BUYING FARM STOCK FEEDS.

Otago Witness, Issue 3566, 18 July 1922, Page 10

BUYING FARM STOCK FEEDS.

Now that farmers supplement the usual home-grown stock fodders more or less, it seems high time that some light was “let in” on the general subject of buying high-priced “concentrates.” It is a question whether Dominion farmers, as a rule, give much thought to the composition of a foodstuff; and yet, no matter how much it may be advertised, its value to ■a farmer depends upon its nutritive value —in other words, on its composition and on the digestibility of its nutrients. All feeding stuffs worthy the name are composed of the same constituents (known as nutrients), but they differ widely in their value to the animal. It depends upon the extent and state of the following constituents Moisture, protein, fat, carbohydrates, fibre, ash. It is not enough to be content with ordering so much of one of the many by-products put on the market irrespective of their composition in respect to proteins and fat. We can take it for granted that the ordinaryroughages grown on the farm will supplyample carbohydrates. The need is largely for something of a nitrogenous or protein nature. We may consider bran as one of the most valuable “concentrates” used in the Dominion to-dav, whatever the position may be when whole-wheat-meal bread is in universal use. ' Bran is rich in digestible protein, and in addition possesses considerable amounts of digestible carbohydrates and fat and mineral elements. In milling wheat about 70 per cent, of the weight is obtained aa flour. The interior of the grain is rich in starch cells, with some gluten, and from this the flour is obtained. Bran consists of the outer coverings of the wheat grain and the rich aleurone layer, together with some starch particles adhering. Pollard contains the finer bran and some flour. In milling the wheat embryo, which is rich in protein and oil, is also removed, as it impairs the colour of the flonr. Bran and pollard contain more fat and protein than the original wheat, and the flour less. Bran is of peculiar value for the dairy cow, promoting the milk flow and furnishing the necessary protein and other nutrients so invaluable when other farm rations are of poor quality. Once the general public demand wheaten wholemeal bread en masse we may anticipate a general lowering in the nutritive value of bran and pollard, seeing that their once valued constituents as a stock feed will be extracted in order to make the loaf in reality “the staff of life.” In effect, we may expect more flour will be made from a given weight of wheat than is at the moment customary, with the result that bran and pollard will be scarce; and then comes the risk of adulteration. It comes to this: Farmers are entitled to know the nature, composition, and nutritive qualities of the more important stock feeds on the market. Something must be done t-o keep up the standard quality-, or. if impossible to do this, at least supply farmers with the percentages of protein, fat, and digestible fibre in stock .food. The price should depend upon the quality. At the last south-eastern Agricultural Bureau Conference at Mount Gambier (Australia), says the Adelaide Observer, it was resolved that a Bill be introduced into Praliarnent to prevent the sale of adulterated bran and pollard. The Advisory Board asked / the Director of Chemistry (Dr W. A. Hargreaves) whether any instances of adulteration had come under his notice, and whether he could offer any suggestion as to how such adulteration, if any. might be prevented. This called from Dr Hargreaves the following enlightening reply-: The conference has drawn attention to a desire that has been frequently expressed both in this and the other States for legislation to prevent the sale of adulterated bran and pollard. It- has from time to time been sueggested that standards should be fixed for bran and pollard, but this is not practicable owing to the nature of these materials and the various ways in which they are prepared for sale. The fact is that both bran and pollard are “offal.” They are products which are discarded during the manufacture of flour. Millers do not make bran and pollard. They make flour, and the bran and pollard are the substances left over, which by their present methods they- do not turn into flour. If wheat were properlymilled there would be no bran and pollard for the constituents of the wheat grain which are taken out and rejected as bran and pollard during tho manufacture of flour are those very ingredients

which are most necessary for human consumption. Already there are evidences of a world-wide awakening to the seriousness of the present methods of milling wheat, and as an illustration it may be mentioned' that the largest baking company in the world—the Ward Baking Company, of New- York—has this year given up the use of white flour entirely and adopted what the company terms “100 per cent, whole wheat flour.” As this company produces about ICO tons of bread a day, and has about 17,000 distributing agencies, it will be evident that it is actuated by no mere fad. Other bakers are sure to follow, and it is only a question of a little time before bran will be off the market. Its place will probably be taken bv the discarded inferior grain which is subsequently to be ground to flour. Whether, however, we regard things as they are at present, or as they will probably be in the near future, in both cases a- high standard of quality for offal is likely to act detrimentally with respect to the people’s itood. . . . Apart from the foregoing considerations. there are great difficulties in the pray of fixing standards for bran and pollard. These difficulties arise out of the fact that bran and pollard are by-pro-ducts in the manufacture of something else—namely, flour. The purpose of using bran and pollard is, of course, as food material for stock and fowls, and consequently they are to be judged by their food values. Many analyses of bran and pollard were made, and no satisfactory chemical standard was achieved in respect to the various mill products. Incidentally it was found that the food values of bran and pollard were higher than that of flour. For instance, the protein of both bran and pollard is generally higher than 14 per cent-., whereas the standard for flour under the Food and Drugs regulations is only 7j per cent. The chief complaints that are made respecting bran and pollard refer to the fact that substances sold as bran and pollard are not what are ordinarily known under these names, and it becomes not so much a question of standards as of definitions setting out what constitutes pollard. In order, however, to better control the sale of bran and pollard, legislation might be passed which would getover the difficulty of having hard-and-fast definitions and standards, and provide for each manufacturer of stock foods to be registered, and for the registration of brands, similar to the Fertilisers Act. Vendors could by this be required to guarantee their products as to nitrogen, fat carbohydrates, fibre and moisture, each fixing liis own standard. Provision could be made in the Act for securing the freedom from contamination by weevils, weevil dung, mould, sand, and dirt generally. Such an Act would be difficult to frame and administer, but it offers some hope for the protection of users of bran and pollard.” A farmer to-dav is called upon to correlate price with composition in the selection of foodstuffs, just as he does or should do when buying artificial fertilisers, and it seems in no way an Utopian idea t-o desire a vendor to furnish a guarantee as to protein, fat, and fibre content for such stock products which lend themselves to easv adulteration. We do not for a moment stress wilful adulteration, as there may be several grades of by-products on the market, but we do affirm that at present the farmer is not sufficiently safeguarded when compelled to come into the market for prepared stock foodstuffs. Finally, it should be born in mind that while the composition of a food mav be determined by analysis and is valuable information, the fact must not be overlooked that palatabilitv is a duality which may markedly influence a food’s usefulness. Palatabilitv and wholesomeness are attributes that can be ascertained only by actual feeding trials.