MILK FOR CHEESE.

Hawera Star, Volume XLVII, 15 August 1928, Page 10

MILK FOR CHEESE.

THE CASE FOR THE FRIESIAN.

SECRETARY REPLIES TO CRITICS.

(To the Editor)

Sir, —j\lr Veale, in his report, showed that Friesian butter-rat yielded 13. < per cent, and Ayisiiire butter-fat U. 4 per cent more cneese than did Jersey butter-fat, and in his summary lie llaid the greatest stress on tines points: (a) ‘TJie need lor reduction in the minimum rat to 45 per cent-, in the dry matter of cheese; (b) the need for an equitable system of payment for milk supplied to cheese factories; and (c) the general adoption of the lower testing herds, e.g., Friesian and Ayrshire for suppliers of milk to cheese factories. Since the publication of the report many articles and letter's dealing with this question have appeared in the public press, and it is the object of the writer to criticise some of the statements made in these articles and letters.

Mr Topper, chairman of the Lepperton Co-op. Hairy Co., at the annual meeting of isliarcholdei's, made several statements, to which the following is a complete reply: When Mr t ,epper’ r s remarks aip read carefully it will, be seen that Jrns critic-, ism is vary weak —so weak indeed at® to agree with a term used by himself, ‘‘a. perfect fiasco.’’ Air Lepper made free use of extracts from Van Slyke and Publow’is '‘Science and Practice of Cheese-making,” and in the first figures quoted iic showed that Er.iesian butter-fat produced if.7Alb cheese per pound of fat, while Jersey fat produced 2.491 b. Air Veale’** figures, ar given in the Hawera report, are. i Friesian 2.5351hs cheese; Jersey 2.4944 b cheese. In Van Slyke and Publow’s book, on page 260 appear reasons for favouring tire fat basis lor the payment of milk, and Air Lepper evidently quoted these reasons as the considered opinion of the authors, whereas the authors are simply discussing different methods* of payment and quoting some of the arguments used dn favour of “payment on fat basis.” In the report of his address, Air Lepper i.s made toi say that “Van Slyke, PuLlow and their' assistants” -after hundreds of tests (not only three herds) anno to the conclusion that “cumulative evidence was unnecessary. These important truths are established, namely, that the best milk makes the best cheese and most of it. The milk which is the most profitable for butter is a»\sa the most profitable for cheese. The. best butter cow" is the best cheese cow.” Atav I point out that the above extract from “cumulative evidence” to the end is taken from an article by H. E. Alvord in five 1895 Year Book. United States Department of Agriculture. Surely Air Lepper can give us something a little more up to date in support of hi® case. Air Leppar wishes to know the, total! amount of cheese and the' total amount of milk produced by each of the breeds that took part in the experiment were: Jiersey, 55 cows quantity of milk was as follows: Jersey 290,7951 b, Ayrshire 256,0851 b, Friesian 491,427.1 b; but only 472,39411 b of the Friesian milk was uieed for cheesemaking, as during October, November and December the daily supply of Friesian milk frequently exceeded the capacity (2500 gallons) of the vat. I have not teen the figures for the total production of cheese, but 1 can give Air Lepper some further very interesting information. The three herd® in the exepriment were: Jersey, 55 cows on 165 acres; Ayrshire®, 45 to 50 cows on 100 acres, and Friesian, 70 cows on 129 aerps. Air Johnson, the owner of the Friesian herd, inform® me that his herd averaged 64 cows, and' that the total! butter-fat (actual factory returns) from his herd was 19,5691b®, the best three months—'October, November and .Decembe.i —giving a total of 7702.381 b, and the best month 2642.61 lbs from 77,724'1bs milk. 1 shall be very pleaded if Air Lepper will give me the butterfat returns from the Jersey herd. Air Lepper is made to say, “This cheewe (i.e. the cheese from high-testing milk) actually realised 2d per il'-b more than did others.” In Air Veale’s report the average value of the Jersey cheese, is isihown as 84.8305. per cwt, and of the Friesian 84.658 s per cwt, a difference of 2d per cwt in favour of the Jersey cheese. If we take the average production of cheese per lb of ibutter-fat (Friesian fat 2.8351 b dheeee, Jersey fat 2.4941 b cheese) together with this assessed price, we find that (Friesian butter-fat i*s worth 3.07 d per lb more than Jersey butter-fat for cheesemaking purposes. Air Veale. in his report, estimates the Excess value of Friesian fat at ‘something over 2d per lb’’ ancl the report also show® that Friesian fat produces 13 per cent, mope, cheese than Jersey fat.” “Factory Alanager,” in a letter which appeared in many of the principal! papers, states : “There is one point which seems to have been overlooked by Air Veale and others who have written on the question, and that i®, mot the yield per pound of butterfat, which is admittedly in favour of the low-testing milk, hut the amount of clhisese from a given quantity (of milk.” “Factory Alanager”, is surely aware that. payment i® made not on the milk supplied, but that payment is made' on the butter content and Ids own figures show that for cheese-mak-ing the low-testing milk with* 3.5 per cent, fat gives a return of 24.75 d per lb fat, while the high-testing milk with 4.5 per cent, fat gives a return of 22.5 d per lb—a return of 2Jd per lb in favour of low-testing milk. And that is exactly where the injustice of the present system lies —the owner of the lew-testing (3.5 per cent) herd is paid exactly the sains price a® the owner of the high-testing herd (4.5 per cent), while the fat from the* low-testing is actually worth 2-fd per illb more for. cheese-making purposes. Nowhere in Air Veale’s repoirt can 1 find any mention whatever of ‘‘water - logged” cheese, yet “Factory Alanager” infers that lie * does so, for “Factory Alanager” uses the words :“It to he regretted that a portion of our cheese contains excessive moisture, in other words, is waterlogged. Air. Voaie’s graphical records of the moisture content of the cheese show that in the beginning of the 'season the Friesian and Ayrshire cheese moisture content was 37.39 per cent., and the Jersey cheese 36-38 per cent. Later on in October the moisture content of the Friesian and Ayrshire was 39-41) per rent., while the Jersey cheese was 36-37 per cent, moisture. Towards the end of the (season the Friesian and Ayrshire showed 36-37 per cent., while the Jersey cheese was 34-35 per cent, moisture. After discussing “body and texture,” Mr Veale ®wmis up the position as follows: Milk reasonably low in fat can bo made into cheese of high moisture content which may have just sis good bodv and texture and be indisbingurthable on tluese grounds 'alone from another cheese containing much leas moisture and made from milk of higher fat content.” Mr Veale. in bis report, after dealing thoroughly with the quality of the cheese, summarised his opinions as follow®: ‘The facts of this investigation show that there is no necessary difference perceivable by physical examina-

tion alone between the body and texture of normal Friesian cheese low in fat and high in moisture, and that of Jersey cheese high iu fat and low in, moisture.” Again, All" Vealc, after pointing out that the |low-tosting (Friesian) clieose maintained the average of “first” grading, points out that the high-testing (Jersey) cheese fell away distinctly and finished up the season second grade. Air Veale ,summarises up the position us follows: “Those figures indicate that 4 to 4.5 per cent, of butter-fat represents the limit beyond which it is unsafe to go if one would make a. constantly good oheees of uniform body.” Air Veale’s report shows that Friesian butter-fat produced an • average of 2.8351 b Fat. while Jersey fat produced 2.4941 b cheese per ,!;b of fat. The 'average assessed value of Jersey cheese in London was 84.83 s per cwt, while Friesian cheese was valued at 84.66 a per cwt. Another important extract from. Mr Veale’s report reads: “The New Zealand daily industry is annually losing huge sums of money by exporting in overfat cheese enormous quantities of butter-fat for which there is no financial return. The only course left open is the more widespread adoption of the 'ower-testing breeds such as the Friesians and Ayrshire® in oheesemaking areas. The significance of this from the economic viewpoint is most import- “ The Jersey will always hold her own for high butter-fat production, combined with . a comparatively low food consumption.” This _statement is also hacdoieyed and unreliable. Experimental work show® conclusively in the words of the “N.Z. Journal, cn \gri culture.” February. 1928, that ‘‘heavv eaters of dairy type are those which" give the largest yields most economically.”—l am, etc., .1. P. KALAUGHER, . f~ec. N.Z. Friesian Association.