DAIRY FARMERS AND HOME SEPARATION.

Taranaki Daily News, 21 July 1915, Page 3

DAIRY FARMERS AND HOME SEPARATION.

S ; r, My attention has been direct.'*! to a letter appearing in vonr issue of even .late, dealing with (lie home Hfrpur.itii.ii system appertaining to the Moil Dairy Company, anil over the sign iture of tr. A. Hunt. His principal argument-, against the introduction of tiesystem arc:--(li The possibility of lowering the quality of the butter outpu'; (2) the possibility of margarine competing v.it!, the butter market: (.",) the asset tlie company possesses in its creameries, 1 admit that butter made from home separated butterfat has not graded within two or three points of the fact, ry separated butterfat. but why:- It i« a ca.-e of comparing old mr-tIK-fU with new, and benefiting !>v tli; experienc." of other:-, liutter made'from home -eparat.-d fat has not reached the possible standard of quality because the method-* the fanners adopt arc not in accordance with requirements. ff a farmer cools the butterfat as it comes from the separator, and keeps it cool, there i- no practical reason whatever why the- quality of the. article should deteriorate. The possibility of margarine superseding butter is rather remote as far as butter for table use is concerned, f have- seen it in the process of making, and the principal reason it is on the market is because it is n line substitute for low grade butters, which used to be mad' for cooking purposes in sweets, biscuit, and pastry manufacturing businesses, but as for coining into general table use. one might as well assume that c.ndeused milk has replaced fresh cow's milk, as was the prediction years ago. From what I understand, "each creamery belong to the individual suppliers who supply it witli milk awl cream. For the erection of these cream cries the company allotted a certain number of shares, which taken up by the v. ;,i'.ld be creamery suppliers. The building-, plant, and laud are assets, but as a payable business concern, no. in four instance-. The cost of running Lincoln Itoad, Katapiko, UVitui. and Bristol !!ond creameries is not defrayed by the supplier- of those creameries,'because the supply is too small. The suppliers bought the creameries, but in order to keep them (join;;, and to supply the Moa Company, they expect the main factory and the paying creameries to p.i ,- the deficiencies in the working costs of those 0:1 which the company as a wholv shows an annual individual loss. As far as the share value of the creameries is concerned. I will ask Mr. Hunt one question. Tf a supplier decides to gi.-e up milking ami goes in W sheep, who would buy that supplier's creamer/ shares, and what would they rcalis"'? Calcidations reveal, to us that'the dairy company which follows the practice of making it necessary for suppliers to cart their milk to the factory, so that they may get the butterfat taken from it in order to make the bye-product (skim milk) ready to feed their calves and pit's, burdens the individual suppliers with such waste of time, money, and energy as to limit the suppliers' efforts in the direction of more profitable and scientific farming, by compelling him to cart thousands of tons of milk to the factory, to the detriment of roads, horses, vehicles, harness, and profitable labor! Tf the company would undertake the cost of carting at, say. £IOO per month, the suppliers would be saved a vast amount of money, of time, wear and tear on horse, harness, and cart. Were the basis of calculation, when figuring out the cost of making the product, and i.f the company could sec its way dear to reducing th;- running cost of the factory by .CIOO to advantage, they woull jump at the opportunity, so why not start economising on the farm. V.ome separating reduces the collective quantity of milk carted on the roads to the individual quantity of butterfat required for the factory's output. For instance, a supplier with lOOOlbs of milk at a 4 per cent, test carts lOOOlbs to the factory and 1)001 bs home again, where 401bs is necessary or.e way only. Tn the same ratio he carts during a nine months' milking season 2201 tons for no purpose whatever. Taking the same supplier a? living one mile from the factory. During nine months of the season he carts 220} tons 504 miles, and 10-es 21 full working day a (at one hour per day), io

cart. Apart from that, the company's working expenses would be reduced by ■.i: 11)00 per annum if the creameries v.-ie closed down, which would mean approximately one farthing per lb extra to tin supplier for his buttcrfat. Ucgarding factory managers receiving . oniniissioii (;?■ remuneration for ad,<- ■ ■■iting home Separating, it may be true Unit some separator linns adopt the practice of recognising the assistance given them for promoting business. I a!- : ; ways advocate giving the supplier thbenefit of any concessions going in jir-- ■ i'orcnee to allowing the company ten 0.fifteen per cent, to swell the company's profits at the expense of the scparal- ! purchasers. It is well for farmers to remember that a dirty separator will not ' skim, that a farmer can skim as cleanly 1 is {he faetorv. and cleaner in some ia--1 stances if he uses the right machine. -- Yours, etc.. AUTOMATIC. Jiiglewood, .lulv 20, lfll.-).