JERSEY V. FRIESIAN

Southland Times, Issue 23989, 2 December 1939, Page 15

JERSEY V. FRIESIAN

To The Editor Sir,—ln reply to Mr McFadyen’s letter cf November 15 may I state that milk and cheese-making is not paid for by weight or by the gallon—if it were so, the high-testing herds would be treated unjustly. The present method of payment on butterfat alone for cheese milk is, however, absolutely unjust to the suppliers of low-testing milk- I showed Mr McFadyen’s own figures that the supplier of milk testing 3.6 per cent, fat was being underpaid o.Bd per lb cheer? or 2Jd per lb fat as compared with the supplier of milk testing 4.6 per Ce Mr McFadyen asks, “Why not the public why Moreland’s got the cheese order for the' Wembley Exhibition, Now, sir, I have several times answered this question through your columns. May I repeat that the Dairy Control Board in ordering these cheeses tad no thought or knowledge of the breed from file milk of which the cheese was made. Mr Brash, then secretary of the Njw Zealand Dairy Board, stated most emphatically that at the time negotiations were being carried on with the private factory (Moreland’s) no thought was given to the question of breed and that he (Mr Brash) personally did not know what breed was being drawn on for that factory supply. Mr W. A. loms, a member of the New Zealand Dairy Board, personally dealt with tiie selection of display cheese at Wembley in 1925. These were selected from bulk supplies in the London stores. Both .Mr Brash and Mr lorns strongly deprecated the idea that any question of breed influenced them in their selection of these cheeses and expressed themselves as quite willing to sign a statement to that effect. Mr McFadyen writes of the huge savings in men, wages, and factory costs in handling high-testing milk. It will interest Mr McFadyen to read the views of three of New Zealand’s leading scientists on that question.Mr P. O. Veale, 8.A., M.Sc., A.1.C., says: “It js universally admitted that high-testing milk when set with rennet requires to be cooked at a higher temperature and generally, for a longer time than the product of low-testing milk. It usually requires more careful handling and unless it receives the special treatment which it demands, it gives rise to soft weak-bodied curds which are later extremely open. For this reason every cheese-maker will indicate a preference for handling lowtesting milk. Again, high-testing cheese curds have a tendency to become greasy after milling and to exude a whit: whey which is very rich in fat. When the milled curd is coated with material such as this, pressing is made very difficult, as the fat makes a greasy layer round each individual piece of curd which tends to separate it from its neighbour. During pressing, the fat often runs easily and the interstices between the pieces of curd are filled with butterfat.”

Professor Riddet, of Massey Agricultural College, and Dr E. Marsden (Director of the Department of Scientific Research), in “Problems of the Dairy Industry," says: “Evidence is accumulating that high-testing milk has brought increased difficulty in the manufacture of cheddar cheese, apart from the well established fact that high-testing milk gives decreased cheese return per unit of fat. It is more difficult, to make good cheese from highrtesting milk than it is from low-testing milk.”

Mr McFadyen asks: “Why was there a steep increase in the North Island grade (of cheese) last year and a decrease in the South?” I really am very sorry for Mr McFadyen, for his questions clearly show that he has no definite knowledge of his subject. Here are the official cheese grading returns (supplied by the Director of the Dairy Division) for the past seven years:— Average Points. Year ended North Is. South Is. July 31

Your readers will note that the South Island average grade has been over 92 points each year, while that of the North Island has reached 92 points only twice in the seven years. Again, South Island cheese has graded higher than North Island cheese in each of the seven years. In. conclusion may I most strongly emphasize that payment on butterfat alone is an inequitable method of payment for cheese milk. Note these two cases, for the 1938-39 season, of herds supplying milk to a cheese factory which is paying out on the casein-fat ratio method for cheese milk. (Herd No. 1) Butterfat supplied 6420.41 b Yield of cheese per lb fat 2.349 Cheese made 15,085.01 b Cheese payment £434/4/5 Payment if made on butterfat method £458/11/6 (Herd No. 2) Butterfat supplied 9348.71 b Yield of cheese per lb fat 2.607 Cheese made 24,375.11 b Cheese payment £695/18/11 Payment if made on butterfat method £667/14/7 Your readers will note that the lowertesting herd, No. 2, received £2B/4/4 more by the casein-fat ratio method of payment than it would have done under the straight butterfat system. On the other hand the high-testing herd, No. 1, received £24/7/1 less than it would have by the straight butterfat method. May I assure your readers that I am fully prepared to stand by any statements I make. All my references are carefully checked before publication. —Yours etc., J. P. KALAUGHER, Secretary, . New Zealand Friesian Association. Auckland, November 28,1939.

1932 91.566 92.631 1933 91.509 92.214 1934 ' 92.084 92.506 1935 91.988 92.095 1936 91.924 92.235 1937 92.113 92.256 1938 91.851 92.031