DIRTY MILK.

Marlborough Express, Volume XLVII, Issue 145, 21 June 1913, Page 6

DIRTY MILK.

SOME PLAIN SPEAKING.

Brief reference was made in the opening speech of the^ chairman of the National Dairy Association at Palmerston North this week to the trouble with unclean milk, but the conference was hardly prepared for the unpleasant state of things brought under its notice by Mr Fred Nathan. He said the condition of milking machines and separators that had come under his personal notice were indescribable. Why farmers were not more alive to this shocking condition of affairs was apparently that they were accustomed to be so much among pigs that they did not know what dirt was when they saw it. In this matter it seemed to him that the Dairy Department was a department that "couldn't and wouldn't," but if something were not done to remedy this deplorable state of affairs the whole industry would be ruined, because 50 per cent, of the farmers were "too oussed lazy" to clean their dirty machinery. He suggested the appointment of Government inspectors to see that the milking machinery was kept in cleanly condition. Mr Powdrell: The dirty man is riding on the top of the clean man. * Mr Marks twitted farmers with spending half their time trying to get inspectors and th« other half in cursing them. Mr Nathan, resuming, said he could not and would not horrify the conference by describing some of the machinery he had seen. In his closing remarks, made later, Mr Nathan said he was not surprised at the righteous indignation that had been expressed. He hardly expected the representatives present to admit that they were the dirty people.

OFFICIAL STATEMENT,

Mr Cuddie (Dairy Cqmmissionor) said the cause of complaints in the quality of the cheese were traceable to a combination of circumstances. The cheese industry was forging ahead, but the milk supply was going back. In some districts the milk was not so good as it was or ought to be, and it was difficult to make >ai first-class clkeese when the industry was not in a small compass. He was not against milking machines; they were now indispensable, and ho was ■satisfied; in fact, he knew that good milk could be drawn through them, but many of the machines were not as they should be. Out of 300 machines inspected only 23 per cent, were clean, while 50 per cent, were very bad. "So bad. were they,' 'said Mr Cuddie, "that I would not like to attempt to describe them to you'on a public platform. The remainder were not so bad, but they were far from clean." There are 4000 machines in use, and we have to admit that one-half are not so clean as they should be. To appoint inspectors would cost £12,000 a year, but the factoryowners should themselves do something in this way. Something was required to be done to make the power of a factory manager to reject milk more real. It was merely nominal now. He knew that the manager was not backed up by his board. Mr Cuddie referred to dirty suppliers as realising more money for their unclean milk than they would otherwise do by its being united with clean milk, raising its own value but lowering the quality and value of good milk. He instanced the Kaupokonui factory, of whose cheese not a single complaint had been received.

Mr F. Nathan moved :-^- ---"That this meeting views with grave concern the public utterances of the Hon. the Piriine Minister (Mr W. F. Massey) and Mr D. Cuddie (Chief of the D.-.;ry:-,g Division) in reference to 'uiu influence milking machines are having upon the Dominion dairying produce, and! expresses the opinion that some steps should be adopted to investigate the evil."

This was seconded, and duly carried on a show of hands.

MR McNAB'S REGULATIONS

Commenting on this matter, the Wellington Post says:—Time is tending to show that the dairy regula-tions,-'which were ■ partly blamed for the defeat of Mr R. McNab in 1908, were wanted to assure cleanliness and therefore to promote the welfare of an important industry. Revelations of filth were made at Palmerston yesterday, chiefly in reference to the carelessness or laziness of many dairyfarmers who allowed their milking machines to become dangerously dirty. Mr I>. Cuddie repeated the figures wMch he quoted at Dunedin a fortnight -ago. His officers examined 300 machines, of which only 23 per cent, were clean and 50 per cent, very dirty—some in a state too disgusting lor mention in a newspaper. No doubt these dirtmongers howled more loudly than decent dairymen when the. McNab regulations were projected. They shuddered at the prospect of a revolutionary change from slovenliness to cleanliness. The slack ones roared that they were able to mind their own business, and they have done it in such a manner that the National Daily Association is alarmed, and has resolvsd "that some steps should be taken to mitigate the evil.'' It is estimated that the arm 3' of inspectors required to closely watch dairies would cost £12,000 a year, but it would be preferable to pay even that large sum rather than have the reputation of New Zealand's dairy produce ruined by dirty persons. However, Mr Cuddie indicated anot'ier way to reform. "It rested," he said, with the factory managers to refuse inferior milk, and the manager should be backed up by his directors." In too many cases suppliers are able to tyrannise over a manager, whose position is not enviable if he lacks that necessary "backing."