MARKETING OF EGGS

Otago Daily Times, Issue 24409, 21 September 1940, Page 3

MARKETING OF EGGS

ro THE EDITOR Sir, —“ One-sixteenth Ounce ” Is concerned over the egg marketing regulations. For the past 15 years to my knowledge the industry has been urging Governments—not only the present Government—to grant a measure of control over the distribution of eggs in line with the principles underlying the regulations fo which your correspondent appears to take exception, In giving effect to them the Government has been assured of the support of the New Zealand Poultry Board the Poultry Producers’ Federation and groups of producers wherever they could be contacted by board members, together with representatives of the Internal Marketing Department, from Auckland to Invercargill. Requests for their application to their particular centres have been received from producers around Invercargill, New Plymouth, Hamilton, Wanganui and other places, Your correspondent avers, “If the object—the regulations reveal no other —is to ensure that the consumer gets the weight of eggs for which he pays this could be simply effected by selling eggs by weight.” But that is not the object. There have till now been a few pepple who have done exceptionally well out of the chaotic methods of distribution, and they were neither producers nor consumers. The primary object of the regulations is to ensure a complete “ tie-up ” of speculation and the unethical practices of those who stand between producer and consumer. Further, eggs have always been sold by grade in Christchurch. Wellington and Auckland. With Dunedin now in line it will be no longer possible for interests in Christchurch to send smaller (medium) grade eggs to their retail shops in Dunedin to be passed off on the Dunedin housewife at the higher (standard) grade price. This is but one of the many “unrevealed benefits.

“ One-sixteenth Ounce ” asks: “If weight is to be the criterion for the acceptance of an egg, and a poultry farmer should object to the rejection of his eggs on other grounds than weight, to what specific clause in the regulations can he be referred? ” This does not need a specific clause; it merely requires common sense. What more revolting on the breakfast table than a dirty, or stained, or stale egg, or one all streaked with blood? What more warranted to put the consumer “off” eggs for quite a long period? Obviously it is in the interest of the producer that no such egg should reach the market.

And, finally, your correspondent comments, “It is questionable if the regulations will work.” He has my word for it that it will not be the fault of the producers in the industry if they do not. —I am. etc., T. Gill, Member N.Z. Poultry Board. Oamaru, Sept. 17. 10 THE EDITOR Sir, —Your correspondent “One-six-teenth Ounce” had some remarks in Monday’s Daily Times on egg grading. Evidently he does not rely, wholly and solely, on hens for his livelihood, and his remarks are rather amusing. Any poultrykeeper, if he has any sense at all, should see that his eggs are marketed m the best condition. Of course, of late, he has received no more than the person who sends any class of eggs for sale, irrespective of whether it is fresh or dirty. This has always been a bone of contention with rightminded poultrykeepers. One cannot sell butter, milk or meat unless it is of good quality, so why should the public have to take eggs that may be “ anything ”? The Internal Marketing Department, along with the Poultry Board and the executive of the New Zealand Poultry Producers’ Federation, has brought into being these new regulations. Because grading is new to Dunedin, why belittle it? Grading and testing have been carried out in the other three centres for some time now and everyone is quite satisfied. If they were not, why have so many in North Otago gone elsewhere to sell eggs instead of their old market, Dunedin? The pouitrykeeper gets paid for his various grades and the public gets a uniformly . graded egg. Testing is certainly not mentioned in the regulations, but it goes hand in glove with grading. Blood spots, etc., can only be detected under the light and it is only fair that these classes of eggs should be withheld from sale. As I mentioned in a previous letter, put a good egg on the market and sales will increase. Once the housewife finds that egg-buying is not a gamble I am sure that the regulations will have proved their worth.—l am, etc. Poultrykeeper. North Otago, Sept. 19. TO THE EDITOR Sir,—Since there is nothing In the new egg marketing regulations about eggs having to be tested for cracks, badness or blood spots, is there anything to prevent the producer from sending eggs direct to a retailer provided that the retailer sells the eggs at the prices fixed for corresponding grade weight? As it seems impossible that each egg sent to the wholesale firms is to be weighed accurately, when say one of the grade weights is 1 15-16 oz, probably all that these firms do is to weigh an entire crate, or at best each dozen, and calculate on that. Cannot a retailer buying direct from a producer weigh each dozen eggs as sold and call 270 z first grade. 240 z second grade, etc.? Surely that is all that is required. To the poultry farmer who has been in the habit of sending his eggs to a wholesale firm these new arrangements may not be an inconvenience. But here is where the small producer, mainly the farmer, gets it “in the neck ” again. Probably many country wives keep the home in groceries or find their only pin money through the sale of their surplus eggs—perhaps 10 or 12 dozen a week. Now, how do these small suppliers fare? The wholesale firms probably accept only crate lots (24 dozen) and the retailer seems to be under the impression that he cannot now sell eggs unless they have been graded and tested by listed wholesalers. The wholesaler charges 10 per cent, for handling the eggs. Then for each £1 worth of eggs sold the Government rakes off another 2s, and then cartage, 2s, reduces the 20s to 14s. Out of this 14s the producer buys pullets, feed and does all the work. There was no call for this new regulation at present, when the big cry is “ More production ” and eggs are needed for export. Even the small producer has his value, but instead of receiving encouragement he is more likely to be choked right out. This seems just another instance of Government interference. Instead of putting forward concrete schemes to advance production, it does everything in its power, by petty regulations and bureaucracy, to kill out all individual endeavour. —I am, etc., . Sept, 17. Pullet-off.