DAIRY CONTROL

Press, Volume LXX, Issue 21308, 30 October 1934, Page 5

DAIRY CONTROL

TO THE EDITOR OF THE FBIS3. Sir,—lf "Avonhead" will send his name to me in confidence and can assure me he is a genuine producer, I am quite prepared to answer the questions asked by him in the correspondence columns of "The Press." But if he is interested or connected with a dairy company, only seeking information, no good purpose would be served.—Yours, etc., H. BLISS. Heathcote, October 29, 1934. TO TH* «OITOB Of THE PEBSS. Sir, For months past references have'been made in your correspondence columns to the state of the dairy industry. The produce of 50 per cent, of our dairy farmers, when delivered to the manufacturing stations, can be classed as good, 25 per cent, as fair, and 25 per cent, as unsuitable for making exportable produce, whether it be butter or cheese. Some of the unsuitable produce is produced in the finest cow byres in New Zealand so far as structures are concerned, and some of the best from most primitive surroundings. It is all a matter of cleanliness and good, white painted walls and white-tiled cow byres with foot warmers for the cows will not produce any better produce than the most primitive bush cow byre, unless cleanliness is observed. Some inexperienced people seem to think that if we build the latest types of bungalow cow byres and the latest design in dairy factories all our produce will then be finest quality, but such dreamers will find that dreams ana reality are not the same. The report of the Dairy Commission is a most disappointing document, and some of its recommendations savour of Russia. British people will never tolerate interference to the extent contemplated, and if the Dairy Board had done its duty in the last few years and worked with the officials of the Dairy Division the unsatisfactory dairymen would have been eliminated and the reproach that our produce was not satisfactory removed. The first Dairy Board antagonised the merchants and retailers in Britain by its unwise policy, and we have never recovered from that shock. Strong exception is also taken to the fixing of our exchange at 25 per cent., as British people consider we are "dumping" dair& produce into Britain; and if we fix a higher price- for butter for local consumption than London parity, this feeling will be greatly intensified. Control of our dairy produce has been a failure and has cost New Zealand millions of pounds. Control of the milk trade in Britain has been a failure, and at the present time the turmoil is tremendous. Farmers are being fined for disobeying the regulations of the Milk Board, bailiffs are in possession of farms, and groups of farmers up to 600 in number have prevented sales of farmers stock to satisfy the fines inflicted under the Milk Board regulations. Drastic regulations will drive the best of our dairymen out of business, as they will not tolerate undue interference. In New Zealand all that is required is the cleaning up of the careless dairymen, and this can be done by the stock inspection officials of the Agricultural Department without any increase in the number of inspectors. Abolish all boards and allow our exj porting firms free competition, and in I two years our dairy troubles will be i over, while two more years under boardn will about finish the industry. I In conclusion, I wish to say that I know the dairy industry of both this country and Britain. I am only interested in the producing end and so hold no brief for merchants or retailers, but anyone; with an ounce of common sense must see that the established houses which could buy and sell New Zealand are the only ones that can successfully handle the dairy export trade.—Yours, etc. INTERESTED. October 29. 1934. TO TBE IDITOR Of TUB FRBSS. Sir,—l read a letter in your correspondence columns about the dairy commission and must say that in my opinion the commission is one of the most important that our Government has set up. It seems to me by this report that a great alteration will take place through this legislation and put the industry on a more profitable basis for the dairy farmers, who have been powerless to rectify their condition themselves. . . But your correspondent signing himself "Accountant" thinks that we have no right to seek legislation to protect our industry, which is the main source of revenue to the country, and in conclusion I should like "Accountant" to go to the trouble o£ looking over some of the balance-sheets of various factories. It may interest him to see that there is very little left for the dairy farmers. I also think that our local markets should be controlled in such a manner that one factory should not enter into competition with another factory, as the case has been under the present management of factories.— Yours, etc., W. G. SHACKEL. October 29, 1934.