NEW MILK REGULATIONS.

Gisborne Times, Volume XXVI, Issue 2151, 28 March 1908, Page 4

NEW MILK REGULATIONS.

TOO DRASTIC,

PRICE OP MILK TO BE ADVANCED.

(Dunedin “Star".) Tho now dairying regulations issued by tho Health Department, and which came into force on the Ist of .March, have aroused a very disturbing inlluenco upon all those connected with that industry. Tho president of tho Dairymen’s Association (Air D. lloy), interviewed to-day, very strongly voiced tho opinions of tho trade in regard to tho new regulations. Tho farmers, ho said, liad previously worked hand in hand with the Stock Department in all recommended improvements, and were equnlly in sympathy with tho Health Department in their endeavors to further tho interests of all concerned. But'any regulations; which would inflict hardships upon the trade would bo strenuously opposed. Tho present regulations had entirely missed iuoir mark, inasmuch as they showed that the rules of tho two departments were contrary to otio another. One of the Health Department’s now rules was to the eflect that fifteen days must ela.pso 'after diving before the milk was fit lor consumption. Tho Stock Department’s rule said that only four days neecl elapse after calving. Now, tho Health Department woro not in a position to determine when a cow had* ca-lvcd, ■is they were not empowered to inspect dairymen’s premises. The Stock Department only had that right. MILK STANDARD. Tho Health Department's new milk standard said that milk delivered for hitman consumption. must not contain less than 31 per cent, of tatty solids. This Mr .Roy considered much too drastic. Tho universal standard was 3 per cent, and neither no nor any "bf the dairymen could lma"ino any conceivable reason for tho rise. This rule would be stronglyopposed. CLEAN MILK CANS. Tho first of the scheduled regulations would also bo very uifair to dairymen. This law read —“No person shall stand, or allow to stand, up on any public footpath or pavement any milk *or any milk etuis or other vessels used for tho carriage ot milk.” A. law of this nature « altogether too stringent. In order that tho customers might get their supplies in nlciiy of time, the men employed to deliver tho milk had to do their f-ork as expeditiously as possible. Under the now law their hours would bo doubled, and a great waste of timo would ho tue outcome. At tho present timo tho men and lads had to deliver milk to consumers who lived in places not accessible to the delivery carts. In consequence, tho ’man in charge of tho van had to leave sufficient milk at convenient spots, so that he might not cause any delay to customers on the main run. This was the only way execute the work to the advantage ox all concerned. The new rule would binder expeditious delivery, and. was absurd, to sav the least of it. The farmers would not object to reasonable precautions, such as the enforcement of securely covered cans to prevent dust or other sediment from entering the cans. Indeed, such a rule would be encouraged. TOO RIGOROUS. Rule 11. was also too rigorous. It reads that “no washing or rinsing of milk cans or utensils must take place in a properly' constructed building." As a matter of fact, most of the farmers had outside wooden racks in con junction with a good water supply, and at a reasonable distance from the byres, where tho cleansing work was carried on. There could bo no better and cleaner place than the open air for these operations, and the farmer thought all would agree with him in that contention. Again, in some cases a farmer, after distributing his milk, had to do some business in town. The first thing he* did was to hose his cans :out thoroughly at a town friend’s place. Under tho new rule the driver would be compelled to wait until he could clean his cans. This would be foolish in tho extreme, as when he got home lie would find that the milk dregs would not only he giving off a most unpleasant smell, hilt would also have a bad effect upon the cans. Every good housewife knew the desirability of cleaning the milk cans as soon as they wero empty. Rule 111. was also absurd. It read that “No manipulation of milk, such as mixing, must take place unless in a properly constructed building.” This would mean that the customers who were lucky enough to get the first of tho milk from a can would got the cream, and those who were unfortunate enough to get tho last of the cm—well, their milk would not be all it should be. When the milk was mixed from one can to another it was done merely for the sake of giving all tho customers an equal share of good milk. To meet tho trouble the farmers would suggest that each driver should carry a cloth or other strainer with him. All danger from contaminating influences would' then be successfully coped ' VItII 'PENALTY TOO HARSH. Another grievance tho farmer had was the £2O penalty to he Imposed for the violatfon of tho regulations. The penalty was much too harsh, and they",thought 'that maximum fine of £5 would bo ample. PRICE OF MILK TO ADVANCE.

Asked as to 'whether tho imposing of these rules would mean extra expense to the consumer, Mr Roy said that undoubtedly all new regulations of this nature had a tendency to rise the price of milk. As it was, milk was.very scarce at the present time, •and thero was sure to be an advance on the present prices for the coming winter. How much the prico was likely to advance it was too early to conjecture, but if the new regulations were enforced a substantial rise in the price was to be looked for. It was Intended, however, to submit to the new laws. The proper authorities were to bo approached, and a revision of the rules -was looked for. The Health Department, ho considered, might easily bring about a desirable improvement if they were to inspect more closely the town shops from which much of tho milk was distributed after leaving the farmer’s hands.