WT AND BAL. ITEMS LOADED WITH INCORRECT WTS. AFT CTR OF GRAVITY RESULTED.

Narrative

BAGGAGE HANDLERS LOADED FREIGHT IN DALLAS TOTALLING 875 LBS IN CARGO AREA #1. THIS WAS THE WT FIGURE I USED TO DETERMINE OUR CTR OF GRAVITY LOCATION. BASED ON THIS WT IN CARGO #1; CARGO #2; AND PAX SEATING IN THE CABIN; OUR CTR OF GRAVITY WAS MINUS 6.8 INDEX UNITS WELL WITHIN THE AFT LIMIT. UPON LNDG IN LAREDO; TX; I EXPERIENCED STRONG PITCH CTL DIFFICULTIES EACH TIME I ATTEMPTED TO RETARD THE PWR LEVERS TO FLT IDLE DURING MY LNDG FLARE. AFTER REACHING THE GATE; WE HAD STATION PERSONNEL RE-WEIGH ALL THE CARGO/BAGS IN CARGO AREAS #1 AND #2. CARGO #2 WTS WERE AS RPTED TO US IN DALLAS. HOWEVER CARGO TOTAL WT WAS 1604 LBS VERSUS THE 875 LBS RPTED TO US IN DALLAS. OUR ACTUAL CTR GRAVITY WAS PLUS .5 INDEX UNITS PUTTING US JUST BARELY BEYOND THE AFT CTR OF GRAVITY LIMIT. THE FREIGHT AND RAMP OPS PEOPLE FAILED TO TAKE THE TIME TO DETERMINE ACTUAL WT OF THE FREIGHT AND GAVE US AN ESTIMATE THAT COULD HAVE RESULTED IN SERIOUS PITCH CTL DIFFICULTIES ON TKOF; INADEQUATE STALL RECOVERY ABILITY. TO PREVENT THIS OCCURRENCE IN THE FUTURE; THE FREIGHT DEPT MUST MARK THE WT OF EACH BOX ON THE BOX; SO AS NOT TO FORCE BAGGAGE HANDLERS TO MAKE INACCURATE WT ESTIMATES OR IMPROPERLY APPLY STANDARD WTS USED FOR CHKED BAGGAGE. CALLBACK CONVERSATION WITH RPTR REVEALED THE FOLLOWING INFO: RPTR FO AND CAPT HAD EXTENSIVE DISCUSSIONS WITH THEIR COMPANY CONCERNING THE ERRONEOUS CARGO WTS AND LOADING. THE COMPANY INSTITUTED A CONTINUING EDUCATIONAL AND MONITORING PROGRAM TO PREVENT FUTURE OCCURRENCES.