chihli, coarse-grained and heavy skins are produced. In the southern section, centering in the Province of Scechuan on the Upper Yangtse and the area about the city of Hankow, fine-grained short-haired skins are produced. At the present time trade from China is considerably reduced because of war conditions.

- 35 -

Of the Latin American countries~ Ar~entina and Brazil are the leading producers of goatskins. The medium-grained, air-dried skins of Argentina are well taken off, and the small, light, fine-grained skins from Brazil are considered among the best in the worlcl. During recent years the high price of Brazilian skins has reduced exports, particularlY to the United states.

Of the individual countries, French skins are considered the finest in the world, follQ'!,'1ed by the top quality German skins" but the majority of the goatskins of Europe are coarse-grained, although the take-off is generally good. The large production of Spain is fine qual­ity except in the Western section where long-haired, inferior skins are produced.

In normal years, 65 to 70% of total goatskins production enters international trade. On the importing side trade is heavily concentrated on the United States and the United Kingdom. Changes in trade are shown in the table on page 36.

As .. with other hides and skins supplies of goatskins are affected by changes in price" which are primarily reflections of changes in demand for leather in women I s footwear as styles alter. Since goatskins re­present, in most producing countries, a primary purpose of goat husbandr.y, changes in demand for goat's meat and milk do not materially affect skin prices. Since" however, goatskine come into competition with other types of skins, goatskin priees have tended to follow the general trend of hides and skin prices.

Types of cattle hides and skins have been changing with the development of dairying while those of sheep have been affected by the movement to dual purpose animals. Among goats no marked similar change has occurred but the possibility exists. In Africa, the Middle East and many parts of Latin America ti1e goat is an agent of destruction. In other areas, Pakistan and some parts of Europe" for instance, goat-keeping is a well managed business in which the natural destructiveness of the goat is curbed. These animals have a permanent ana useful place in the agricul­tural econonw and provide meat, milk and milk products as well as good com­mercial skins. Scientific goat-breeding in areas where the climate does not favor cattle or sheep could prove of great benefit to many under­developed countries. In isolated rural areas where lnilk is difficult to obtain the goat is invaluable. It is capable of yielding more milk in proportion to its body weight than the cow and one goat can adequately supply a household.

-36-

'l'RADE Ilr GOAT SKINS (million pieces)

Importers Unite~ §t~te§!d) Un! ted :K;i;gggom f,lermanv Cd.) lrang§ {oJ

h;~~ters---Average Average 1934/38 1949 1950 1934/38 1949 1950 1934 1949 1950 1934 1949 1950

India 13.1 7.9 9.0 6.5 6.6 3.9 1.0 0.8 0.9 0.5 China. 5.7 2.0 3.2 0.6 0.2

Union of S. Africa 0.8 0.8 0.8 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.1 0.4 ~rit. East Africa 0.5 3.5 3.6 1.0 0.6 1.3 :Brit. West Africa 1.7 4.4 6.0 1.3 2.5 2.6 0.1 0.3 Ithiopia 0.6 3.9 3.2 0.2 Algeria & Tunisia 0.9 0.2 0.8 CD II)

r-i r-i

lIlgypt 0.5 0.2 0.2 1.0 ~ ~ r-i .-I

'" '" Mexico 1.8 0.3 ID ~ Argentina 2.4 0.6 1.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 ~ '" :Brazil 4.0 2.9 2.7 0.2 0.1 ,.:> ,.:>

Peru. 0.9 0.8 o 7 :& ~

Indonesia 2.1 0.3 Aden 1.1 Turkey 0.6 0.4 0.1 0.5 Spain 0.6 0.2 0.5 0.3

Others 7.5 9.0 11.1e) 0.5 1.7 1.8 2.7a) 2.0e) ~.lf) 1.4b)

TOTAL 44.8 36.1 41.8 9.8 11.1 9.9 5.9 4.1 7.0 5.7 3.3 3.0

a) Mostly European countries. b) Mostly Europe and French African Territories. c) Including Pakistan 0.5. Iran 0.7. and Greece 0.2. d) Including kidskins. Source: Compiled from official trade e) Arabia 0.1, ~ritlsh Somali1and 0.8, and Pakistan 4.0. statistics of importing countries. f) Europe 2.4.

- 37 -

APPFl'JDIX

EXPLANATORY No'rES OF TECHNICAL 'IERMS

The terms hides and skins will always mean the raw stock as it comes from the animal's back before it is subjected to any processes beyond those needed to preserve it for shipment and storage. Trade figures will include raw stock which has been partly or wholly prepared for tanning but has not yet been tanned y; these are variously known as "in the white" or "in the pickle". Trade figures also include, though separately distinguished where possible, raw stock which has been tanned with primitive equipment (not necessarily badly tanned) and normally re­tanned and finished in the importing CO\1Iltry; these are variously known as "rough tanned", "in the crust", "India-tanned", or "primitive leather".

T.~e different types of hides and skins which enter international trade are as follows:-

1. Cattle Hides and Skins

The term hides is loosely used in connection with cattle generally but important distinctions, largely of weight, are made in trade:-

(a) Heavy Hides - 55 to 140 Ibs. wet or from 22 to 50 Ibs. dry. These hides are used for better grades of sole leather, for all but the liGhtest kind of belting leather, for most harness leather and for some specialities, chiefly mechanical.

(b) Light Hides - 35 to 60 Ibs. wet or from 18 to 20 Ibs. dry. Thes$ are used primarily for the lighter grades of sole leather and secondarily for some light harness and belting stock and for most bag, case and strap leathers.

(c) Extreme Hides - 25 to 40 lbs. wet or from 12 to 20 lbs. dry. The principal use of these hides is for side upper leather, light bag, case and strap leathers and specialities such as apron leather, carding leather and low ~rade strap leather.

(d) Kips - from undersized cattle and l,~reighing below 25 lbs. wet or 12 Ibs. dry. Their uses are sinilar to those of extreme hides but a higher proportion goes into side or upper leathers.

(e) Calf Skins - less than 12 Ibs. wet or 6 Ibs. dry, are used main~ for upper leather for shoes and for fancy leather goods.

Y Excludes finished products which are never tanoed, such as, rawhide, white leather, parchment and vellum.

- 38 -

2. Sheep Skins

lbe qua1i~ of the sheepskin is large~ determined by the wool-type of the sheep, as follows:-

(a) Fine-wooled or .Merino - These are skins of small animals and are thin, loose-fioered, soft-grained and ribby (unduly stretched by the weight of the wool). They are used for cheap shoe linings and trimmings.

(b) Coarse or Open-wooled - These are skins of large animals and are thicker and harder than merinos and are free from rib but are often spongy. They are the most plentiful and have a ver'J wide variety of uses.

(c) Low-wooled - These are mainlY skins from medium-sized animals and have superior substance, compactness and fineness of grain to open-wooled sheepskins. They are in plentiful suPPlY and go into better grade 510ves and medium grade uppers.

(d) Hair Sheee - These are skins of ~he best quality from srrall animals and go into high grade gloves, fine uppers and roller leathers.

3. Goat Skins

1 The character of the grain of the goatSkin deterw~nes its quality and use as follows:-

(a) Fine-grained skins are small, thin and light weighing from 1 to 1-173 lbs. They are used by the glazed kid industr,y for women's dress shoes.

(b) Coarse-grained skins are relativelY large, thick and heavy, weighing from 4i to S Ibe. 'lhese are used mainly for shoe linings.

(c) Medium-grained skins fall midway between fine and coarse and are the most plentiful type.

A. Deficit Qountries

I. Heavy Hides United States(a) Canada United Kingdom France Germa~ (b) ltal,y Others (f)

II. Light Hides Scandinavia (g) Balkan Countries(h)

III. Extreme Hides Japan

B. Surplus Countries

I. Heavy Hides Argentina Brazil Paraguay Urug'll8l' South Africa Others (j)

l2.Q2.

TABLE I

EST n.fATED WORLD CATTLE NUMBERS (million head)

1911 1921 122i ~ !2ll ~ ~ 1948 ~ !25Q !2ll (prelim)

1~2,1 119.2 136,0 123.4 121.6 140,0 132.4 142.3 141.) 144,0 147,6 152.9 60.8 56.6 68.7 63.4 58,9 70.3 65.2 81.2 78,1 78.3 80.3 84.2 7.2 6.7 10.2 9,3 8.8 8.9 8.5 9.0 8.9 8.3 8.2 8.3

11,8 7.7 11.9 7.4 7.9 7.9 8.9 9.6 9.8 10.2 10.6 10.5 14.3 15.3 13.3 14.4 15,6 15.8 15.6 15.1 15.1 15.4 15.4 15.7 20.6 18.5 17.0 17.2 18.0 19.8 15.8 14.6 13.1 13.5 1).9 14.3 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 7.0c) 7.5c) 7.7 7.8 8.0 8.3 8.2 8.4 8.2 8.2 8,7 5.5 5.4 9.8 10.7 10.0 10.3 10.0 11.0 11.5

29,2 22.1 26.7 27.4 28,4 27.7 29.7 24.1 23,2 22.9 23.5c) 24,Oc) 7.5 7.7 7.0 7.7 9.0 9.0 9.6 8.6 7.9 8.1 8.5 9.0

21.7 14.4 19.7 19.7 19.4 18.7 20.1 15.5 15.3 14.8 15.0 15.0

1,4 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.5 1.4 1.4 1.4 1.5 1.5 1.6 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.3 2.5 2.5

82.0 79.4 89.1 99,7 100,5 100.0 102,5 116.1 lIZ,S 120.2 118.1 119,0 29,1 25.9d) 28.1 37.1 32.2q) 32.2q) 34.3 41.3 43.0 45.1 42.0 43.0 30.7 30.7e) 34.)p) 34,)p) 42.5s) 42.5s) 40.1 46.0 46.0 46.2 46.4 5.2i) 5.21) 5.5 5.5 3.0 3.2 3.2 4.1 3.5 4.1 ).9 3.9 8.2 8.2 7.8 8.4r) 7.1q) 7.4c) 8.) 8.5c) 8.5c) 8.7 8.6 5.6 5.8k) 8.5 9.7 10.7 10.2 11.4 12.1 12.5 12.2 12.2c) ).2 3.6 4.9 4.7 5.0 4.5 5.2 4.1 4.0 4.0 5.0

Continued next page -------

II. Light Bides Australia New Zealand Colombia Mexioo Poland Others (n)

III. Extreme Hides ~i~ ~) Korea (v) Africa (x)

Bed Sea Area(y) West (z) East (aa) North(bb)

fABLE I - Esttmatet WorlG Cattle Numbers - Page 2 million head)

l2Q2. !.2ll 1921 1925 ill2 l2.ll 12J§. ~ 1948 ill:2. 12.S.Q llil (prel1m)

31.9 44.0 40,8 43 .. 8 51.' 58.6 68,1 61.5 63.6 65.6 68.3 69,0 11.0 11.5 13.5 13.3 11.2 13 .. 5 13.1 13.4 13.8 14.1 14.6 15.2 2.0 2.0(1) 3.1 3.5 3.4 4.2 4.6 4.6 4.7 4.7 5.2 5.2 4.8m) 4.8m) 5.00) 6.5 7.3 7.6 9.0 13.8 13.9 14.2 14.5 5.1 '7.(0) 2.2p) 2.9 9.4q) 10.8 17.6 12.00) 12.7 13.3 14.5 14.6

8.7 8.0 8.60) 9.1 9.0 9.9 4.'7 5.7 6.3 6.50) 9.0 9.3 9.0 9.0 11.3 13.5 13.9 13. 00) 12.8 13.00) 13.00)

88 s4 86.S 82.1 82·2 88:8 90.6 23.1 19.0 18.2 18.2 18.5 1.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.'7

63.6 66.9 68.5 68.8 69.6 74.8 22.0 15.3 20.8 5.5

IV. Kip Weights 156.4 166.1 170.2 165.' 165.6 171.0 179.9 181.9 181.6 182.' 184.9 185.0 Indonesia 3.1 ).9 3.7 4.3 4.5 4.9 4.6 3.7 3.6 3.6 Siam & Indo-China ).00) 3.9 4.1 4~8 4.8 6.9 7.7 6.3 6.3 6.5 India. (cc) ~44.0 152.0 157.0 149.1 150.5cc~S5.0 160.5 136.7 136.5 136.5 137.9 Ceylon 1.5 1.5 1.4 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.1 1.1 1.2 Turkey 4.8c) 4.80) 4.0c) 6.5 4.'7 5.1 5.9 9.8 9.8 10.3 10.3 Pakistan (0) 24.4 24.3 24.4

C. Qther Countries 15.' 22.6 2~.8 45.4 26,9 49.2 27.0 22.6 26.5 22.8 10,8 12.0

WORLD TOfAL (u) (dd) 515.0 525.0 560.0 578.0 616.0 624.0 630.0 642.0 645.0 653.0 664.0 675.0

Source: Food and Agriculture Organization. U.S. Department of Agriculture. Internatio~ Institute of Agricultural Statistios. Bides & Skins, Arnold, J.R.

Continued next page -------

T1BLE I - Estimated World Cattle Numbers - P§€e 3

FOOTNOTES a) Numbers of all cattle on farms, January 1. b) After World War II totals represent 4 zones of occupation. c) Estimated. d) 1914. e) 1912. f) Includes Spain, Portugal, Switzerland, :Belgium and the Netherlands. g) Includes Finland, Nortia;y', Sweden and Denmark. h) Includes Austria, Czechoslovakia, Hungary, Yugoslavia, Roumania, Albania, :Bulgaria and Greece. i) 1915. j) Includes Cuba and West Indies, but excludes Haiti and Dominican Republic. k) 1911. 1) 1910. m) 1911/24 average. n) Includes Venezuela, :Bolivia, Chile, Peru, Haiti, Dominican Republic, Costa Rica, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua,

Panama, Puerto Rico and El Salvador. 0) Pre-World War I estimate. p) 1920. q) 1930. r) 1924. s) 1931. t) 1934. u) Excluding U.S.S.R. v) After World War II, South Korea only. w) China proper (22 provinces) only. The latest available estimate for China Proper, Manchuria, Jehol and Sink lang

(Turkestan) is 1947 - 23.6 million: the 1936/40 average - 25.0. ::It) Totals for Africa must be considered as rough estimates. U.S.Department of Agriculture and "Hides and Skins". Arnold.

were the basis of the pre-World War II estimates. From 1938 to 1949 FAO-figures were used and USDA for 1950 and 1951. y) Includes Anglo-Egyptian Sudan, Eritrea, Ethiopia, hench, :British and Italian Somaliland and Aden. z) Includes French and :British West Africa.

aa) Portuguese East Africa and :British East Africa. bb) French North Africa, Libya, Spanish North Africa. cc) In the years 1909. 1913 and 1921 estimates are based on "Hides and Skins" ,Arnold. From 1925 to 1933 the Rome Year Book

figures were used; the,r ~ be a little low. From 1938 to 1950 FAO-f~ures were used ana 1951 i8 estimated. dd) Before World War II. world totals were estimated from U.S.Department of Agriculture figures. allowing 10% for buffalo

numbers, and "Hides and Skins". Arnold. From 1938 to 1949 FAO-figures were used. The 1950 and 1951 estimates are based on USDA estimate April 1951 allowing ~ for buffalo numbers.

TABLE II

HIDE ProDUCTION AS PERCENT OF CAT:rLlli NtJl;::BERS. PBEWAR

Percent A. Deficit Countries

I. Hea:g: Hides United States 25 Canada 27 Unl ted Kingdom 27 GermaI\V 32 Italy 13 Others (a) 12

II. 1I1gG~ Hides Scandinavia (b) 18 Balkan Countries (c) 13

B. SB[Rlus Countries

I. Rean: Hides Argentina 24 Brazil 11 Paragua;v 19 Urug~ 20 South Africa 10

II. l!l@t HiSles Australia 18 New Zealand 13 Colombia 12 Mexico 11 Poland 21

III. Ext~me Hides China 5 Africa (d) 9

IV. Kips India 12

.All Others 15

WORLD i'OTAL (e) 15

a) Includes Spain, Portugal, Switzerland. Belgium and the Netherlands. b) InclUdes Finland, Norway. Sweden and Denmark. c) lncludes Austria, Czechoslovakia. Hungary t Yugoslav1a, Roumania. Albania.

Bulgaria and Greece. d) Excluding Union of South Africa and Egypt. e) Excluding U.S .S.R.

Note: Figures for individual countries should not be directly compared because of differences in definition of calfskins which are excluded from the Table and because of differences in dates of livestoCk enumerations.

Source: !lide! altd Skins and I&a.theJ:. U.S. Tariff Commission. 1946.

TABLE III

ESTPMTJ!lt) SLAUGHTD OF CA'ITLE AND CALy;ES IE gjlRTAIN COUNTRIES (million head) .

~ lill. 1933 l2:l§. l$!2. ~ l2!!:i l25.Q

A. Deficit Countries

I. Heavy Hides United States Cattle 14.7 12.2 13.0 14.8 22.4 19.2 18.8 18.6 Calves 10.1 8.3 8.5 9.3 13.7 12.3 11.3 10.4

Canada Cattle 1.9 1.9 ) 1.4 2.1 2.0 1.9 1.7 Calves 1.7 ) 1.4 1.4 1.6 1.3 1.4

United K1ngdom(b) Cattle 1.8 1.9 1.8 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.6 2.0 Calves 0.9 1.0 0.9 0.8 1.4 1.3 1.2 1.3

France Cattle 1.7c) Calves 4.0

GermalW' (.g) Cattle 3.2 4.0 3.5 4.3 1.7 1.0 1.5 2.0 Calves 4.2 4.6 4.4 5.1 1.6 1.5 1.9 2.4

Belgium Cattle 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.5 Calves 0.3 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.3

Netherlands Cattle 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.2 0.3 0.4 Calves 0.6 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0.8

II. Light Hides Denmark

Cattle 0.4 0.4 0.5 0.5 0.8 0.5 0.5 Calves 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.6 0.7

Czechoslovakia Cattle 0.7 ) 0.5 . 1.1 0.5 0.5 Calves ) 0.5 1.0 0.5 0.4

Hungary (d) 0.2 0.5 Roumania 0.9 l'ugoslav1a 0.4 0.2 0.4

B. Surplus Oountries

I. Hea:yz gi!1es Argentina (e) 7.4 6.1 5.7 7.1 8.7 8.6 8.9 9.4 Brazil 4.0 4.3 5.2 5.8 6.0 Ul'Ug'Uq (c) South Africa (e)

1.2 1.4 1.0 1.1 0.5 0.5 0.9 1.0

Cattle ( 0.7 0.5 0.6 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.2

Calves (0.6 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1

Continued on next page -------

TABLE III - Est1ma~e~ Slaygh~er of Catt1egn~ Cilve§ in ggrtain gguntrle~'- ~,2 . (m1llion head)

~ ~ l2.ll 12l§. 12M. 1248 19!t2. l2S.Q

B. SurpJ.y.s Countri9@ - Cont'd

II. lIight Hi~es Australia(a)

Cattle { 2.4 1.9 2.0 2.3 2.4 2.4 2.5 2.6 Calves ( 1.3 1.0 1.1 1.1 1.1

New Zealand(h) Cattle 0.5 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.7 0.7 Calves 0.7 0.6 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.2 1.3

Mexico 0.8 0.8 0.9 1.1f) 0.9f) 0.9f) Colombia 1.0 1.3 1.4 1.4 Poland (d) 3.7 0.7 1.3 1.7 2.6

III. Extremg Hide§! Nigeria 0.3

IV. Ki~s India 5.3

a) 12 months ending June 30 of year following that stated. b) Great Britain only 1925 to 1933. 1~res are for 12 months ending Maf 31 of

year subsequent to that shown 1925 to 1933. c) Based. on slaughter tax returns. d) Inspected slaughterings. e) Excluding farm slaughter. f) For domes tic consumption only. g) Western German;v onl¥ 1947 and later. h) 1938, 12 months ending March 31 of year following that stated.

1947 on, months ending September 30 of year stated.

Source: ~ttle and Beef Survex. Imperial Economic Committee, June 1934. ~. Commonwealth Economic Committee, 1948 and 1951.

A. Deficit Countries

I. Op!n-wooled Skins United States United Kingdom France Italy German;r Others (a)

B. Surn1us Countries

I. line-wooled Skins Australia South Africa

II. Open-wooled Skins Argentina (g) Uruguay (g) New Zealand Others (c)

'!!ABLE IV

ESTIMA~ WOlgJ) SHEEP NUMBERS million head)

l2Qi l2ll l22! m.s. l2Z.2. l2.ll l2J§. 1.9lt2

13!;~_ 1.1.8 .• eL~JO'l ___ 'l 111.2 1~6~ 122.3 124.4 86 ___ 2 48.6 41.0 39.1 38.5 48.2 53.1 51.3 37.8 28.1 24.3 21.0 23.7 24.4 26.7 26.9 16.7 17.4 16,1 9.6 10.5 10.5 9.7 9.9 7.4 11.2 11.2 12.0 12.0 9.9 9.0 9.5 8.8 7.7 5.5 5.9 4.8 3.5 3.4 4.8 3.0

21.0 20.7 20.1 21.7 20.4 20.4 22.0 12.5

194{S .J.2!a l25Q l35l (prel)

89.1 93---2..n ___ .93.1 94.5 34.8 )1.e 30,8 31.5 18.2 19.5 20.5 20.0 7.4 7.5 7.5 7.5 9.2 10.1 10.0 10.4 3.0 3.2 2.3h) l.6h)

16.5 22.0 22.0 23.5

122.4 124.7 117.8 139.4 149,8 163.4 150.1 126.4 115.2 141.7 144.9 151,0 91.7 88.9 86.1 103.6 104.6 109.9 111.1 95.7 102.6 108.7 111.9 118.0 30.7 35.8 31.7 35.8 45.2 53.5 39.0 30.7 32.6 33.0 33.0 33.0

124.9 86.0 85.7 90,0 101.0 90,9 103.0 112.7 112.7 197.3 107.5 114.8 67.2 43.2 43.2 44.4 44.4 39.3 45.9 54.0 53.5 48.0 48.0 50.0 26.3 11.5 11.5 14.4 19.4 16.0 17.9 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 26.0 23.5 24.2 23.3 24.5 29.1 27.8 31.9 32.7 32.5 32.8 33.0 34.8 7.9 7,1 7.7 6.7 8.1 7.8 7.3 4.0 4.7 4.5 4.5 4.0

III. ~-woo1ed Skins 151.2 152.4 161.8 162.8 158.2 147.2 166.9 119,; 143.9 141,8 145.3 162.2 Spa1n 15,5 16,4 20.5 20.1 19.4 19.1 20.0 20.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 26.0 Turkey 27.1 27.1 9.4 11.5 10.3 11,1 23.1 23.5 24.5 25.5 24.0 22.1 Iran 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 17.0 14.6 14.9 13.2 13.2 11.1 13.6 14.7 China , 45.0 45.0 45.0 45.0 34.0 34.0 25.9 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 22.0 French North Africa 13.0 12.7 15.0 16.8 17.5 15.9 18.5 10.8 12.2 13.2 16.4 17.4 Others (d) 33.6 34.2 54.9 52,4 60.0 50.0 64.5 50.0 50.0 50.0 50.0 60.0

Continued on next page -------

~LE IV - Estimated World Sheep Numbers - Page 2 (million head)

1909 l2ll 1221 12Zi ~ !ill 123§. J$.!Z 1948 l2!!2. l2iQ..- ~ (prel)

IV. Hair Skins 81.4 88.2 81~·6 82.0 10J..5 100.3 26 1 1 23.8 28aJ 1001 2 103.0 J,04.5 India 38.2 40.9 40.1 41.2 50.0 50.0 44.0 44.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 39.0 Pakistan 6.1 6.2 6.5 6.5 :Brazil 10.5 10.5 7.9 9.5 10.5 10.7 14.1 16.0 16.0 16.0 16,0 16.0 Nigeria 1.8 1.8 1.9 1.5 2.1 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.2) French W.Afrlca 6.0 6.0 6.1 6.9 7.6 8.4 6.4 6.0 7.4 8.5 9 • .5 ) 43.0 British E.Africa 8.5 12.9 6.1 7.0 5.0 5.5 5.1 5.6 5.6 6.8 7.8) Others(e) 16.4 16.8 19.5 20.9 26.3 23.5 24.3 20.0 22.0 22.0 22.0)

c. Q]hers Qountries(b)f)ll.l 9.6 9.5 13.7 10.8 18.9 22.5 77.2 66.6 58.4 58.3 49.0

WORLD TO~L (b)(f) 625.0 580.4 564.1 604.1 638,2 643,5 661,0 615.8 645.8 645.8 652.1 676 1 0

a) Includes Austria. Hungary. Poland, Czechoslovakia, Roumania,:Belgium, Netherlands, Denmark, Norway, Sweden. Finland, and Switzerland.

b) From 1947 and 19.50 estimates may be too high because figures for China and India in particular are rough estimates. c) Including Canada. Eire, Newfoundland, Paraguay and Falkland Islands. d) Including Portugal t Greece, Cyprus, :Bulgaria, Albe.nia, Y\l€oslavia. Iceland, Peru, :Bolivia. Chile, Iraq. Palestine t

Syria and Lebanon. e) Including :British, French, Spanish and Portuguese African Colonies, Madagascar. Egypt, Anglo-Egyptian Sudan,

Ethiopia, Eritrea and Italian Somaliland. f) Excluding U.S.S.R., Estonia. Latvia and Lithuania. g) Numbers from 1909 to 1938 may not be for actual year shown but nearest available year. h) Western Germany only.

Source: International Institute ot Agricultural Statistics. Wool Production and Trade, lEC. 1928,to 1946. Wool Survey, Empire Marketing Board. 1932. U.S. Department of Agricu.lture.

~ v

ESTn.fAtO§D SlJtUGHTEll OF SHEEP »II2 ~S IN CERTAn! COUNTRIES (million head.

19li ~ l.2ll ~ ~ ~ l2!t2 1.2S..Q. A. Deficit Qountries

I. ODen-wooled Skins United States 15.4 18.0 21.7 22.4 18.8 17.4 13.4 13.3 United Xlngdom(a) 9.1 10.1 12.3 10.7 5.5 5.9 6.5 6.8 France 5.5 5.7 Ge~ (g) 2.6 1.8 1.7 2.0 0.3 0.5 1.0 0.7 Ne the rland.s 0.3 0.3

:B. Surplus Countries

I. Fin~-Wooled Skins Australia (b) c11•0 15.9 19.2 18.9 17.1 18.3 20.3 16.0 Union of S.Africa 4.2 4.5 3.2 3.3 3.2 3.0 2.8 2.3

II. OPen-Wooled Skins Argentina(d) 5.8 6.5 7.0 7.8 12.3 8.9 7.5 uruguay (d) 0.6 2.3 1.3 1.2 0.9 0.4 0.7 0.6 New Zealand (b) 8.8 10.6 12.4 14.7 16,8 17.0 17.2 17.8

III. Low-~ooled ~ins

a)

b)

c)

d) e) f) g)

Turkey 1.ge) 2.2 Yugoslavia 0.9 Chile 2.3 2.7 2.5 2.2 1.9 2.1 1.8

IV. Hair Skins :Brazil 5.2 India 14.5f)

Great Bri taln only for 1925 tf. 1933. which refer to year ending May 31 of year subsequent to that shown.

Year ending March 31 of year subsequent to that shown for 1925 and 1929. and JUDe 30 for subsequent years for Australia and September 30 for 11ew Zealand.

Year ending June 30 of year subsequent to that shown for 1925 and 1929. AbattOir slaughterings only; figures m~ include some soats.

Excluding farm slaughter. Slaughterings in public abattoirs. Produotiol1 of skins from slaughtered animals. Western Germany only 1947 and following years which are for 12 months,

ending June 30.

Source: ~ton and }iamb Surygy, Imperial Economic Committee. September,1935. Mea t, Commonweal th Economic Commit tee t 1948 and 1951.

TABLE VI

AYEBAGE A1"11UAL PRICES FOR HmES AND SKINS , UNITED STATES

~ight Native Cow~ Calfskins ShearliE&B Goat Skins F • a .B , Chicago Packers City F.a.B. Chicago Amritsars (cents per Ib) 8 - 15 Ibs. (dollars p.skin) C. I,F. New York

F.O.B. Chicago (dollars per skin) (cents per Ib)

1909 14.8 18,4 1910 13.0 16.9 1911 13.5 17.3 1912 16.5 19.8 1913 17.3 19.8 1914 19.3 21.9 1915 22.9 21.5 1916 24.9 34.0 1917 29.6 39.8 1918 22.7 40.1 1919 39.3 70.5 1920 29.1 41.9 1921 11.6 18.1 1922 15.4 18.2 1923 13.0 17.3 1924 12.3 20.1 1925 14.6 21.7 1926 13.0 18.1 1.32 .72 1927 18.7 20.1 1.06 .75 1928 22.6 27.5 1.32 .79 1929 15.6 20.9 1.23 .75 1930 11.6 17.5 0.68 .78 1931 8.5 11.8 0.49 .62 1932 5.7 6.4 0.31 .41 1933 9.3 12.8 0.64 .51 1934 8.7 11.1 0.63 .56 1935 10.0 14.6 0.71 .57 1936 11.4 18.3 1.11 .63 1937 1.5 .0 20.0 1.29 .72 1938 10.3 13.6 0.63 .47 1939 12.0 17.9 0.97 .47 1940 12.7 20.1 1.40 .44 1941 14.8 22.3 1.75 .55 1942 15.5 21.8 2.07 .62 1943 15.5 21.8 2.05 .54 1944 15.5 21.8 1.51 .62 1945 15.5 21.8 2.03 .62 1946 18.5 25.4 2.2.3. .80 1947 27.4 60.7 2.37 .95 1948 27.5 42.5 3.14 .95 1949 25.1 41.24 2.64 .99 1950 29.6 50.40 3.33 .97

Continued next page ------

TABLE VI - Avergge AAAual Pr1C(es fot JUg.es and Skins, United States - page 2.

~1eht Native QgWB Calf Skin! Sh!!arlings GO&t Skins F.O.B. Chicago Packers Ci\?, F.O.:8. Chicago Amritsars (cents per 1 b) 8 - IS Ibs. (dollars per C.I.F.l~ew York

F.O.B. Chicago skin) (dollars per (cents per Ib) skin)

1951 34.1 63.40 4.30 1.04 January 41.2 85.0 5.52 1.19 February 40.0 85.0 5.68 1.25 March 39.1 82.8 5.68 1.23 April 36.0 80.0 5.68 1.15 I-Iay 36.0 18.8 5.53 1.12 June 36.0 10.0 5.10 1.11 July )6.0 53.5 3.43 1.05 August 31.8 50.9 3.01 .904 September 32.2 3.02 .896 October 30.6 3.01 .911 November 24.1 38.8 2.86 .908 December 23.8 38.2 2.91 .833

Source: U.S.Bureau of Labor Statistics.