4.5 Provision of information to customers
4.6 Market responsiveness

5.0 Potential for quality improvements in wool production

Back	Back to top

Key Quality Issues

Wool producers face a number of quality issues which are mostly dealt with at strategic stages of the wool production process. These include:

The production of even lines of wool
Processors prefer to source wool with minimal variation within lots. Variability can be reduced through breeding programs, culling of non-performing sheep and the classing of wool at shearing.

Elimination of wool pack fibre contamination
Contamination is ranked as the major quality problem by processors due to the high cost of contamination. The main contaminants found in Australian wool are wool pack fibres such as high density polyethylene (HDPE) and jute.
Although it appears that much of the pack fibre contamination arises from post-farm bale handling, producers can play an important role by providing a contamination free product to the wool store.

Elimination of dark fibre contamination
Dark fibre is seen as an increasing problem by some customers and this contamination is directly attributed to clip preparation standards. Sources of dark fibre are urine stain and pigmented wool.

Elimination of non-wool contamination
The major contaminant in the Australian wool clip after wool pack fibre is polypropylene from hay baling twine and fertiliser bags.

Supply of accurate information about the product
Buyers of raw wool value highly the provision of accurate information about the product. This includes both objective measurement and quality system assurances.

Management of chemical residues
The issue of chemical residues in scour effluent and products such as lanolin (which is used in pharmaceutical products) is expected to become more significant. Environmental standards are increasing worldwide and consumer preference for environmentally friendly products is increasing. Growers need to implement strategies designed to eliminate the risk of chemical residue contamination.

Market responsiveness
Customer requirements shift over time as fashions change and technology is updated. Growers need to continually ensure that their product is in line with medium to long term market trends.

Back	Back to top

1.0 INTRODUCTION

Scope

This module covers wool growing and harvesting (shearing) operations which influence wool quality. The module details the best practices that should form part of the quality system for organisations operating within the wool production industry. It aims to;
highlight the wool production practices which have the most influence on wool
quality (as defined by the customer),
identify "best practice" guidelines for assuring the quality of wool, some of which
can be used as performance indicators,
describe useful sources of information and feedback on wool quality issues and
developments for the producer.

Wool Production

There are around 60,000 wool producers operating across a vast area of Australia, from semi-arid country through to high rainfall areas. Most sell their greasy wool through the auction system or privately to wool buyers. Some private merchants who buy wool directly from producers also re-sell at auction. This means that 85 to 87 percent of greasy wool produced in Australia is sold through the auction system.

Some individuals and groups of producers produce and prepare their wool to meet the requirements of a specific market or processor. In some cases, this also involves further processing of the wool before sale.

After leaving the farm, wool typically passes through a series of owners prior to reaching the end-user. This can confuse the issue of quality throughout the pipeline. Each owner may use different quality parameters compared to the sector before or after it. Wool may also be taken out of the pack and blended with other wool. Processing or product performance can be directly affected by both the quality attributes of the greasy wool and its handling post farm.

What is Wool Quality?

At the producer level, "quality" is often defined in terms of fibre diameter, yield, strength and freedom from contamination. Many people at the "fabric" end of the wool pipeline consider quality to be "better", "finer" or "luxury". However, wool is made into many products, from fine suits to insulation batts, and a different production system is used for each product. This means that customers and processors have various quality requirements. So necessarily, it is the customer who ultimately defines quality and to whom the supply chain must be responsive.

Quality is defined by the customer as being the provision of the required product at an acceptable price. For wool, this focuses on;
low variability within lots and between consignments,
freedom from foreign fibres and substances not specified (for example, physical
and chemical contaminants),
accuracy of the product description,
service attributes such as delivery on time.

Why should producers consider wool quality?

Growers need to consider wool quality for many reasons;
to satisfy customer requirements as customers are increasingly requesting quality
assured products,
to allow customers to predict processing performance through the use of
objective measurement,
to place wool in a position to better compete against other fibres (for example,
cotton and synthetics) which already assure the quality of their product,
to continually reduce chemical residues on greasy wool so markets are not
endangered, given the tightening of environmental controls,
to allow individual producers the chance to differentiate their product in the
market place to improve financial returns as wool quality assurance programs
become more widely available.

Meeting the quality needs of wool customers

There are three main ways to assure customers about the quality of greasy wool:

Specify measurable characteristics.
Individual lots are measured to appropriate international standards (for example, fibre diameter, yield, staple length and strength). The provision and accuracy of this information, rather than the actual value of these measurements (for example, 21 micron) is the quality issue.

Provide assurance about non-measurable characteristics.
Assurances are given where measurement is not possible (the type of packaging, the presence of dark wool fibres in individual lots), or where there is random screening only (such as for pesticide residues). The assurance can be given via documentation and/or accreditation by a recognised quality management scheme.

Provide information about characteristics of emerging importance.
It is important to provide information such as fibre diameter distribution and crimp definition when it is known the customer values it.

Major Quality Developments in the Wool Production Sector

On-farm wool production practices have traditionally been subject to quality standards for wool preparation, classing and packaging.

However, changes to the wool marketing system in Australia in the early 1990's have made producers more aware of market requirements as they move from just selling a commodity to marketing a textile fibre which fulfills the needs of customers.

Consequently there has been an increase in the number of private quality assurance schemes conducted by brokers and various producer groups. Wool within these schemes may be sold conventionally via auction (where they are usually listed in a separate part of the sale catalogue), privately to a processor, or taken through early stage processing before sale (for example, sold as wool tops).

Private quality schemes vary in their objectives, scope and method of implementing quality assurance. This may impact on their credibility with processors and their ability to achieve commercially viable volumes of wool, which in turn may affect their profitability.

Most current quality schemes focus on wool harvesting and packaging because at this stage there are few quality guidelines for wool production practices.

Where value is added to wool, such as with early stage processing, producers become exposed to greater risks. This exposure to risk has provided an extra incentive for producers to increase their understanding of the financial implications of quality.

Back	Back to top

2.0 OVERVIEW OF WOOL PRODUCTION

Wool Production Activities

The production of greasy wool involves the management of a number of annual cycles and processes which interact. These include;

breeding,
nutrition,
animal husbandry,
wool harvesting (shearing) and packaging.

The activities in the wool production cycle are conducted in a sequence which can vary from district to district and even within a district, depending on a number of seasonal and climatic factors, and on the management policies of the producer. A typical wool production cycle for Southern Australia is shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: A typical wool production cycle for Southern Australia.
This figure illustrates one type of wool production system only. Other systems vary significantly in the activities carried out and also in the timing of activities throughout the year. The timing of lambing and shearing is determined by the producer and largely influences the timing of other production processes (for example, pest control strategies).

Wool harvesting activities have a major impact on the quality of the wool product at the end of the pipeline.

In addition to managing aspects of wool production and harvesting, the producer also has some control over three post-shearing processes which may influence
wool quality;
transport to store,
wool tests conducted,
feedback to suppliers and shearing team.

Some producer groups have become involved in value-adding and retain or share ownership of their wool through to a later stage of processing. Operations normally considered as part of processing are covered in the Early Stage Processing Module of this Guide.

Current Quality Standards and Codes of Practice

Two important aspects of wool production are currently covered by mandatory quality standards and codes of practice, which provide for a minimum level of quality assurance. Growers must conform to minimum standards in the following quality areas:

Wool classing, which is done by a registered wool classer. Wool classers are accredited through the Wool Classer Registration Scheme, which is administered by the Australian Wool Exchange Ltd (Wool Exchange). There is also a Code of Practice for Clip Preparation.

Contamination control, which is achieved by using Wool Exchange approved wool pack standards, the Wool Exchange contamination screening program and compulsory limits for chemical residues which are checked through random tests.

Additional quality standards are voluntarily imposed by some producers either individually or in conjunction with commercial quality schemes. Examples in the quality management functions include:

Contamination control in the production cycle. Some private schemes control the pre-shearing preparation of sheep, shed "hygiene", wool pack standards, transport and handling of bales.

Even wool characteristics, which is achieved through selective breeding, and advanced level shearer and shedhand training.

Guidance testing pre shearing (mid side sample) and during shearing (random samples).

Linkages between wool production and other sectors of the pipeline

The linkages between wool production and other sectors of the wool pipeline are shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Wool Production - Linkages with Other Sectors

Linkages with Other Sectors

Most producers are totally reliant on brokers, agents of private schemes or private wool buyers to pass on processing information relating to the performance of their wool and on-farm quality systems (see the Assembly module).

The transport, handling and warehousing (Assembly) function provides the information link to producers from the early stage processor (scouring, carbonising and combing). This should be supplied via the buying, selling and trading operations (exporters and private treaty merchants). Mill batches of around 200 bales (and up to 1000 bales) are assembled from sale lots which average eight bales per lot. Mill top length and clean wool content descriptions of mill batches must be converted back into greasy wool descriptions for farm lots. This makes the feedback and traceback of wool quality information for specific farm lots quite difficult. However, the provision of these information linkages is crucial for improving the quality of wool preparation and its subsequent processing performance.

Feedback

Information such as variability of fleeces in a mob is generated at the wool harvesting operation. Organisations such as broker/agent, wool testing authority, wool merchant and processor also generate information which should be passed back to the producer. The producer is reliant on intermediaries for the transfer of feedback from processors. This information may not be routinely supplied, sought or utilised unless the producer realises the value of the information.

Growers can provide useful feedback to their own suppliers, such as the breeders of rams, chemical suppliers and the shearing team, to improve the quality of farm inputs.

Traceback

The potential exists for feedback channels to be used for identifying the source of wool, should quality problems be experienced by early stage processors. This requires sufficient records to be maintained by various sectors of the pipeline. Feedback and traceback are the way quality problems can be identified at their source so that corrective action can be taken.

Assurance from the producer can only be valid for wool in the original bale packaged by the producer and not for wool which is repacked by other sectors along the pipeline.

Back	Back to top

3.0 QUALITY OBJECTIVES AND KEY QUALITY ISSUES

Quality Objectives

Wool production objectives must be attuned to the needs of the customer, the person to whom assurances about the product are made.

With the customer's requirements in mind, the quality objectives for the Australian producer should be to;

produce even lines of wool,
eliminate wool pack fibre contamination,
eliminate dark fibre contamination,
eliminate non-wool contamination, specifically;
non-wool fibre (for example, dog hair, fertiliser bag fibres and baling twine),

other objects,

supply as much accurate information as possible about the product,
manage chemical residues within prescribed or acceptable limits,
remain responsive to the changing needs of customers.

In addition, the quality management system must address the need to maintain or improve profitability by aiming to;

attract an optimum price for greasy wool,
maximise the chance of a favourable sale,
quantify the benefits of good quality (or the costs of poor quality),
continuously improve wool production procedures and product quality.

Key Quality Issues

Quality objectives for greasy wool can be largely achieved through the use of management systems applied at strategic stages of the wool production process.

Even lines of wool
Processors prefer to source wool with minimal variation within lots. The key points where quality can be influenced are;

breeding and selection of rams (stud or commercial),
classing of ewes,
culling of non-conforming sheep, identified at any stage,
management of mobs of sheep for uniformity and to minimise environmental
effects on wool consistency,
ordering of mobs when presented for shearing (for example, age groups),
classing of wool at shearing.

Elimination of pack fibre contamination
Contamination is ranked as the major quality problem by processors, due to the high cost of contamination in processing. The main contaminants found in Australian wool are wool pack fibres such as high density polyethylene (HDPE) and jute.

Although much of the pack fibre contamination apparently arises from post-farm bale handling, producers can play an important role in providing a contamination free product to the wool store. New wool pack materials offer a partial solution to the contamination problem. The use of nylon packs, though more expensive, is supported by major customers worldwide. Unlike HDPE, nylon is dye-compatible with wool.

The key points where pack fibre contamination can be influenced by the producer are;
selection of wool packs,
wool pressing,
transport of bales to store.

Elimination of dark fibre contamination
Dark fibre is seen as an increasing problem by some customers and this contamination is attributed to clip preparation standards. Sources of dark fibre are urine stain and pigmented wool.

The key points where dark fibre contamination can be influenced are;
breeding, classing and culling to eliminate pigmented fibres,
pre-shearing stain removal.

Elimination of non-wool contamination
The major contaminants in the Australian wool clip after wool pack fibres are polypropylene from hay baling twine and fertiliser bags.

The key points where contamination can be influenced are;
shearing shed, yard and property hygiene,
wool preparation techniques.

Supply of accurate information about the product
Buyers of raw wool regard product description as highly important for selecting wools that satisfy their requirements. The key points where accurate information can be provided are;
bale descriptions,
complete and accurate classers specification,
provision of objective measurement,
documentation of non-measured characters,
transfer of information and provision of quality system assurances.

Management of chemical residues
The issue of chemical residues in scour effluent and products such as lanolin used in pharmaceutical products is expected to become more significant. Environmental standards are increasing worldwide and consumer preference for environmentally friendly products is increasing. Growers need to implement strategies designed to eliminate the risk of chemical residue contamination. The key points where quality can be influenced are;
mulesing to reduce flystrike,
using biological or non chemical control methods, for example, fly traps,
preventing and eradicating lice infestations,
using pre-shearing (long wool) and post shearing chemical management
strategies.

Market responsiveness
Customer requirements shift over time as fashions change and technology is updated. Growers need to update their management system in line with medium to long term market trends. The key points where quality can be influenced are;
seeking information on changing market requirements,
seeking feedback information,
timely delivery (in case of contracts to supply),
implementing a recognised quality management scheme.

Back	Back to top

4.0 DESCRIPTION OF THE KEY QUALITY PROCESSES AND PRACTICES

The main wool production functions at which greasy wool quality is determined are:

Sheep breeding, classing and culling.
Mob management and husbandry.
Chemical use.
Wool harvesting, preparation, packaging and transport.
Provision of information to customer.
Market responsiveness.

Back	Back to top

4.1 Sheep Breeding, Classing and Culling

Sheep breeding, classing and culling are all aimed at minimising the natural genetic diversity within a commercial flock in order to produce wool characteristics demanded by the market. This includes producing a uniform wool type with no pigmented fibres. Managing flock genetics involves:

Selection of rams for breeding purposes. The commercial wool producer will select a uniform type from the range of rams on offer by the stud to profitably meet a specific market.

Classing of ewes for breeding purposes. At the commercial level, this activity again aims for uniformity to profitably produce a consistent type of wool.

Culling of non-conforming individuals in order to eliminate undesirable traits such as pigmented fibre.

Responsibilities
Progress towards breeding objectives is primarily the responsibility of the producer. However, external advice from studs, sheep classers and advisers is commonly used in commercial wool production.

Quality Parameters
Product consistency is the major "quality" aim of genetic management of the sheep flock, ensuring that for example, the customer is delivered even fibre diameter wool with no pigmented fibres in the fleece.

Genetics interacts with husbandry in the management of other wool quality attributes. For example, there is evidence that fleece structure plays an important role in the prevention of flystrike, therefore reducing the need to use pesticides.

Best Practice
Best practice for the management of flock genetics should include the following:

A documented policy outlining the attributes of the wool to be produced, based on long term market trends.

Annual evaluation of genetic quality in relation to the breeding goals. This may be achieved by a combination of;

mid-side sampling, guidance testing and fleece recording, seeking proof from the stud that it's own sheep are making sufficient progress in the desired traits, annual wool clip analysis, assessing the comparative performance of sheep bloodlines, examining the stud's own quality management system with respect to its responsiveness to longer term market trends.

Annual classing of breeding ewes within the flock, according to documented selection and culling criteria.

A clear identification system for culls at any stage of the production cycle such as at lamb marking, drenching and shearing.

Appropriate records to monitor and modify the breeding program. Useful feedback is obtained from;
joining records (rams joined to each ewe mob),
the sheep classer,
the wool classer at shearing time,
guidance testing pre-shearing and wool testing pre sale,
account sales documents,
clip analysis

An understanding of sheep breeding principles such as the heritability of traits important to the customer and environmental interactions between them, and the skills needed to measure the genetic characteristics, such as mid-side sampling, visually assessing sheep and understanding measured characteristics.

Limitations

Progress towards the goals of a quality breeding program are generally slow, because of; the need to ensure progress in, or at least maintenance of, many traits at once, insufficient comprehensive information on genetic progress in studs, external factors which cause a poor lambing percentage and reduce the number of replacement sheep from which to select.

There is also some difficulty in identifying the permanency of long term changes in the market (for example, premiums for fibre diameter). Short term information can confuse the long term trends resulting in an uncertain target for sheep breeders and the need to re-adjust breeding goals from time to time.

Unknown factors and conflicting sources of information commonly confuse those seeking advice. Establishing the credibility of information sources is vital because producers must ultimately make their own commercial decisions regarding their business.

Back	Back to top

4.2 Mob Management and Husbandry

Improving mob management and husbandry methods can reduce contamination from dark fibres, non-wool fibres and chemical residues. Improvements in product consistency may be important quality traits where wool is only subjectively assessed. Husbandry practices which can influence wool quality include mulesing, drenching, crutching, dagging, grazing management and paddock hygiene. The timeliness of such procedures can also affect wool quality.

Responsibilities
Managing a wool production system entails setting reasonably fixed policies on the best way to grow wool in a particular situation and district. These decisions are often made as a compromise between the need to optimise various aspects of management within the financial constraints of running the wool enterprise. Such decisions are ultimately the responsibility of the producer.

Quality Parameters
Mulesing and time of shearing can reduce the incidence of fly strike.
Timely drenching, crutching and dagging reduce the amount of stained wool present at shearing.
If the time of lambing coincides with a period of a feed shortage, it may affect staple strength.
Time of shearing can affect the position of break and consequently staple strength. A quality issue can arise if these two parameters are only subjectively assessed and not measured, or if the wool is forward sold under contract and it fails to meet the specifications of the contract.
Feeding of hay and the management of paddock cleanliness can influence the risk of polypropylene contamination from hay baling twine.

Best Practice
Best practice for mob management and husbandry will vary according to property and district factors, but should include the following:
Mulesing all Merino and comeback type lambs.
Shearing at a time of the year which minimises the need to chemically treat whole mobs for flystrike within three months of shearing.
Strategic drenching as required and crutching sheep within the three months before shearing.
Optimise feed and grazing management to minimise the need for hay feeding and risk of tender wool.
Membership of a farm management discussion group, or using specialist consultants.
Managing the use of polypropylene hay baling twine for paddock cleanliness.

Limitations
Limitations which prevent the achievement of best practice include:

Some areas of sheep husbandry are pushing the limits of current knowledge. For example, the role of nutrition strategies in countering wool tenderness is not completely understood at this stage.
The effect of climatic variations may over-ride the quality management strategies implemented (for example, drought and flystrike).
Market signals are not always consistent, nor attractive enough for producers to consider changing to a more expensive production system (for example, an extra crutching before shearing).
There is presently no viable alternative to polypropylene hay baling twine and paddock contamination may already exist.

Back	Back to top

4.3 Chemical Use

Chemicals are commonly used in the control of both sheep lice and blowfly, and can legally be applied from immediately post-shearing to pre-shearing. A variety of application methods includes the use of backliners, automated and hand jetting, and shower and plunge dips.

Chemicals are also used to control internal parasites, but these are unlikely to result in chemical residues in the wool. Their affect on wool quality is through animal health and better presentation at shearing.

The major groups of chemicals used on wool to control sheep lice and blowfly in Australia are classified as organophosphates, synthetic pyrethroids, or triazines (also known as IGR's or insect growth regulators). There is also some use of avermectins and less commonly, chemicals such as rotenone, magnesium fluorosilicate, copper sulphate and zinc sulphate.

Chemical use strategies employed on-farm include;
treatment of individual sheep for flystrike,
treatment of whole mobs to prevent flystrike,
treatment of the whole flock to prevent or control lice infestation.

Responsibilities

The producer is responsible for management techniques which reduce chemical contamination. As environmental standards become more stringent worldwide, violation of chemical residue limits may result in the loss of international markets or reduce the price for affected wools.

Quality Parameters

The presence of chemical residues in greasy wool is a quality issue of growing importance. While there are currently no relevant local or international standards, except for arsenic and organochlorines which are illegal to use, world-wide environmental standards are becoming more stringent. "Green" textile products are also starting to make their mark, with a small trend particularly in the more environmentally aware countries towards "eco-labelling" schemes.

Residues from chemicals applied to greasy wool occur in the effluent from processing mills and in lanolin, a by-product of the wool scouring process used as a base for pharmaceutical products. Treatment of the contaminated effluent or lanolin to meet residue limits will incur a cost to the processor which will ultimately affect the demand for wool.

While the average level of organophosphate (OP) and synthetic pyrethroid (SP) residues on greasy wool is low, there is still a need to further reduce chemical residues on the clip, particularly in the application of long wool treatments. The triazines are also being examined.

The wool industry is taking a pro-active approach in this issue to ensure that Australian wool will meet any future international standards.

Best Practice

Best practice for minimising chemical residues in greasy wool should include the following:

A policy to maintain greasy wool chemical residues within defined limits, as determined by the controls imposed on local and overseas processors by governments or regulatory bodies.

Minimising chemical use wherever possible. Chemical use can be minimised through;
avoiding chemical treatment of whole mobs (as opposed to treating individual
sheep) within the 3 month pre-shearing period, for example, preparedness to
treat individual sheep for flystrike,
management to prevent lice infestation and spread by monitoring for presence of
lice and not treating for lice unless they are detected.

Use parasite control techniques which incorporate prevention, early identification and minimal early chemical treatment if necessary. For example;
breeding for reduced susceptibility to fly strike,
correct mulesing and lamb marking technique,
properly maintained boundary and internal fences,
improved animal health through control of internal parasites and nutritional
management,
strategic crutching,

Correct chemical application techniques, such as;
adherence to label recommendations,
use only trained personnel and effective equipment,
understand chemical resistance within pest groups,

Correct storage and disposal of chemical containers,
monitoring of chemical application procedures to verify their effectiveness,
completion of a Farm Chemical User's Course,
a mechanism for receiving up to date information about changes to chemical
residues.

Limitations

The achievement of best practice may be prevented by a range of factors:
Unexpected flystrike problems close to shearing time may necessitate the
treatment of whole mobs to prevent large losses,
Cost considerations often compromise the quality management program. For
example, boundary and internal fencing may not be sufficiently stock-proof to
effectively isolate lice infected or suspect mobs.

Back	Back to top

4.4 Wool Harvesting, Preparation, Packaging and Transport

The operations of wool harvesting, preparation, packaging and transport include the following actions;
ensure a clean environment and adequate facilities for wool harvesting,
shear the wool from the sheep,
prepare the fleece,
class the wool into lines,
press the wool into bales,
brand the bales,
describe and document the wool produced,
transport the bales of wool to store.

Wool harvesting, which includes packaging and transport of wool, is the culmination of the producers whole year of planning and management.

"Twelve months to grow it - two weeks to blow it" is the expression which sums up the futility of poor quality management prior to and during the wool harvesting operation.

Responsibilities

The producer has ultimate responsibility for the quality management of the wool harvesting and associated operations. This includes being responsible for the actions of additional staff employed at shearing time.

However in practice, responsibility for the quality of the job is shared amongst a number of people who are not always under the direct supervision of the producer. If the producer is not present in the shearing shed, the role of quality manager is delegated to the overseer for large contract sheds, or to the wool classer for smaller sheds.

In addition, individual responsibilities for aspects of quality management are given to various members of the team, for example, pressers checking for loose fibres in wool packs.

Quality Parameters

The manner in which harvesting, preparation, packaging and transport are carried out will have an impact on the following wool quality parameters;
consistency of wool within lines,
contamination by pack fibres, dark fibres, non-wool fibres and other objects,
the accuracy of the product description and documentation produced.

Best Practice

Best practice for wool harvesting, preparation, packing and transport to store should include the following:

Adequate facilities to enable employees to meet documented wool preparation standards, for example, a table for picking bellies, sharpened pins for side pinning presses, loading and transport facilities which do not damage bales.

An adequate ratio of staff and shed hands to shearers, to enable employees to meet documented wool preparation standards.

The organisation and documentation of individual responsibilities and supervision to documented standards (for example, quality responsibilities of the shearer, shedhand, presser etc. and how they are to be supervised).

Training for shed staff through formal courses and on the job training.

Accreditation with a recognised quality assurance scheme.

A team responsibility approach in the shearing shed, generated through employees having an understanding of the downstream implications of quality management. Discussion of the quality management system with the shearing team can promote ownership of the system by all involved in implementing it. Two examples of this approach include a property at Balmoral, Victoria, where a shearer holds the local "record" for detecting just three pigmented fibres in a fleece and a Riverina wool producer who pays shearers a bonus for raddling sheep found to have pigmented fibre.

Inspection of shearing and wool preparation facilities (using a checklist) to confirm that the risk of contamination has been reduced to approved standards.

Upper limits on the number of fleeces handled per table per day.

Branding procedures to eliminate misdescribed bales.

Use of the previous year's clip analysis data to assist in wool preparation decisions, including forward sales.

Thoroughness and accuracy in completion of wool specification documents.

On-going audits and data systems to identify faults or compromises in the quality system.

Feedback and corrective action mechanisms for continual improvement of the quality system. Regular use of market feedback is important where there is likely to be an impact on wool preparation methods (such as premiums for style), so that wool preparation may be best aligned with market quality requirements.

Use of a non-contaminating pack.

Limitations

Limitations to a producer achieving best practice for these functions may arise from:
The possibility of higher costs for labour and wool packs. This should not be a
problem for most producers if clear benefits are demonstrated.
Traditional shed layouts which may compromise the quality system. Major
renovations are costly and producers may not be able to outlay the money
required to bring the shed up to the requirements for a quality scheme.
Unexpectedly fast shearing resulting in fleeces left on the floor and a "wool
storm" at the wool table. Flexibility in, or limits to, the output of shearers are not easily achieved under a tally system.

Back	Back to top

4.5 Provision of Information to Customer

Customers require information about the wool they are purchasing in order to ensure that it fulfills their requirements. Information provided to customers includes:

Forecasts of production and measured wool characteristics where wool is contracted for private sale.

Line description to recognised wool classing standards.

Objective wool test data, including staple measurement for combing wools and clean colour for appropriate wool types.

Classer's specification and waybills for wool transported to store.

Accurate branding of bales.

Documentation of any other quality assurances.

For information to be useful, it must be provided in a timely manner and accompany the wool to the store and sale.

Responsibilities

The producer is responsible for the provision of information which starts before shearing if forecasts of production are required, and usually continues through to and after wool harvesting.

The producer is responsible for requesting that objective measurements be made on the wool and verifying the results.

If delivering wool outside of the wool harvesting period, the producer is responsible for passing on information to the broker.

During shearing, some responsibility for specific functions may be delegated to the contractor or wool classer, and to a lesser extent, the wool presser. If so, these functions need to be clearly understood.

Quality Parameters

The quality aspect affected by this function is the accuracy of greasy wool description and the amount of objective test information provided.

Best Practice

Best practice for providing information to customers should include the following:
Adequate training and performance of the wool classer to meet requirements of the Code of Practice for the Preparation of Australian Wool Clips.
Having all lines of wool tested, including staple measurement for all combing length wools and clean colour for appropriate wool types.
Ongoing reconciliation between classer's specification and the wool book during shearing.
Branding of bales in the woolpress and prompt recording in the wool book.
Reconciliation between the classer's specification, the wool book and waybills (forwarding advice) as wool is forwarded to the store.
Membership of a recognised Quality Assurance scheme to provide credible documentation and accreditation of the system.
Provision to the customer of previous years classer's specification and test results, plus current guidance test results prior to shearing where wool is to be contracted for sale.

Growers may plan, document, implement and assure customers using their own quality management schemes. However, they face two major difficulties:
Establishing a good reputation for their scheme. There is a growing number of large quality schemes in the market place who are providing credible information to customers about their merits,
The volume of wool offered from a small scheme would be insignificant in the market place, unless the producer has established a direct-selling alliance with a particular processor.

Various private schemes are available to producers for the purpose of implementing a quality management "package" at shearing time. They are conducted by brokers, independent organisations and producer groups, sometimes in association with a particular marketing method (for example, via the broker concerned, value-adding or bloodline marketing). Components of the package and the rigour with which standards are applied vary. Customers in the processing area may also have varying impressions of different schemes.

For most producers, joining an existing high quality and well respected scheme should provide the most benefits. These schemes should include:
Accreditation of the producer's wool production and harvesting system subject to ongoing satisfactory performance (that is, independent accreditation for the producer).
The use of accredited assessors at the start of and during wool harvesting to ensure that quality system procedures are in place and if problems do exist, they are rectified.
Accreditation of transport procedures and in-store handling systems for wool prior to sale to ensure that quality management is continued through to sale.
Inspection of the clip in the store at grab sampling and on the show floor to verify that documented procedures have been followed and the wool conforms to quality standards.
Independent oversight of the whole procedure to give credibility to the quality assurances made.

Limitations

Accurate documentation and provision of information to customers is already achievable within current wool production and harvesting systems. However, the number and diversity of private quality schemes currently operating may be reducing the credibility of quality assurances, if customers react adversely to a bad experience with a system.

Customers may be confused about the relative merit of each system, given the large variation between them in terms of quality procedures and systems used for accreditation.

Back	Back to top

4.6 Market Responsiveness

Market responsiveness ensures the quality management system is able to meet future as well as present market place requirements. It involves;
seeking current market information with respect to quality requirements,
where possible, seeking information about the performance of the product directly attributed to on-farm processes and the likely performance under changing market requirements,
implementing the necessary changes in the quality management system.

Responsibilities

The responsibility for seeking and using information rests with the producer, although organisations further along the pipeline such as the broker, agent or processor are responsible for communicating their requirements and providing feedback to producers.

Quality Parameters

If market requirements change over time, management must be responsive to the market to meet the new quality criteria.

Best Practice

Best practice for managing market responsiveness should include the following:
Regular market information updates including analysis of premiums and
discounts.
Participation in a recognised Quality Assurance scheme.
Participation in a farm management discussion group.
Establishment of alliances or channels of communication with a processor to
obtain feedback about the performance of product.
Delivery on time (where wool is forward sold under contract).

Limitations

Limitations to achieving best practice in the management of market responsiveness include:
Impediments to clear and accurate feedback which occur along the wool
pipeline and include disjointed communication channels or self-serving interests
of other sectors.
Difficulty in obtaining feedback on performance of a particular line of wool due
to blending.

Back	Back to top

5.0 Potential for Quality Improvement in Wool Production

There are a number of practices identified in Section 4 of this Module which would be relatively easy to implement and would bring about a marked improvement in the quality management of the wool enterprise.

Know the wool market
A better understanding of market requirements would enable producers to align their wool enterprises with present and future market needs. Information can be sourced from the IWS, Wool International, Wool Exchange, brokers, processors, field days and workshops. Understanding market requirements is the basis of designing and documenting a wool quality management policy.

Know your product
Information which already exists on-farm can be put together to build a fairly comprehensive picture of the wool produced on a property. Useful sources of information include;
the wool book,
the clip specification,
wool test data,
account sales,
broker's advice,
wool clip analysis,
comparative farm analysis,
farm records,
processor feedback.

A profile of the wool clip over recent years can be compared to market requirements in order to identify areas where quality management can be improved.

Define the target market for your wool
In light of the best available market and production information, potential markets or marketing channels should be listed along with their particular quality requirements. The practicality and cost-effectiveness of meeting the quality requirements should be evaluated, with a view to targeting market(s).

Refine the production system
Comparing market quality requirements for particular wool characteristics with current performance will identify the areas where improvement can be made in the quality management system. However, there is no point changing an existing system without a good idea of what the objective is and the total effects of the management changes made.

Useful sources of this information for each district include Departments of Agriculture, brokers, private consultants, leading farmers, producer groups and comparative analysis studies.

Minimise chemical residues in greasy wool
This is an issue subject to increasing regulation. Some sheep husbandry practices could place wool at risk of rejection in the future. Present quality management schemes may not cope with future market requirements if maximum residue limits are suddenly imposed or reduced. There is an important need to keep abreast of the developments in this area and to aim for a large safety margin in chemical residue levels in wool.
The most immediate need is to document external parasite control strategies with the aim of eliminating chemical use over whole mobs, at least within the period three months before shearing.
Knowledge of and competency in use of sheep protection chemicals can be enhanced by undertaking a Farm Chemical User's Course.

Become part of a recognised quality assurance scheme
Most producers will benefit from being part of a larger quality management scheme. There are difficulties associated with accrediting wool from an individual property scheme, such as establishing creditability and the low volume of wool produced.

Private quality schemes currently in operation address many of the quality issues which concern customers such as even wool quality, physical contamination and chemical contamination (to a degree). Accreditation with such a scheme can provide credibility for a quality management program, along with the potential for market premiums. However, quality schemes do vary with respect to the quality issues controlled and in their credibility as perceived by wool processors.

IWS Around The World Research & Innovation Market Intelligence Woolgrowers Experience Wool Wool Education News Woolmark