[?]

Rotorua Morning Post, Issue 2, 25 August 1931, Page 5

[?]

JBASIS FOR PAYMENT IS PRESENT SYSTEM UNFAIR? SHOULD STANDARD BE SET. The question of what class of milk should be supplied to a cheese factory, and the basis on which such milk should be paid for, is a matter of importance to national dairying, and the following article, written by a man deeply interested in the question and who claims to be unbiassed in his views as to breeds, should be of interest to the dairy farmers of this district. , "This matter of the milk supply and the basis-of payment for milk for cheese making is far too vital, to be shelved as a problem to be dealt with only by correspondents under letters to the editor in our daily newspapers, and ref erred to by many readers as a battle of the breeds. We look to the highest qaalified experts engaged in the dairying industry in this Dominion and the officers of the Dairy Division, of the Department of Agriculture to give us a lead. They should know by now the right quality of milk required for the manufacture of the finest grade .cheese suitable for the Home market, and what milk will produce the greatest quantity of cheese combined with quality :A the lowest cost, thus yeilding the h'gl-est returns to the primary produeer, the dairy farmer. lu would appear that first grade normal whole milk testing between 3.6 per cent. and 3.8'per cent butterfat will provide the factory manager with the ideal raw material to manufacture first-grade cheese containing the necessary legal limits of fat in the dry matter. The question evolves itself into this — Is it better to deliver 10001b of milk with a 4.5 test to a cheese factory than to deliver 12501b of milk with a 3,6 test? Both will yield 451b of butterfat. If the supplier is paid on a butterfat basis, he will naturally aim at the former, and thus save the handling and cartage of the additional 2501b milk to the factory for which he receives no payment. It must not be forgotten, however, that a considerable amount more cheese can be made from 12501b than 10001b of milk, as butterfat is not,responsible for half the weight of the cheese manufactured. Practical Illustration. Perhaps it may be as well to view this problem from different angles and illustrate the, position by comparing what actually takes place in practice when two suppliers deliver milk to a cheese factory, one with a high test and another with a low test, and allow readers to judge for themselves if the present system of payment on a butterfat basis only is equitable. Supplier No. 1 (J. Smith) : — Total butterfat supplied during the year, 18.0801b. Supplier No. 2 (A. Morris) : — Total butterfat supplied during the year, 18.0801b. .

At ls per lb butterfat, each supplier receives the same amount, £904. J. Smith's average test was 4.41 yield 2.63; consequently the amount of cheese made from the milk he supplied was 47,5501b. A. Morris' average test was 3.616; yield 2.765; consequently the amount of cheese made from his milk supplied was 49,9901b, which is 24401b more than that of J. Smith. Why should not A. Morris, therefore receive full payment for the extra 24401b of cheese made from his milk? With cheese at 56s per cwt., this represents £61 and with cheese at 63s per cwt., its present market value, the difference would be much greater. Can it be said, therefore, that payment on a butterfat basis is fair? Furthermore, it is recognised that a test much over 3.8 per cent. is unnecessary for the making 'of the first grade cheese for the home market. Probably the consumers may not mind the additional fat, but they certainly will not pay for the extra fat content. Consequently the farmers of this Dominion will make them a present of it, if ' they continue to manufacture cheese from a high test milk now that standardisation has gone west. Guide Wanted. It is therefore in the interesis of cheese suppliers that a guide should be given by the Department of Agriculture as to what is the right class of milk to be delivered to cheese factories. The great majority of the herds supplying such factories are composed of grade cows, not pedigree cows of any partieular breed. If the average herd test is high, a number of cows giving a greater quantity of milk with a lower test, should be added, and vice versa. By the adoption of this system the supplier will deliver the class of milk best suited to eheese-making and he will thus be paid fairly for what .he delivers at the factory. This is all any supplier expects. • It is useless to continue to supply what is not wanted. If a sheep farmer delivers fat lambs at the market under 281b or over 361b in weight they are classed as second grade and he is paid accordingly. Ihdications are that the requirements of fat in cheese for the market for which we cater are not as high as we have been led to suppose, and no adequate premium in price can be commanded by cheese substantially higher in fat content. Hence the use of high testing milk for cheese-making is economicr)lly unsound for the reason that no return is obtained for a very considerable proportion of excess butterfat. The following figures may be taken as an example of what average tests and yields might be expected in our cheese factories from August to March: —

Payment on a fat plus casexn basis has been frequently suggested, but if the casein test cannot be readily determined for this more equitable system of payment, then the payment of a premium -for first quality milk subjeet to an approved standard butterfat test, is the system to -adopt.

Month . Test Yield August 4.0 2.72 September 3.8 2.77 October 3.7 2.79 November 3.8 2.75 December 3.9 2.72 January 4.2 2.62 Feruary 4.3 2.61 Marc# 4.5 2.55