Copra Cutter

Tests of Machine Being Made in Fiji

AFTER some preliminary con

fusion —the result apparently of a misunderstanding between in ventor, manufacturer and distributor —the Rey copra-cutting machine is now being introduced to use in Fiji, through the agency of Burns Philp (South Seas) Ltd.

The machine is the invention of Mr. P. Rey, of Tahiti. It is now ' being manufactured by a firm in Burbank, California. There has been a good deal of interest shown in it by coconut planters in areas where labour has become scarce and dear. The following summary, dated April 22, has been made avail able to us by Mr. M. H. Helsen, of Burns Philp (South Seas) Ltd., Suva: Mr. Rey, the inventor of the machine, has been with us for the past three weeks, and has given various practical demonstrations of his invention.

As with all new inventions, there is a certain resistance from people who, used to old methods, are re luctant to try anything new; and the first demonstration I arranged with the Director of Agriculture was reported by the Fiji Times and com mented upon in lukewarm terms, and inferred that the machine did not appear to have any advantages over Indian or Fijian copra-cutters.

This, possibly, is true, as long as this labour is available; and this is the main point which would be of interest in territories which are not as fortunate as Fiji on the labour question.

Following a further demonstra tion yesterday, which was attended by Mr. “Tui” Johnson and Mr. R.

Ricketts, and a few old hands, Mr.

Ricketts (a planter himself) was sufficiently impressed to purchase one of the machines for his planta tion on Koro Island.

My own opinion of the Rey equipment—and speaking as one who has seen copra cutting in vari ous territories —is that it can indeed perform the actual cutting of coco nuts at the rate of at least between 5,000 to 6,000 nuts per normal work ing day; the operator needing, of course, an assistant to feed him with the coconuts, whilst another one or two assistants are required to operate the extractors. In summary I would briefly set out my observations: • Although portable, I consider the best results would be obtained by collecting the nuts and bringing them to a point near the “smoke house” or drier, where the nuts can be cut, kernel extracted, and the husk used as fuel for the drier, as is customary on certain plantations. • The loss of potash fertiliser in using the above method could be

?v!i eC vf.?K^ 0 P lan^ers who are in SSiA leavmg the hua,ks f£Pc U ™i,i!i 8 tr ? l ? 1 s as manure, but HjnL c - d possibly be offset by the louowmg; (a) Saving in labour cost in cutting and transporting firewood. (b) The avoidance of idle labour on rainy days rp. , . * .. .. A 6 spll , ts nuts neatly and with no loss of the Kernel, as in the case with an axe. • The extractor cuts the kernel in regular pieces. . „ 7 . f . . , • The water of the nut is saved and can be used for feeding pigs, • As both the cutting machine

and extractors are operated by a !-hp engine there is less fatigue on the operators, and I therefore consider there would be a more consistent output than by present method of cutting with an axe and extracting with a copra knife. For the same reason, women labourers co P ld bo used. 1 venture to say that a native, given sufficient time to become pro ficient with both machines, would cut out as much if not more copra than under present methods; and, not having the same physical strain, would as aforesaid be more con sistent in his output, The Rev eoninment have f ar mo re appeal in Territories where the labour problem is acute, than is the case in Fiji.