DAIRY INSPECTION

Wanganui Chronicle, Volume 79, Issue 199, 26 August 1935, Page 3

DAIRY INSPECTION

OF PARAMOUNT IMPORTANCE | PROBLEMS WHICH ABE MET. | A COMPREHENSIVE ADDRESS. DELIVERED BY '!J. J. HILI. . ... i lON. Dairy inspection problems were fully covered by Mr. J. Hill-Motion, B.s'., in his address to the Royal Sanitary institute (Wanganui-Taranaki Subcentre.) Con) i.ivuit, held at Wanganui on Friday. Air. Hill .Motion, who is the veterinary officer attached io the Rata Co-operative Dairy Company, Staled that the subject of his address was j one which was of paramount importance | to the dairy industry of the Dominion, This was not merely so from the vitally important, aspect of export trn<le, but also from the public health point of view. “Dairy scientists, farm dairy in structors, dairy inspectors, and factory managers all over the country have been conecntrtaing on this all important subject of a better raw material fur manufacture, whereas welfare officers ami health inspectors have focussed their attention on the improvement of market milk,’’ said Mr. Hi 11-Motion. “ Under the Dairy Industry Act, 1908. and similar enactments, ' with, of course, the many subsequent amend men-ts, various regulations have been gazetted from time to time towards ihis end, and more recently a revision of the general regulations have been undertaken. It is not my purpose at this meeting of the Royal Sanitary Jn stitute to discuss these in detail’ but rat her to dismiss them since we non await, their publication. ‘bpeaking generally, you will all agree that the revisions and amendments of our dairy regulations have proceeded far too rapidly for the growth of the industry, with the inevitable result th.it there has been a general lagging behind on the part of the producer. This has no doubt resulted from the unprecedented slump in dairy prices during the past live years, when the necessary improvements, although compulsory according to the regulations, could not. he effected. Undue pressure by dairy inspectors in many areas, ami uneconomic competition in various centres, due to a changeover from factory to town-sujiply. has resulted in a lack of confidence within the industry. Again, the slump in over seas prices, the increased competition on the London market, and also the various enactments by the Home Gov eminent have of necessity caused considerable alarm in official circles, so that ways and means had to be con sidered in order to improve the quality and purity of our export produce. At the same time the posi hili ties of a quota or export restriction semed inevitable, and the disposal of our raw material became a major problem for Government and health officers.

Guarantee of Purity Necessary. 4, 1 f we are to stimulate an increase consumption of milk and milk product within the Dominion, then we must b able to guarantee the purity an cleanliness of the raw material by jud cious inspection, reasonable demanus a regards the premises, and an educaliv policy generally amongst the producer: In order to attain this end, the policie of the Departments of Agriculture an Health must he brought into line wit each other, with more co-operation an better eo-relation of the activities o these departments. The registration o all dairies supplying factories, as reconi mended by the Dairy Gommisison,. mua be the first step in our control service and the appointment of dairy inspec tors with full powers to carry out in sped ion and advisory work. The scheme for the adoption of fam dairy instruction by the factories ha been in operation for many years now and one must admit that this has no been a success. “Only 40 per cent, or thereabouts, o the dairy factories adopted the Dair. Divisions scheme for farm dairy in st ruction and made the necessary ap point meats, and in very many case this work was dropped after one or a most two seasons. At first sight it ma; be difficult to understand why such in st ruction has not proved acceptable t' the producers, but when one consider: that, this was a voluntary service i must be appreciated/that the situatior had to be handled wdth tact, nlthougi the officers appointed had the status ol an inspector’ and the ‘departmenta backing.’ No doubt, the inadequate supply of suitably trained officers, will the necessary tact and personality, ha< an important bearing on acceptance ol such dairy instruction. Anything sav ouring of departmental .interference will of necessity be resented by tin primary producer, ami unnecessary coercion on many unimportant points will, mid has brought the whole scheme into disfavour. 4 ‘lt is anticipated that the Dairy Control Board, with the powers which they already possess, including the pro vision of the necessary funds by gen era I levy over the whole industry, will :ake over the control of the production jf the raw material, ami the ways and menus to attain and maintain ’he high -'st possible standard. How far this will affect th(> activities of the Dairy Division, and Department of Health, it is difficult to say at present. “In order to open up the question from this point onwards, or in other words, to revert to the subject of my id dress, viz., dairy inspection probenis, perhaps, 1 may be permitted to Hitline what 1 consider Should be the dijects of control service. These may )Q summarised as follows: “(1) To stimulate increased eonsump ion of milk and milk products by ataining and maintaining the highest •ossible hygenic standard. “(2) To demonstrate to producers nd their employees that without ex •ensive plant and specially construct ?d uildings it is possible to produce milk f good hygenic value, which will keep “ (• ») To <lemon>lrale that the per onal elemi nt ami the methods cmhired in collection ami handling of • ilk ar- (he factors which determin s hygienic qualities, and fh.it, rein vely speaking, buildings exetcisc only secondary inflnenuee in this respect. “(4) To assist the farmer in carry ig out the Dairy .Regulations generally, id to eo-opemte with him over the grade’’ on the stage, or adverse re arts from health inspectors. “(5) To facilitate the work of the epartments of Health and Agricul ire in administration of the various o\ eminent enact meats.

" Production of Clean Milk le “I have purposely adopted ‘he term •y ‘control’ service, in order to get away >o from the ideas of ‘inspection’ and ‘ ini’. spectors’ as formerly used in connection re with this work. An analysis of the m objects J have just outlined will focus io attention on the requirements for makd ing our new service the success which it one would hope for. These require e- ments are identical with those necessary g for clean milg production. Clean milk 1. of low bacterial content and good keepn ing quality is the objective of all dairy i- research, Government legislation, dair- • ios inspection, and dairy farm instructs tion. We must, all of us, whether niedin cal officer of health, dairy inspector, r- health inspector, borough inspector, or n veterinary offi<-er, direct ourselves to v wards ill is goal. “It is generally stated on good i- authority that only perhaps ten per o cent, of all supplies on the “stage’’ are • below grade, but from experience y amongst the dairy farms of most dist tricts, it is considered that seventya live to eighty per cent, of the prem- ’» ise<s do not reach the standard set I by the dairy regulations, ('onsidcring i only the registered dairies, the position cannot be readily assessed since no standard of purity has been established for market milk, but as a direct result of compulsory inspection the 1 premises and facilities for handling s milk compare favourably with those e existing in older established communi I tics. The position would be simply . this, any farmer can supply a factory s with milk or cream, of inferior qual- ,, ity, subject only to the com mere ia I grading, without either compulsory rcs gist rat ion or inspection of premises or I methods. When he elects, however, to t supply the general public with whole I milk, the registration and inspection f becomes compulsory, but any attempt at a grading system is missing. ‘‘To reach our goal, viz., a clean milk product, the discrepancies just 1 mentioned must be appreciated and ’ furnished. Resorting to the inspection problems. . . . After many years of dairies inspection and cheek sampling. I was 1 convinced that any system of inspecs tion was incomplete unless samples of ' milk were taken for laboratory examination, and it has been my practice throughout to adopt a method of f “score card’’ inspection, allowing a maximum of 1000 points, or 500 for inspection on the farm and 500 for the results of laboratory examinations of ; the milk sample. ! The farm inspection wa. s built up as • follows: — i Health and cleanliness of the cows 150 Personal cleanliness of milkers . • 50 Milking and handling of milk . . 100 Cleanliness, starge, etc., equipment 100 I Cleanliness of premises 100 Total The examination of milk a.< follows: Bacterial count 2.50 ' Coliform organisms 150 Total 500 Grand total loot)

“When inspection of the farms was undertaken, deductions wore made ioi < undesirable practices noticed at time I of milking, for il will be appiv iaied that visits al other than milking limes would be of very little value. •’Milk samples were taken from the mixed milk immediately after the milking was completed and laboratory examinations were standardised according to the facilities provided. Maximum points were given for a bacterial count of 1000 organisms pci | c.c. or under, and coliform organisms absent, from ,Ic.c. and at the other extreme no marks lor a count of over 50(1,000 per c.c. and where culiforin organisms were present in 1 1000c.c. “It. is to be remembered, of course. 1 that the samp es were taken at the dairy immediately after milking an.l transmitted direct to the laboratory tor plating out at the fourth hour after sampling. “Whilst not wishing to labour the value of score card inspection it will ' be apparent that by adopting such a I method of inspection a uniform sys I lem can be evolved for use over a 1 large area, provided considerable de- ' tail is given under the various head- ' ing- already outlined. Al the same 1 lime, the standards set and the alloca ' tion of points under the various head- ' ings need not follow what I have just ' given. It will now be obvious that ’ this method of control would be satis factory for factory suppliers as well as r fur registered dairies. I Duties of Advisory Officers ' “Perhaps I have already said enough to indicate the procedure I would wish to be adopted, and I will now content t myself with outlining very briefly, my y interpretation of the present-day posi- ’| tion and the extent to which \v <• can <

push our duties. In the first place, we have adopted the description of advisory officers under our dairies control service, and we must now proceed to make contact with the producer. We must assume that, with very few exceptions the farmer is not in a sufficiently financial position to warrant any major alterations, and in many cases none at all. but from my experiences. during the last few years, the dairy farmer, if tactfully approached, will admit and would be willing to undertake reasonable alterations as funds become available. He cannot bo bullied in this direction, and I am satislied that much disfavour and loss of coniidence has resulted by such coercion. It has been said that high quality miik and cream can be produced where the conditions are not best, but the following four things are necessary: A good set of brushes! plenty of boiling water, a good cooler ami lastly, the inclination tu use them. • fhe most likely source of contamination arc dirty utensils, hands, or the cow's udder, and an impure atrnosphei • resulting from dirty sheds and dairies. It is estimated that fully f»(. per < nt. of the defects in milk and cream are directly due to these causes, and, of course, neglect of cooling. “Although I am prepared to admit that buildings generally play a minor part in the production of clean milk, yet the labour entailed under such inadequate or unsuitable buildings or premises, is very much greater than where proper facilities and convenience- are provided, and again it is to be noted that under New Zealand condition'- labour accounts for approximately one half the total cost of butterfat production. “In my experience of recent years, many daily have goue into a .-late of disrepair, and again where the farmer has gone in for pigs in order to utilise the dairy by-products, the piggeries have been located in too close proximity Io the dairy, although the old dairy regulations provided for a di.-:anc< of 5(1 yards between tho dairy and pigg »ry. Lack of knowledge of tli«* existence of this regulation or what is equally important, the want of >uftii , ieul advice and assistance when alterations were being carried “I‘roiii my experience, one of the greatest difficulties experienced ou "any dairy farms was the/inadequate facilities for cooling, and especially so luring the summer months or periodt »f drought.