PAYMENT FOR MILK.

Press, Volume LXV, Issue 19813, 28 December 1929, Page 15

PAYMENT FOR MILK.

NEW METHOD SUGGESTED. Following the Royal Show at lnvercargill last month, a meeting of dairy farmers was held, when the subject of the method of paying tor milK bought for cheese-making was discussed. At present it is bought on the basis of its butterfat content, anil the meeting passed a resolution unanimously in favour of paying for such milk 'according to its casein content, as well as us butterfat content. \ representative of Thk Peess made sonic enquiries from those interested in the business in Canterbury, with a view to learning their opinions concerning this proposed new method ot pavment for miik for cheese-maiing. He was told that the proposed new method would be much fairer than the existing one, as under it the farmer, with a herd of cows which produced a comparatively low yield of butterfat hut a high "yield of casein, would no longer be penalised, as he was at present, by having to accept payment on a butterfat basis only. It was pointed out that Mr P. O. Veale, research chemist to the Federation of Taranaki Co-operative Dairy Factories, Haweri. made it clear that a knowledge of the fat test of milk was not all that was required in order to determine it* cheese-yielding capacity. The basic factor determining yield, he said, was the ratio of casein to fat. Milks naturally having a low fat test had a larger ratio of casein to each unit of butterfat than milk naturally rich in butterfat. and for this reason normal low-test milk yielded more cheese per pound of butterfat than normal high-teot milk. Mr Veale also advised that New Zealand should set up its own standards for cheese-making, and should not conform rigidly to the standards in America, where conditions were different from those in New Zealand. Dairy herds in the two countries were not the same, and the average proportion of casein per unit of fat is different in the two countries. Van Slyke's standards were artificial for the reason that they were calculated on the assumption that the cheese from all varieties of milk h&d a uniform moisture content of 37 per cent. This, said Mr Veale, was never true in average practice. Cheese made from milk testing over 4 per cent, of fat usually contained less than 37 per cent, of moisture, and the richer the milk the lower the moisture content of the cheese. On the other hand, low-testing milk made into cheese usually contained more than 37 per cent, 'of moisture. The fundamental reason for this difference was to be found in the fact that high-testing milk contained a low proportion of casein to each unit of fat, the ratio fluctuating from about 0.50 to a figure which rarely exceeds 0.6-3. Low-testing milk, however, generally contained not less than 0.65 parts of casein to 1 of fat. averaging over 0.70, and mignt even give a ratio of 0.80. These proportions of casein to fat were approximately the same in the different cheeses; and since casein was noted for its property of tenaciously retaining moisture, ample reason was adduced, said Mr Veale, for the superior moisture-carrying capacity of cheese made from low-testing miik. Lowtest milk with a high casein ratio certainly contained more casein per unit of butterfat than high-testing milk. Each pound of butterfat from low-test-ing milk was associated with more casein, and much more moisture than was the case with the product of hightesting milk. One of the factory managers who was seen said that about 12 years ago in Taronaki the method of payment now suggested was tried, but for some reason it was dropped. He did not know why; it was certainly the fairest method.