THE FARM INDUSTRY

Dominion, Volume 2, Issue 498, 4 May 1909, Page 8

THE FARM INDUSTRY

THE MILK STANDARD IS 3.25 TOO HIGH? - Tho Health Department lias • frequently boon assailed on account of the,high. cream test fixed for-Now Zealand milk. The law of Now Zealand provides that no milk may bo sold as milk .unless it contains at least 3.25 of butter-fat, . and also • certain percentages of other solids. If tho milk bo deficient in either, the vendor is liable to be dealt with as if tho milk had been watered. It is by no means rare in New' Zealand and elsewhere to find individual cows yielding a milk which does not moot the requirements pftho ■standard. ' Using' this as an. argument, 'some have. contended that the.' standard '. is too high. In support of that contention it has been pointed out that,' at the various butter-fat contests,: there is. often a valuablo cow competing. whoso. milk, though copious 'in quantity, is deficient in "tost." At the Mastorton contest there were three cows deficient in. test, at Wairarapa' ono, and at tho Sydney Eoyal Show several. '~ : ; ,A point,, however, that,is usually ignored by tho assailants of the standard is the fact that no dairy fanner is prosecuted because one cow in his hord giVes a, poor, milk. Trouble comes only when the mixed inilk of the whole herd, falls below the standard, and that is an exceedingly rare occurrence. Mention has. boon made, of .the fact'that the Sydney champion cow, . "Success," gave a milk whioh' was below the! New 'Zealand standard.'< This occurred only at same of tho milfcings._ - Her test ranged from 2.75 to 3.8j and, taking these two'figures' as a basis, her average test would be 3.275,. which is above the New.-Zealand. standard. 'Hera was the lowest test in the competition. .Again, if: one take the lowest, testa recorded for, each of the ten cows competing,'; and judge; them at'their worst, they, are found jointly to meet the New Zealand standard." The ranges if testa of Hie ; ten : cows-were as follow.— . .. ■•■' -;''■■ ''"'■''•' •'."'■:' .Lowest. Highest. Empress, JX ..■:;„. ,_. 4.1 •. 5.5 Polfie, JX ■..: ; ; ..•..'... ~..U.3:: '6.3' -Katherine, : 'S. :,...- . ..•.': 3.0 v 3.8 : Jennie, 5.,:../ ... ... 3,3 ! •''. 6:1 "Dora, .J.. ... : /;..-. ... • 141'' 5.6'" Toohoy, SX r : ... >. ... 3.3 .5.1- ■,'.'. Pickup,. A.S. .. ■■..: ' ■■ .... 2.9 .■■■ 4. - v A.S.. ; , ...' 2.75: .■■.'■ 3.8 '.'•" ■i Gold, G.:! ... :• .U , .„ 2.8 .5.4- ; ■j ... : , ; ...: 3.2 . -4;65 ■ •■; i--':; : ;j ./-Average '.*-.. Y./.i;. 3.4 y ■ ' 5.07;; ,;Thus,\ev6n if all these cows as a herd cavo, at; the ■same inilking, their lowest tests, thei 'mixed milk would .etill. have been above tho New Zealand standard. However, one cannot safely. judge -this- matter' on the milk•.' of picked cows, even at thoir lowest tests. -. but the example will suffice to.show ,, the impor-. tint difference ■ between individual test ■• and mixed test; .:■".;.;. '■■-..-. •■■':■] ::. -ify-'i .-v. ■■■: . : ; The New Zealand standard no doubt existe for two .objects :—(l) To prevent the sale of watered milk, and (2) to prevent tho sale of muk. of: very, .low■','.nutritive value ■ Each of these objects-is impoftant'in the eyce of consumers. One.has yet; tio;]earn of any. Now Zealand herds whose mixed milk falls bejow tho standard,, and, ,even if there "wore'.such JnstaDces,. it would merely indicate the'need of; mtroducing into' the • herd :■ a . fow,-,-, »ws giving higher tests to tone: upi -the whole.' ■lo comply with the standard is obviously not impossible. It is aunply'a question, of improving, the herd's milk; at an outlay of money., llhe; essential matter is whether' the standard is a fair one viewed commercially— whether, under the ruling conditiona of the milk, industry, a supplier-can .' reasonably, comply. On'.that investigations into the. quality of New Zealand herd ■'milk;, and into tho ranges of variation in tho tests, may perhaps bo desirable. -The results would afford the fairest possible.basis on whioh to discuss the reasonableness of the standard ■