MILK SELLING OR SUTTER MAKING.

New Zealand Mail, Issue 1618, 4 March 1903, Page 65

MILK SELLING OR SUTTER MAKING.

If this subject is not perennial in these columns, it is one which is substantially perennial in discussions which relate to the respective profits of the respective branches of dairy farming. Prima facie it is more profitable to sell milk than to in alee butter, and yet there are men known to the writer who woxxld, if we are not mistaken, ridicule the bare suggestion that the sale of milk was a less profitable industry. The discussions on this subject fiy correspondents who are evidently so well informed would appear to be based upon given conditions, and so long as those conditions are allowed to stand, it is difficult to arrive at conclusions which are far removed from those which one or two writers have defined. Il ! , for example, we take a herd of dairy Shorthorn cows which have been kept essentially for the supply of milk to some distant town, then it must surely follow that the butter making capacity of the herd would be discounted when the question ox the respective profits of the two of sale of produce are discussed. The milk-selling farmer is aware that, so long as he satisfies his buyer by the supply or milk which is substantially above

the standard, his wisest conrs© is to aim at quantity, and therefore the larger the quantity of milk his cows produce the larger hi 3 money return. On the other hand the producer of butter seeks not so much quantity of milk as quality, and it is for this reason that so many highlyskilled amateurs are able to make their herds of Jerseys and Guernseys pay them so handsomely. It is not long since that from the farmer's point of view the Jersey was regarded as an amateur’s cow. which only MEN - OF WEALTH could afford to keep. It is possible that there are many who regard this famous breed in the same light at the present moment. It is, however, a mistake, and the Jersey Cattle Society has done great service through the medium of their butter tests in showing the agricultural wurld that the Jersey is essentially an economical cow, and one which it is difficult to beat under any conditions. A man who has taken the pains to collect or breed a herd of cattle which are rich milkers, and which in consequence provide him with a handsome return for butter, would be very unpractical if he sent his milk into the market at the price of the day, for he would assuredly lose by every transaction; and, similarly, it would appear, from the evidence which experience provides, to be equally unpractical for the owner of a carefully collected herd of cows intended for producing 'milk for sale to suddenly change his system, and to convert his milk selling into a butter making dairy. Some short time ago, Professor Woll collected facts which had been obtained as the results of public trials in England and America, in order to show the ACTUAL MILKING VALUE of the various breeds or dairy cattle. These figures include other breeds than those which we know in this country, and therefore we confine ourselves to a limited number. The richest milk was produced by the Jersey, followed by the Guernsey, the Devon, the Ayrshire, the Red Poll, and the Shorthorn, including unpedigreed cattle, in the order named. Three hundred and seventy cows, mostly dairy Shorthorns, produced milk containing an average of 3.73 per cent, of fat; while 275 produced a daily average of 4-3-ilb of milk containing 1.621 b. of fat. The Shorthorn, in a word, produced the most fat, the Jerseys coming only fifth; and the figures relate to over 400 animals. The daily fat yield of the Jerseys was 1.361 b. These figures , are not a little remarkable. We do not propose to base any estimate upon them, but they at least suggest that if the Jersey and the Guernsey are profitable butter makers, the dairy Shorthorn cow, as a cow, should be still more profitable. It must be admitted that when the question is brought down to actual detail in figures, a difficulty arises, which has beetn pointed out by one of our correspondents —and that is with regard to the value of the skimmeid or separated milk. One correspondent apparently regards this milk is -worth 6d a gallon. Another-—a very well known friend of wide and lengthy experience—has been, able to buy separated milk at Is per seventeen-gallon churn, and he re£ards it as well worth the money, but e apparently does not regard this mills: a 9 worth more than l£d or 2d a gallon for such. purposes as feeding calves and pigs; and here he is unquestionably right. Another difficulty relates to the ratio of milk to butter; and her© we can scarcely do better than refer to Irish figures, ■which are much more extensive and conclusive than anything which has been possibly jmblished. In the twelve years ending the 31st December, 1900, the cooperative creameries in Ireland had received over million gallons of milk, and had produced over 13£ million pounds of butter. The average quantity of milk, therefore, to produce a pound of butter was, in round numbers, 2.61 b.. each gallon producing 6.59 ounces. Making allowances for any sight discrepancy between the figures, these ratios are certainly indicative of a higher standard of butter producing capacity than, is indicated in one or two of the letters above compared, but it should not be in the slightest degree unfair to take 2.6 a.s a standard from which to work and upon which to base an estimate. A dairy coat yielding 650 gallons should, omitting the odd pint which dealers so often demand, return gross, .£2l 13s 4d. Here. ho>A r ever, comes in another difficulty. The cost of carriage may amount to l£d or it may cost only Jd, and this item alone possibly influences many persons who sell milk as ivell 'as many who make butter. A penny a gallon, which large numbers means £2 14s 2d per coav, or, in a dairy of 20 coavs, £55 a year. Our experience in this particular matter teaches us that the cost of sending to the station daily not only involves a large proportion of the time of one man, whose day is twice broken, but the maintenance of a horse, which, where the distance is considerable, is of little value for any other purpose, and a cart or van, and of harness; Avhere&s in a daily of any size the balance of the time of the driver Avhen he is not engaged in milkibg is practically occupied to the full in the cleaning of the churns in other AA'ork which is essential to the av ell-being of the industry. Taking, then, into consideration the cost of carnage, the cost of conveyance of the milk j station, the maintenance of churns, and the multifarious duties Avhich are involved m the business of selling milk;, quite apart from the Avork of milking, cleaning and feeding the stock, Ave can scarcely place the return, per cow at more than £l7. Avithout taking into- account the value of the calf. This figure is not arbitraly. It is merely indicated for tne purpose of making a comparison. It WO jw.- 6 lle< ; essar ily altered to suit the conditions of those farms Avhich do not comply w Itli 'fciios*3- whicli liciY& Tb&snj cliscussed, for under no circumstances, we appiehend, is l it possible for one individual to estimate the profit and less' account Avhich applies to a farm of wlr'ch ho lias no personal whatever he may have had with his own. “T.C.S." says that the quantity of milk required to make a pound of butter

from a mixed herd of good dairy nonpedigreed SHORTHORN COWS is not less than three gallons, and if this were the case under all circumstances it would not be worth Avhile, as Ave suggested early in these remarks, to discuss whether such a herd could make butter as profitably as it can produce milk. Noav, let us endeavour to see Avhat AA'ould be the result from a butter making point of vieAv if 650 gallons of milk Avere employed in this department, estimating 2.6 gallons to be equal to lib. The quantity of butter made in this case Avould be 2501 b., Avliicli is infinitely smaller than it should be, for a coav yielding no larger quantity cannot be regarded as a first-class butter maker. Mr Shanks, Avriting from Cumberland, says that the average of Is 3d per lb. is never experienced in his district. And yet lam acquainted Avith gentlemen, both farmers and private individuals, Avho, AA'hile engaged in other occupations, CAvn good herds of dairy cattle, AA'hose minimum price is Is 3d per lb., and who very seldom are compelled by competition to reduce their price beloav Is 6d; indeed, in some cases .Is 6d is exceeded; and it need hardly be added that the blitter being extremely fine the demand exceeds the supply. I do hot believe that it is essential to assume that the English maker of fine butter must necessarily regulate his price in accordancel with the cost of butter in the open market. As a. matter of fact, no butter arrives in this country which is equal to the finest of our own private brands, and especially those made by owners of Jersey and Guernsey cattle or of mixed herds. A man avlio makes for the open market, and Avho competes Avith imported butter Avith his eyes open, is not doing the best for himself. There are infinitely more buyers among the Avealthy than can. possibly be supplied Avith the article they require; and I Avould simply suggest, to any "reader who has sampled- any of the finest brands exhibited at the. London slioav, that if he applies to the makers for a regular supply he ryill find it next to impossible to obtain itf. I confess, too, that personally, AA'ith the names of dozens i-n my mind, I should not knoAV Avhere to obtain such a supply for myself at anything approaching Is 3d a pound at any time of the year. Although, however, I believe Is 6d can be realised by anyone Avho chooses to take the trouble to make the finest article, and to let the public know of the fact, in this discussion it would not be fair to take Is 6d a pound as a practical figure; but I have no compunction in taking Is 3d, because it can be realised, not certainly in the market, but by the ordinary process of personal effort, Avhich is so seldom adopted. At this price, then 2501 b. of butter Avould realise £ls 12s 6d. If. then, Ave add the value of 600 gallons of skimmed milk at l£d, Ave get £l9 7s 6d as the gross return in the butter dairy on the basis of those conditions Avhich Ave have adopted in this argument.

As a pig food separated milk has keen shoAvn to be Avorth 2d a gallon, and Avhether we take the results of the Wiltshire experiments in pig feeding, which are most instructive, or the results of private persons, one of Avhom I had in. mind —a gentleman on the Council of the Royal, Avho has done splendid work in. this direction—Ave shall find that 2d a gallon has been realised, and trier© is, therefore, no reason why it should not be realised again. As a food for calves, separated milk, enriched as in the case of the Yorkshire experiments, is fully worth 2d a gallon Avhen it is compared either with neAV milk or Avith calf meal; and those who have had experience in this matter will scarcely deny that the systematic use of milk in this Avay in the rearing of young stock is folloAved year by year by the gradual production of cattle, which always provides something to sell, growing rapidly into money, and. as it Avere, maintaining a substantial addition to the live stock of the farm, Avhich is seldom found Avher© the milk is all sent away, and AA r here efforts to breed are not- attempted.—Prof. Long, in “Agricultural Gazette."