DAIRY COSTS

Evening Post, Volume CV, Issue 82, 7 April 1928, Page 8

DAIRY COSTS

*■"■ ARE OURS LOWER? AUSTRALIAN STATEMENTS COST OF LIVING " By the aid of tho Australian Tariff Board and various investigating Eoyal Commissions, the Australian public hears far more about the economies of its industries, both primary and secondary, than the New Zealand public hears. Most of these proceedings are .held in public, and aro reported in the ■ Press. Applications for tariff aid are .fought out as in a court of law, evidence being called both pro and con. . In fact, it is possible to hear in Australian proceedings statements concern-. • ing New1 Zealand industries that would never bo heard in this country, because New Zealand tariff investigations aro carried on out of the sight _and hearing'of the public. COULD NOT COMPETE WITH DOMINION. A body which has been hearing something about New Zealand dairy methods "is the Australian Royal Commission on dairying. On 28th March the Conimis- > sion heard, at Port Fairy, Mr. P. Walsh, manager of the Glaxo Milk Co,, who stated that he had great experience in New Zealand and eight years in Port -Fairy. The. first year they exported 1000 tons of dried milk and the second ;year 1200 tons. They now only dried for the. Australian market owing to the high cost of production as against New Zea■r" land. It cost £10 to £.14 more to manufacture in Victoria than in New Zealand. ' Wages were £3 15s .for seven days a there. Hero the wages were £4 32s 6d for 48 hours, and time and a half for overtime and holidays. • . They now had to manufacture cheese with' the surplus milk, but ' owing to tho high cost could not compete- against New Zealand cheese for export. Only 25 per cent, of their milk was dried. Tho method of '-." cheese-making in . Australia was most unsatisfactory, their factory being the only one that adopted New Zealand ,methods. If better'methods were employed the value of cheese would be considerably increased. Factories should not be allowed to put cheese on the market until properly matured. HERD-TESTING. Compulsory herd-testing (added this j "witness) was very essential,' and dc- \ monstration factories were also desir-j able. These were in existence in New Zealand.'- The cost of living was 25 per cent, higher than in New Zealand. ■ When their factory was erected it was intended to dry all their milk. • Mr. M. Burke, of Lake Gillear, dealing with the question of marketing butter, advocated tho introduction of leg- j islation to provide for a system of equalisation of prices similar to that in operation in Queensland. If such a system wore in operation in New South Wales and Victoria it would prevent market breaking and would benefit tho producers. ■ Mr. Bond (M.L.A.), presiding over -,'tli" Commission): In the event of an -ruslr;ilian price being arrived at. what .liquid you suggest would bo a reasonable price for butter-fat?" Mr. 'Burke: "I think Is 9d a pound butter-fat would bo a payable price." Mr. Glowry, M.L.A.: "If legislation gave power to fix tho price at Is 9d, what, benefit would the Tateison plan be1?" ■-. . Mr. Burko: "If the other States would not break tho market, Is i)d would satisfy me." Replying to other questions, Mr. Burko said that he was opposed to storing butter if it could bo avoided. As a whole he did not think the dairying methods in tho district could bo greatly improved. BUCKET TEST EXPERTS. '. He was not opposed' to testing, but thought that most dairymen could tell by the bucket whether a cow was profitable or not. About 2001b of but-ter-fat was a fair averago a cow. He '.thought the system of dairy inspection by the Agriculture Department more effective than municipal' inspection. Every factory manager should be a competent grader and tester. He agreed that tho amalgamation of the smaller factories in a district would be a good thing, but thought it should be voluntary. Mr. B. M. Buruic, Nirranda, said that he considered that herd-testing would have an uplifting .effect on tho industry, and he believed in purebred bulls and proper feeding. Culls from dairy herds should be branded. A demonstration dairy farm would be an excellent thing and more effective than visits from'departmental officers. Mr. J. 8.. Habcrfield.said that tho average price he received from Nestles Company was Is IOJd a Hi butter-fat. He gave figures to show that a farmer "milking one hundred cows on a farm worth £4000 would show a loss of £107, with an average return of 2001b ol butter-fat a cow, at Is lOd a Jb, allowing the basic wage of £4 10a a week for two men. Most farms were worked on shares, and by this method the dairyman could employ young children to help with milking. A family of six milking on the share basis of 6s in the £1 would earn about £.560 a year. ABOUT SHARE-FARMING. -Mr. John Mullholland, share dairy farmer, said that the conditions of the share farmer were unsatisfactory. The hours averaged 80 a week, and the basis of payment varied from 5s to 6s 8d in tho £1. The result was employment of child labour, and a wife had to take a month-old baby to the milking yard night and morning while she helped. Unformity of payment on the basis of •not less than a third should be introduced, and allowance should be made for other work done on the farm. Mr. P. J. Fogarty, herd-tester, gave evidence of the value of herd testing. He considered.that it was the only reliable means of ascertaining the quality of a cow.