MILK TESTING.

Kaipara and Waitemata Echo, 30 October 1919, Page 2

MILK TESTING.

IS THE METHOD FAIR?

" There is going to be a big row soon over the milk test." :

So spoke Mr E. C. Banks, prominent Holstein dairyman of Matamata, but perhaps better known when off his farm as the. agricultural member of the Council of Education.

"Tell us why," urged a reporter. " Because the farmers are not getting paid for what they supply," he answered. "Listen: all the payments to suppliers are made on the basis of the amount of fat in the milk, Yet it is only on the fat that the payment is calculated."

"You get all there is in it. Doesn't it average out all right ?" the reporter persisted. '' Not by any means," said Mr Banks, with emphasis. "The man with the rich milk gets paid too much, and the man with the poor milk gets too little. I'll explain to you. In my district we supply a dried milk factory. Now, dried milk contains it all except the water. It contains the butter-fat and also the other solids. Now these other solids are very constant; they comprise about Sli per cent of the fresh milk and rarely vary a half per cent. Su milk is just as rich in other solids as the milk that tests 7 per cent. But when the factory manager pays out to the 7 test man he pays him double for his cream (quite correclty), but also double tor his other solids (quite incorrectly). " And how is the big row going to start ?" .

" Oh, someone will jump up air a suppliers' meeting one oFthese days, and then the matter will be threshed out all over the country."

" But the other ' solids ' are not yet analysed. How will you remedy that?"

" They .can be, and they are,-"" but payment is not made on them, I'll tell you a little story to prove how seldom the other solids vary. I received a note one day from the factory manager saying that my man must be watering the milk —a proceeding, of course, which would benefit nobody. We looked into the matter, and found that the factory staff had made a mistake in entering up their analysis of the other solids. They keep consistently close to 8^ per cent, but by error they had been entered at 7^, and that small difference was enough to make the manager decide there was added water, I tell you that skimmed milk does not vary." - MThe big row will right alj. all that," added this stud Hoi? stein man, " but you'll see there will be tremendous opposition from Taranaki. They've got; .a lot of Jerseys there, and thepresent system suits thern."— Whafcatane Press. [As everyone engaged in the dairy business knows, there is something in Mr Bank's argument, viz., that the butterrfat test is nqt an altogether satis^ factory base o-i which to pay out, but the difficulty' is to §n4 a practical system that would be better. Since cheese making has come so largely into vogue it is generally recognised that it would be more satisfactory if some absolutely equitable basis for payment to milk suppliers could be devised. For example, we will suppose that two suppliers, and A and B, each take a hundred pounds weight of milk to a cheese-iTiaking factory. The analysis of the milk delivered' \)y A is : Test 3.0, casein 3,0, other solids 3.9. For this he would be paid qn the butte^fat test, which, at 2s per Ib, would fee is. E's analysis works out- Test 4.2, casein 3.5, other solids 4.2. He would be paid for 42.101bs of butter.fat on test at %s, roughly 8s 4d, Supposing, however, thafe all the solids were taken into consideration, A's total would be 9.9, and B's 11.9. This proportion would not be so great as the proportion of test, and instead of A. receiving 6s, he would receive approximately 6s 6d, and B would receive 7s lOd /instead of 8s 4d._ These results could be arrived at 1$ an evaporation test, but whether suc.h:w,ould be practical or not remains fqr. expert's to say.