DAIRY INSPECTION.

King Country Chronicle, Volume V, Issue 367, 7 June 1911, Page 2

DAIRY INSPECTION.

DISCUSSED BY FARMERS

The remit dealing with the inspection of dairy herds that was discussed at the Woodville conference recently ia one of great importance, because it touches one of the greatest drawbacks that factory managers have to contend against in turning out a high grade article. From published accounts the discussion at the conference was confined chiefly to one phase only of the question, that relating to cows suffering from tubercular and Kindied diseases. The matter was freely discussed, and the resolution favouring inspection adopted with only one or two objectors, who were apparently afraid that the recommmendation to have inspectors appointed would prove to be an unnecessary annoyance and expense to the farmer. Fortunately the practice of pasteurising skim-milk at the factories has proved that a great percentage of the troubles referred to can be reduced to small proportions. When pasteurising becomes general the trouble will most likely be entirely cheeked. A few years ago when it was rumoured that the Government proposed to institute a system of inspection, and to enforce dairymen to put down concrete yards, there was a general revolt, and the matter was allowed to drop. About the same time a suggested tax upon cows to provide the funds to meet the expenses "f inspection was another subject that met with strong obection. However, the hint thus given had the effect of bringing about a great improvement in many of the dairy yards throughout the country. It would be an injustice to a large proportion of our dairymen to say that they do not use every precaution to ensure that the milk from their farms reaches the dairy factory in the best possible condition. On the other hand, it cannot be denied that there are many who are slovenly in their methods, and who appear to be quite unconcerned so long as the cheque comes regularly on factory pay day. It is, therefore, to be regretted that the whole industry should suffer because of the carelessness of indifferent suppliers. Anyone who is acquainted with the country districts cannot fail to have noticed the filthy conditions that surround many of the large dairy sheds and approaches. In many instances the cows have to wade through slush and mud several feet deep, morning and evening, on their way to and from the milking yards. Under these conditions it is an impossibility to thoroughly cleanse the udders before milking. While it is admitted that wherever there are cows in the winter and early spring there will be mud, with care and foresight on the part of the farmer the trouble can be avoided to a very great extent. By adopting a proper system of draining a large proportion of the water can be drained away, and some system of paving put into practice. One of the chief reasons why improvements in this direction are neglected is that a fairly large number go into the business as an experiment, or with a view to selling out again as soon as a tempting offer is forthcoming. These men do not go to any more expense than they can possibly help. Generally speaking, those that have been established for any length of time have made some provision against the existence of this menace. Indeed, quite a number of milking sheds are models of cleanliness, and it is unfair that they should have to suffer for the neglect of others. When inspection is suggested as a remedy there is an immediate protest. Why should there not be inspection? Here we find an evil that is a menace to the well-being of one of the most important industries of the country—saying nothing of the public health—and yet in some people's opinion the matter is to be passed unnoticed. The taxpayers throughout the Dominion have spent, and are spending, large sums of money every year in assisting the dairy farmer in every way possible, and lie should at least be compelled to send his produce to the factory in as pure a condition as possible. With the aid of machinery and the introduction of scientific methods the buttermakers are turning out a high-grade article. They are not assisted as they might be bv dairymen, many of whom are ready to find fault if the quality of the finished article falls short of the standard. It has been suggested that the manager should absolutely refuse to accept dirty milk. This would perhaps be effective, but it is scarcely fair because it places the man in charge in a most awkward position. He is the servant of the suppliers and his appointment would be endangered if he strictly enforced the rule, especially if it so happened that some of the company's directors were among the offenders. There is no wish to impose irksome conditions on dairymen, many of whom are haying a hard struggle, but the public health and the future of the dairying industry demands that those who are indifferent shall be brought to a sense of their responsibilities.