WAXED CHEESE

Otago Witness, Issue 4033, 30 June 1931, Page 17

WAXED CHEESE

“ There has been considerable discussion during the past 12 months regarding the policy of waxing cheese prior to export. Some 18 months since,” said Mr Singleton. “ I advised dairy companies

that traders in the United Kingdom intimated that in their opinion the waxing of cheese might well be left to traders and dairy companies without regulations. “ The reports received during this season from our London officers make few references to faults associated with waxing,” he said. “ There has been some complaint of sliminess or moisture having collected under the wax in not more than half a dozen brands. It is possible some of this was due to insufficient turning of the cheese on the curing room shelves prior to waxing, while other defects may have been due to the effects of heat causing the cheese rind to be in a poor condition to receive the wax. So far as these reports- are concerned, there does not appear to be sufficient to justify a prohibition of waxing. “We have no desire to force upon

traders waxed cheese when their trade demands unwaxed, and it would be wrong policy to refuse to supply waxed cheese to such traders as require it. The position might be met by a regulation after the lines of the salt regulation for butter. The export of waxed cheese could be prohibited. excepting that shipments might be made in compliance with the request of an f.o.b. buyer, or of the wholesaler or retailer, through the importer, to the recently-formed association of the unporters and the Dairy Boards London repre:entative. The Dairy- Boards London representative could advise the DairyBoard here. This procedure should make sufficient ’safeguard for all business in connection with waxed cheese that is in the interests of the welfare of our cheese trade. FARM DAIRY INSTRUCTION. “Various resolutions from some of the most important organisations in the industry have been in favour of Dominion farm dairy instruction,” said the speaker. A vear ago it was hoped that the 1930 session of° Parliament might have given effect to the request of the industry as contained in these resolutions. Before Parliament could make an opportunity of dealing with the matter, the general economic position altered materially for the worse, and the v matter had to stand in abeyance. Since then a few of the dis-* tricts which were co-operating with the Dairy Division in the employment of farm dairy instructors have, on account of a desire to reduce costs, given the necessary notice to discontinue the service. Realising that such an opinion exists in some districts which have indicated satisfaction with the work of farm dairy instructors. it seems fair to conclude that had the Government brought in Dominion farm dairy instruction, the Government would have received considerable criticism, from districts which have hitherto not participated in the service. . . “ Nevertheless the general position today regarding fa'tm dairy instruction is, if anything, more unfavourable than was • the case at the time of our last conference. At that time there were some 3i farm dairy • instructors employed on behalf of dairy companies associated in this service with the division. These officers had on their programmes some 23,484 suppliers. At the end of the season which is just closing the number of farm dairy instructors so engaged has reduced from 37 to 31, and the number of sxippliers on the programmes of these officers next month will be reduced from 28,484 to 23,763 out of a total of 60,800 supplying tc dairy factories.”