CHEESE DETERIORATION

Taranaki Daily News, 20 October 1930, Page 6

CHEESE DETERIORATION

SUSPENSION OF STANDARDISATION

TARANAKI FEDERATION'S DECISION

MR. lORNS’ EXPERIENCES AT HOME

‘ r' That all is far from well with the quality of New Zealand cheese on the British market was made abundantly clear to a very representative gathering of nearly 200 dairy factory dueclois anc > those actively identified with the industry at Hawera. on featurday by Mr. W. A. lorns, chairman of the New Zealand Dairy Produce Board. After hearing from him plain statements of the opinions of importers, wholesalers, retailers, and even consumers, legaiding the deterioration in the quality of New Zealand cheese, and the con- - demnation of standardised cheese, the'meeting passed a resolution urging the suspension until March 31 of the regulations permitting standardisation, and warmly thanked Mr. lorns for his address.

The meeting was convened by the Taranaki federation of Dairy Factories,, and Mr. T. A. Winks (president of that body and a member of the Dairy,Produce Board) presided. Among others present were Messrs. J. Hine and J. R. Corrigan (memjiers of the board) and A. Ross (Dairy Division staff), Professor W. Riddett i( Massey College) and Mr. P. 0. Veale (Hawera Dairy Laboratory). .The following companies were represented:—Alton, Ararata, Awatuna, Cardiff, Eltham, Hawera, Joll’s, Kakaramea, Kaupokonui, Lowgarth, Mangatoki, Mells,. Melrose, Meremere, Ngaere, Normanby, OaonUi, Ngutuwera,-Manutahi, Pihaina, Riverlea, Stratford Farmers, Waitoitoi, Whakamara, Whenuakura and Royal Oak.

In introducing Mr. . lorns -Mr. T. A. Winks, president of the federation, remarked that he had particularly;' desired to address Taranaki dairy farmers, who would find his observations during his recent tour of very great interest to the ' industry. > ■Mr. lorns, who was given a cordial reception, expressed pleasure at seeing so many present. He was dealing, he said, with the cheese position as he found it in the Old Country when he was there recently. He was not putting the views of the Dairy Board before them as that body had set up a committee to meet the Director of the Dairy Division. He would give straight out the opinions of the trade that was handling their produce—not only the . importers of Tooley Street but the wholesalers, the retailers and also the consumprs. ' ; ■. . ' ' i RIDICULED AS PROPAGANDA. A cablegram sent by. the New Zealand Dairy Produce Importers’ Association, Tooley Street, on June 20 to the New Zealand Dairy Produce Exporters’ Association in ’Wellington had, -unfortunately, been ridiculed in some quarters) as propaganda and had not been given the consideration it deserved. The 'cable stressed the fact that it, was unanimously agreed that New Zealand cheese showed a pronounced general deterioration and that the standardisation rd cheese had, undoubtedly lowered its prestige. This was reflected in the declining consumption and a consequent lower level of i prices. It was the importers’ opinion that i consumption and prices could only be improved by reversion to full cream cheese, and that grading in New Zealand should be considerably tightened. Mr. A. Ross and Mr. W. Wright, together with the speaker, were present at the conference which sent that message, and they knew the importers in all sincerity expressed their honest belief. He had sent out a questionaire, and the replies from all the Tooley Street agents, including all those that handled the New Zealand Co-operative Dairy Company s produce and .the Cambridge Dairy Com pany’s produce, were just as emphatic as the. cablegram that standardising was no good to the interests of the New Zealand cheddar cheese. Every agent handling Waikato produce had replied, and he could assure the meeting that as far as skimming and moisture in the cheese were concerned Waikato had “nothing on Taranaki”; indeed, as far as Waikato was concerned the quality of its cheese was no better than Taranaki’s. He was struck by the very serious complaints made by the representatives of the trade throughout England. He had received a letter from the National Federation of Produce Merchants, Ltd., stating that it had. passed a resolution to the effect that standardised cheese owing to its non-keeping qualities was detrimental to the trade and it was hoped the matter would receive attention. He had also set but to meet not only the representatives of the importing houses but also the whole; salers, retailers and consuming public m order to ascertain what they really thought of New Zealand cheese. It was a heartrending job, and though he did not become panicky, the dairy fanner must realise from the opinions that he had obtained first hand that the quality of the cheese jras being severely criticised. COMMENTS FROM ENGLAND. The following were some of the comments: “New Zealand cheese is not now suitable for the best trade. Standardised in particular has become unpopular There • fe not enough flavour, too many cracks and apparently too much moisture. TV axing accentuates this defect.” '“Canadian' cheese superior to New Zealand and always commands a “Has to make too many returns of rejected Nerz Zealand cheese to importers. ‘ Some of our societies are concerned as they get cheese one week marked full cream and another time standardised. These cheese are criticised in a way not in the interests of New Zealand production ■“New Zealand cheese is being well taken no by many customers and my only suggestion is to keep to full cream cheese, and now that Scotch cheese of late are not so satisfactory all the more need for New Zealand to put on the finest they can pro-

U "Any New Zealand cheese we have ■handled has been quite satisfactory* The «l e of cheese is not being maintained, largely through packet cheese being pushed so strongly. . . '’Standardisation has not been beneficial o traders look askance at anything that haS' 3 suggestion of skimmed milk about it and we recommend discarding same. Quality has not been so favourable as compared with former years, and J’ e . traders’ ideas of quality should be raised. Some of the opinions of Urge and representative retailers showed plainly that standardisation was detrimental to the New Zealand cheddar cheese trade as traders looked askance at it, Mr. lorns declared. He cited numerous opinions, including some from very large departmental and multiple shops. Among the replies were the following: ''New Zealand cheese_ unsightly and too jnuch waste when cutting. ’ . "New Zealand cheese not stocked; quality not good enough for their trade.” "Sell little New Zealand cheese as quality not good.” .. "Sales of New Zealand cheese are neglr jpble.” i , Zeidand cheesp not good as ;

formerly; sell many more Canadian than New Zealand.” ’ DISAPPOINTMENT AT QUALITY

One big departmental shop had bought on grade, paying for “finest” and “extra.” The firm was most disappointed at the quality that graded finest. . The most disappointing feature was that a large quantity that had been graded finest in New Zealand was' not of sufficient quality to be retailed by the firm, but was put back on to the Tooley Street merchants to sell again. There was no doubt the quality was drifting back and shops were receiving 3d and 4d per pound more for Canadian cheese. One head of a concern with 500 ehope and 1500 delivery vans said that the best advice, he could give was for Mr. lorns to tell the New Zealand farmer to eliminate skimming, for in England they did not call .it standardising, but skimming. Some years ago that , man was a big purchaser of i New Zealand 'cheese.' Another head of a Multiple concern in Birmingham told him that his customers looked askance at standardising!, New Zealand cheese was being replaced by Canadian, which -was more tasty and was full cream. Another buyer had not touched New Zealand cheese since’'standardisation was introduced. ’

“I want you to realise,” Mr. lorns said, ‘that no matter what you determine to manufacture in New Zealand, unless you make what they want in England you are not going to get anywhere. Taranaki is not the only district at- fault., I tell you there is serious deterioration throughout the whole of New Zealand as far a« the export of cheddar cheese is concerned.” He could assure them that botk Waikato and Taranaki cheese had gone, back in quality. He instanced a case where a complaint had been made and a cheese from a Taranaki factory had been cut in front of him. “It was as open as Bell’s Life,” he said, “full of big splits.” ' That evening he had met Mr. T. C. List, of the Taranaki Daily News, and, in discussing the matter Mr. List mentioned that he would like to see the cheese as he was very much concerned over the quality. They had accordingly visited the store next morning and had found that it had opened up further over night, to an extent that one could hardly credit;; indeed, it ■was quite possible to stack three or four half crowns on each other in some of the slits. The buyer said that he did not want any more New Zealand cheese.

Investigations in Liverpool showed that the demand was slow and j quality poor. They were payirig 25s io 30s more for good Canadian. He had a peculiar experience in a big Multiple store when, he was asked to look at the rat box. That was a big box filled with pieces of cheese that were full of big iron holes where samples had been taken out, and most of them were bigger than the ordinary cheese iron. Another firm that handled Waikato cheese said that if standardisation continued it would mean nothing short of ruination for the New Zealand cheese trade. Some retailers said that New- Zealand cheese was much too wasteful. One big Liverpool firm was not handling as much New Zealand produce as formerly. The Midlands was the biggest' cheese consuming district in England, yet one large Birmingham firm was not stocking the New Zealand article as it was not good enough.” “New Zealand cheese is losing its trade. It is time you were told the truth. England ■will not have food products that are tampered with. The manufacture of standardised cheese is becoming unpopular. Unfortunately the consuming public looks upon all New Zealand cheese as skimmed cheese. The texture is poor .md there is a big wastage in cutting.” One firm handling some Waikato cheese had told the speaker that the London County Council barred skim cheese from its contracts. Another firm had said that, though it had been told that it was as good as full cream, it did not want any more standardised cheese. ‘I have given you conclusive evidence,” Mr. lorns proceeded, “What more do you want ? If you don’t believe it ask Mr. Ross. He’ll tell you lam correct. It is damning the whole of New Zealand, cheese.”

Referring to some waxed cheese, Mr. lorns said that inside one he had seen a slippery, slimy mass. That was graded at New Plymouth. Something would have to be done to prevent factories . putting water instead of other matter into the cheese. Mr. Wright had re-graded in London cheese coming from not far from Hawera, The New Zealand grading points for body and texture had been 274, Mr. Wright reducing it considerably. Mr. J. R. Corrigan asked where the cheese came from. Mr. lorns: Glover Road, Hawera. It should not have been exported. Mr. Corrigan: That was an experimental cheese. Mr. lorns still .considered that the cheese should not have been sent Home. Another Taranaki cheese he had seen had been black and not fit for human consumption. The importer did the factory a good turn by selling it at 50s. Unfortunately the retailer, lost the whole lot inside of ten days. The factory might have beep disappointed at the low price, but the (pity of it was that it should have been sold. Unfortunately some foreign ,matter had got into the cheese. Some cheesp -would not stand up to re-

grading, and it had been said that when it had been made the factories must have been making puddings. ■>

IMPORTERS’ OPINIONS. 1

Mr. lorns referred to the questionnaire he had submitted to the importers and asked Mr. G. A. Duncan to read the replies received. One reply was that. the texture of New Zealand cheese , was too open. It was becoming less and less popular. It was considered that waxing prevented maturing.

Another was that there was not a regular differentiation in price between standardised and full-cream. Looseness in texture was the 'outstanding defect in New Zealand cheese, and then came lack of flavour. The price differentiation between Canadian and New. Zealand cheese might be partly accounted for by differences in manufacture. For instance, 90 per cent, of New Zealand-cheese was pasteurised and 90 per cent, of Canadian cheese was non-pasteurised. Therein was a big field for discussion. Certainly New Zealand cheese was looser than before pasteurisation, nor did the cheese develop the fine flavours of 15 or 20 years ago. Even unclean flavours were preferred by a large section of the public to no flavour at all. •

Once New Zealand cheese wap cut it would shrink. Standardised, and waxed cheese! got hard much sooner, the rapid evaporation of the extra moisture probably accounting for this condition. There was an opposition to standardised, pasteurised and waxed cheese. That was why there was a premium of up to 30s for Canadian. Buyers would be glad to pay more for New Zealand full-cream. New Zealand-was tending to send forward what tlie manufacturers and, graders approved of rather than the class of cheese the British public was, prepared to pay for. New. Zealand should copy the Canadian article closely as possible. 1 Another firm, confessing no real technical knowledge, expressed the belief that pasteurisation might, have an effect on flavour.

Another firm stated that New Zealand produce instead of.showing a slight improvement was slipping back further. Canadian cheese was closer'cutting and preferable in flavour. Though not technically expert, the firm attributed the neutral flavour to pasteurisation. Twenty years ago, prior to pasteurisation, the cheese had far finer flavour, Improvement was vitally necessary • to the industry. Another firm complained of insipid and dead flavours, combined with loose and open texture. The curd did not appear to knit together and when standardised was not full of holes it had big cracks. Apparently standardisation had altered the whole characteristics of the cheese. Ou the subject of waxing another reply said: "Waxed cheese are gasbags.** Another opinion was that the quality of cheese had deteriorated. On a normal market there would be a preference for

full-cream'and a slight prenffum. A return to full-cream would be beneficial. One firm stated that'the quality had improved in the', last two seasons,., but was below that of five years ago. Greater maturing would be desirable. Pasteurisation appeared t 0 kill flavour. Standardised certainly did not sell as readily as full-cream cheese.

HIGH' TESTING MILK CONDEMNED.

One firm, said its customers generally stipulated fulLcream, but some small retailers would buy standardised. Its opinion was that Jersey milk was by no means ideal for making cheese and Red Devon, Shorthorn or Friesian would be more suitable.

Another reply said large numbers of buyers refused standardised cheese. Grinders were turning their attention to Canadian cheese. There were indications of a premium for full-cream and standardisation was not in the interests of the' trade generally. " ■ One reply was received stating that there' was nothing wrong with standardisation. Those who knew the real merits would as soon have New Zealand as. Canadian.

The quality of New Zealand cheese had deteriorated more last year was a converse opinion, and a return to fullcream wa? suggested as standardisation and waxing had adversely affected New Zealand cheese. Factories . had been jockeyed by scientists into a scheme that was jeopardising the industry.

Another opinion was that there was always a preference for full-cream. It was apparent that the manufacturers desired quantity instead of quality. It was hardly practicable said another firm that standardised should receive the same price as full-cream. Full-cream was’ much preferred and usually the quality was better. It would have benefited the industry if it had stuck to fullcream. Canada showed no intention of following New Zealand. Another importer thought there was no tendency towards differential prices. Canada secured the high class trade. During his gravels in the , north,, Mr. lorns continued, he had met several men who had told\him that Latvia, which was exporting. 11,000 to 12,000 tons of butter, wgs thinking of. turning its attention to cheddar cheese, which it could do as it was'sending whole milk to'the factories. If Latvia produced cheddar cheese New Zealand produce would Have to go down another step. The New Zealand producers must stand shoulder to shoulder and must assist themselves. They could be sure of assistance from the Agricultural Department. More money must be expended in scientific research, which would be a slow process. He depreciated any split in the ranks by reason of one district determining to manufacture standardised and another full-creain cheese. There were many difficulties to overcome, and one was to see that the best quality milk was supplied to the factories. The regulations regarding farm inspection should

be tightened up.. It was up,.to the Agricultural Department to insist that the best quality mifk was, supplied to factories,. Taranaki, he recognised., had a. problem of its own in regard to the high butter-fat content, in milk- He was not going to tell them how to get .over that, but some , had tried to overcome it by skimming.as much as 30 and 40 per cent, of the milk. He pointed out that Hol-, land, which produced .the best skim milk cheese going to Britain, skimmed 30 to 40 per cent, of. the. fat, not by putting the milk through the separator but by' skimming the vats. “I felt sick at. heart,” said Mr. .torn's, “when I got replies from everywhere regarding the quality of New Zealand cheddar cheese and was told, ‘We will take your butler, which is excellent, but your cheese is no good to us. We do not want skijn milk cheese, but only cheese of high grade quality.’” Mr.’J. S. Tosland (Piha*ma) moved:— That this meeting supports Mn lorns in his advocacy' of the elimination of standardised cheese and requests the Department of Agriculture to tighten tne regulations preventing any abuse. “'LED. BY ' BIG' FACTORIES.” . . y .. . In .the past, .Mr.. .Tosland said, they had been led by the big -factories, and the. time .had come.for the smaller factories and the individual producer to have some say in the quality of their produce. The trouble in the past had been the race for yield and pay-out. Instead of giving the English consumer 16 ounces for his pound they had reduced it to 14 ounces, and to-day were- only giving him 12 ounces. The only way to regain the confidence of the consumer now was to go straight out for quality, and those factories that had given the lead in the past must see that was the right step to take. The chairman said that the executive of the federation with the idea of giving a lead to the industry had framed a proposal on the lines of Mr. Tosland's motion, with the exception that it urged the abolition of standardising till the end of March; as certain factories then were faced with very high testing milk and would be forced into butter making unless allowed to standardise. The fullcream cheese would then not be in competition with standardised, and they would get a better opportunity for comparison. It would be unwise to rush : hurriedly from one thing to another. Standardisation had only been in vogue 18 months, and/he would not like to see it wiped out altogether. By March they would see what the position was in regard to full-cream cheese; and if it was not giving the' results anticipated they could revert to standardised. He moved the following amendment—

That after hearing the evidence of Mr. lorns and Mr. Ross on cheese quality this meeting resolves that the Department of Agriculture be requested to sus pend until the end of March the regulations permitting the manufacture of standardised cheese, the position then to be reviewed.

■ Mr. I. Young (Oaonui) .seconded Mr. Tosland’s motion.

A delegate said he. did not think the meeting, should be - stampeded into, any resolution. Standardisation had been practised for some time. If standardisation was to blame for all the-trouble, why was full-cream cheese allowed to go into store instead.of standardised? He thought the trouble at present, was oversupply. When it was first suggested that the moisture content of butter should be increased to 16 per -cent, they were told that the industry would soon be driven on to the rocks, but it had not been. He thought factories could still be permitted to standardise with safety. NOT TO STAMPEDE THEM. Mr. lorns said that he was'not. there with the intention of stampeding them into anything. Their first step should be to. let the people at Home know hat New .Zealand was anxious to meet their requirements by supplying full-cream cheese.. The. very, finest thing, they could do for New. Zealand cheese .would be to let the English buyer know that they had decided to. give jip standardisation. Mr. .Woods suggested that the federation should, add. to its amendment that after. March the Government should alter the regulation so as to provide that the percentage, of. fat .in dry solids should be increased to 54 per cent. The chairman said that might be considered when the position .was reviewed in March. . .

Mr. J. B. Hine (Toko) said the resolution savoured of compulsion, which had caused so much trouble in the past. Commonsense should prevail, and a actory should not be forced to do what it 4 did not wane. Standardisation would work out its own salvation, though possibly not as quickly as might be desired. If a premium were paid for full-cream cheese that would overcome the trouble at once. I . ' ■

Mr, A- B. Muggeridge asked how it was, .if. the. low. .quality of the cheese was responsible for. the low price, that butter, .the .quality, of. which was admitted to be high, was lower in price than it had. .been. for the. past. 20 years.' If. standardisation was dropped altogether, said Air. J. B. Murdoch, there would be a danger of the recurrence of the old trouble—a complaint of rancidity owing to the presence of too much fat. Standardisation was adopted by some companies With the object of reducing the fat content so as to overcome that difficulty,, and not for the purpose of gaining yield at the expense of quality. As the representative of a company that was out for quality he asked whether it was not possible to improve the quality by increasing the fat content without preventing standardisation altogether. If every crate of cheese had been analysed he believed that some that had been exported had gone below 50 per cent. He considered that it might be better to increase the fat content to 54 per cent, or 55 per cent, rather than be continually changing the brand. Dur-

ing -the past few years the butter-fat content of the milk had increased very rapidly,- and ■it must be patent that by endeavouring to encorporate all the fat in the cheese they might be in a wdise. , position ■ that if they made a better article- with a - mild process, incorporating a suitable percentage of fat. He did not feel inclined at present to support the motion. Mr; lorns said he had never heard a complaint during any of his visits that there was too much fat in any of the cheese. •He realised- that • the cheesemaker was faced with a technical difficulty regarding high testing milk but no doubt that would be got over. The point was that unless they were prepared .to manufacture what. the consumer. required- they would get no further. : THE PROPER FORMULA. Mn J. R. Corrigan, who seconded the amendment, said that standardisation had been permitted after the Dairy Division had found as the result of experiment that a good cheese equal to that, made ■ from full-cream could be made from, standardised if the proper, formula were followed. It was imperative that they should get. back- to. where they were before standardisation started and break down the prejudice that existed at Home. From correspondence he had received he felt sure that there would be a premium on full-cream cheese, and if so no one would want to go back . to standardisation. If the New Zealand producer ha<t made a mistake it. was up to them to acknowledge it and take steps to effect the desired, improvement.

Mr. J. B. ■ Hine asked whether the quality of full-cream cheese was all that was desired. ■ ■

Mr. lorns. said that even in the South Island there was a deterioration in the quality of' the cheddar cheese. The general Opinion was that New Zealand was not cheddaring its cheese as it used to do.

Mr. Tosland said if they were to get back the goodwill of the retailer and the consumer'they must go into the matter 'of improvement whole-heartedly. Hence he'thought they should cut out standardising all through the year. Asked for his opinion as to the effects' of pasteurisation, Mr. lorns stated that 'he had not‘the technical knowledge to enter into a discussion on the matter.

Mr. E. Long thanked Mr. lorns for the valuable ■ information that had been given.' He also suggested that Mr. Tosland should withdraw his motion in favour of the amendment. It was a very important one of the biggest in the industry, greatly affecting their livelihood, and he did not want to see any confusion.

Mr. Muggeridge moved a further amendment, recommending the Dairy

Board to call-a conf creuce. of cheese exporting co-operative dairy companies to discuss the matter of cheese quality. The chairman said that Taranaki exported 42' ‘per cent, of the cheese' sent out of New Zealand and could stand or fall on its. own opinion. ‘ Mr. Muggeridge’s amendment was defeated by a large majority and the proposal to recommend the abolition of -standardisation until March 31 was carried. " I