COST OF PRODUCING BUTTER-FAT.

Franklin Times, Volume 9, Issue 713, 10 March 1922, Page 4

COST OF PRODUCING BUTTER-FAT.

A Tasmanian correspondent of the “Melbourne Leader” writes The low price of butter-fat is very disappointing to dairymen, and the consumer is also concerned in failing to see why the retail charge for factory butter is Is 3d per lb, when the but-ter-fat is just half that amount. Last seoson the difference between butter-fat and the manufactured article was on the overage sd. Consumers would not be so critical if a similar proportion operated on this occasion.i Writing on the cost of dairying, Mr A. C. Foster, a settler about 15 miles inland form Burnie, gives some interesting figures. He says: Have tried to ascertain the cost of producing lib of butter based on the cost of stock, etc., to those who have taken up the industry during the the past few years. Have taken' a “one man show” as a basis, and have not considered child labour, as it so often is. If children do a man’s work they should receive a man’s pay. I consider that 15 cows on an average are milked by one man unassisted. Suppose that the cows made £2O per head last season (six cows on a Latrobe farm averaged that sum), or were bought at £l3, and allow five acres of grass per cow, at £7 per acre. We get this result: Cost of cows, £195 ; 75 acres, at £7, £525 ; separator and utensils, £4O ; total, £760. Interest at 6 per cent, on £760, £451 12; one man’s labour (not at £7 per week and keep, as per recent log), £150; total, £195 12s (approximate). So it would cost Is 7%d to produce lib butter, provided that every cow came to light in due season. There is nothing allowed in that for depreciation, rates and taxes, buildings, horses, or the numerous tools and every-day requireuents to keep the place in order. Fifteen calves might be worth £7 10s, and that might meet these extra expenses. Also, the man might borrow his neighbour’s stud bull. He cou,ld not afford to buy one at Is 7d for butted. Mr Foster continued: For many years we were told that the price of labour could not be fixed, but it is. Now we are told that the price of produce cannot be fixed, but it can be, and in some cases is fixed. The price of butter in Australia is fixed to-day by a group of mainland butter interests. Cost of production is the only equitable basis to work on. The producer has to pay the price fixed by law to the man who carts his cream to the factory, to the hands who make it up, to the freezers, lumpers, shippers, and in no case do they receive less than they did last year. There is no talk of them accepting London or Danish parity, for their labour ; but the man who finds work and wage 4 for all these is compelled to run on a Is per lb dead Loss practically this season. Again, London parity is wrong, because now that we have a fairly high protective tariff the cost of all farming tools and implements has gone up, while the producer is compelled to accept in Austraho such a price as would compare in proportion with the price of his implements less the tariff. Unless the balance of trade is in our favour, the credits o! the Commonwealth go to the pack, md although the primary producers

and miners are the only people who can bring about such a favourable position, they are invariably sacrificed to the importers and middlemen’s interests.