THE BATTLE OF THE BREEDS.

Southland Times, Issue 21100, 4 June 1930, Page 3

THE BATTLE OF THE BREEDS.

To the Editor. Sir, —I wish to thank Mr Bourchier for correcting the error in my letter of recent date. Mr Bourchier’s figures, 749.261 b. cheese for Friesians, were correct, and I apologise to him for my mistake. Mr Bourchier states that Dr. Marsden’s figures appearing in the April Exporter show conclusively that grade Jerseys beat grade Friesians both in. butter and cheese. I am very pleased that Mr Bourchier has given me the opportunity of showing how unreliable are the deductions made by Dr. Marsden. The following table for example is included in Dr. Marsden’s summary: TABLE SHOWING RELATIVE YIELD FER UNIT OF FOOD VALUE.

I cannot understand Dr. Marsden’s compilation of .such a' table. In the- first place, what, guarantee has he that in the herds of the Herd Testing Association the breed of each cow is correctly given. W’hat constitutes . a grade cow of any particular breed, and can Dr. Marsden be certain that the cows were classified correctly. Does Dr. Marsden not know that a very great diversity of opinion exists among dairy farmers as to what constitutes a grade dairy cow. Weights of cows: The weights given byDr. Marsden are guesswork based on recorded weights, I presume, of purebred cows of the various breeds. How can a scientist base any of his calculations on guesswork figures. Unit of Food Value.—lt is absolutely impossible for Dr. Marsden to have had any evidence whatever to show the quantity of food consumed by each cow or even By each herd. How then can Dr. Marsden, as a scientific man, publish such a table purporting to give the production per unit of food value. I regret very much to have to state that this table compiled by Dr. Marsden showing the production per unit of food <alue is unsound in every particular, and Th-is highly. undesirable that a scientific man should issue such statements.

The Exporter’s interview with Dr. Marsden says: “A tremendous amount of detail work was involved in sifting the figures and in assessing averages on a basis of scientific accuracy.” May I say in all sincerity that the result has been more than a waste of energy—several of the tables compiled by Dr. Marsden should never have been published. We expect that a scientist before making deductions or compiling tables should pay particular attention to foundation work—a scientist must see that his foundations are sound—if not, his work is worthless.

I have before me a report issued by the Animal Husbandry Division of the Canadian Department of Agriculture which gives the fullest details of the cost of production of milk and butterfat per unit of food value for a whole lactation period of each individual cow in the pedigree dairy herds, Ayrshire, Fricsjan and Jersey, at their Central Experimental Farm. The table shows the kind and quality of food consumed by each cow, the cost of that food, together -with the individual production of. milk and butter of each cow. This pamphlet, the report of the Animal Husbandry Division for the year ended March 31, 1927, 1 strongly commend to the notice of Dr. Marsden. This Canadian record shows:

PROFIT PEP. COW. Ayrshire 99 dollars 12 cents. Friesian 130 dollars 33 cents. . Jersey 88 dollars 86 cents. Mr Bourchier says: “I am pleased indeed to hear of the Dutch outputs of cheese, but ask why did my friend sidestep. Where is its place on the London market?” As a wing threequarter in my footballing days long ago, I was adept in side-stepping, but nowadays I sidestep no matters in connection with this correspondence. The Weekly Dairy Produce Notes issued by the Empire Marketing Board, Vol. 1, No. 42, dated March 7, 1930, shows that the average prices realised in London for cheese were:

N.Z. finest white or coloured: .83/- to 84/- per cwt. Dutch Gouda cheese, full cream: 87/- to 89/- per cwt. On an output of 80,000 tons of cheese from New Zealand this difference means a yearly loss of £360,000 to the dairy farmers of New Zealand. Mr Bourchier will now admit that I have not sidestepped the question.

The remainder of Mr Bourchier’s letter is best answered by referring him to a most comprehensive and valuable report recently issued by Mr P. O. Veale, 8.A., M.Sc. A.1.C., on cheese manufacture in New Zealand. This report appears in full in the Ilawera Star of May 20, 1930, and I strongly recommend all those interested in dairying to read it. Mr . Veale deals particularly with the faults in New Zealand cheese. In his final remarks he says, “It is not without significance that New' Zealand cheese is now consistently ranked ■ third in quality and price on the English marKets.” '

Mr Veale deals most fully with the causes of the poor quality of New Zealand cheese. “There is a steadily growing consensus, of opinion in New Zealand that an excessive fat test in the milk is one of the causes contributing to the openness of bur cheese . ... . It is.universally admitted-that high-testing milk, when set with rennet, requires to be cooked at a higher temperature and 1 generally for a longer time than the product of a low-testing milk. It usually requires more careful handling and unless it receives the special ’ treatment ,which it demands, it gives rise to

weak-bodied cheese curds which are extremely open. For this reason every cheesemaker will indicate a preference for low-testing milk.” Mr Veale then stresses that “high-testing cheese curds have a tendency to become greasy after milling, and to exude a white whey which is very rich in fat. In the autumn, white whey containing from 8 to 15 per cent, of fat is by no means uncommon. When the milled curd is coated with material such as this, there is small wonder that proper cohesion during pressing is made very difficult, as the fat makes a greasy layer round each individual piece of curd which tends to separate it from its neighbour. During pressing, the fat often runs easily, and the interstices between the pieces of curd are filled with butterfat. Hence, in the autumn months unless most skilful handling is employed, it is quite common to see cheese so extremely open that the outline of each individual piece of curd can be traced through the bandage.” / Mr Veale further says: “Comparatively little improvement on the score of openness could be expected by reducing the fat content of such high testing milk by standardisation, except insofar as it would reduce promiscuous running of the fat and diminish the occurrence of butter sacs. The fat globules would still be large and semiaggregated and would still have a tendency to form greasy curds and to be easily driven off during pressing, thus hindering the complete cohesion of neighbouring pieces of curd, even if not creating a visible film or deposit of fat. Hence a Jersey milk standardised down to a fat test of, say, 3.7 or 3.8, is not identical with a Friesian or Ayrshire milk of the same fat test. These latter milks possess much smaller fat globules, and, in this condition, the fat is more easily retained, and has a smaller tendency to give rise to the defects mentioned.”

Mr Veale deals with the need: (a) for grading all milk. (b) for more care in methods of making the cheese.

(c) for a change in the methods and points of cheese grading. (d) The proper maturing of N.Z. cheese before marketing.

His proposed remedies are: (1) Institution of compulsory grading for milk for cheese-making with differential payments. (2) Encouragement of low-testing .milk from the recognized low-testing breeds by the institution of a new method of payment a constant premium of Id

to lid per lb. of butterfat would more nearly perform justice than the present “straight butterfat” system. . . . What is urgently required is genuine low-testing milk with its small fat globule to combat greasihess of curds, and to promote ease of cooking in the factory . . . Finally when this encouragement had borne fruit stand-, ardization would become unnecessary and obsolete. ‘ (3) Dispensing with pasteurisation as’ soon as the milk is up to the necessary’ standard of cleanliness.

(4) ’A return in the factory to slow and careful methods of cheese making. (5) Power to be given to, the Govern-, ment Dairy Division to have dairy com-j panies under observation at all times, and to withdraw licenses for export unless in-! structions were carried out. I have Sent Mr Bourchier a copy of the’ Hawera Star of May 20 containing Mr Veale’s full report.—l am , etc., .- I

, J. P. KALAUGHER, i Secretary N.Z. Friesian! . , Association, j May 27, 1930. Box 765, Auckland.

Assumed average Breed. Weight. Milk. Fat. Cheese. Jersey ... 9001b. 1.57 .072 .180 Milking Shorthorn 11751b. 1.52 ,.0fo .155 Friesian ‘ 11751b. 1.62 ' .062 .170 Ayrshire .. ..... 9501b. 1.70 .067- . .175.

Cost to produce Breed Average Days in milk milk 1001b. milk Butter, cents 11b. butter cents. Ayrshire .. .. .. 321 8111 372 99 21.6 Friesian .. .. .. 3z9 10985 458 86 20.5 Jersey .. .. .. 320 5669 317 129 21.0