Sidebilder
PDF
ePub

Investigation has in more than one instance in the past proved beneficial, and in the future it will also be found efficacious. With this truism in mind, it may serve a useful purpose to consider some of the conditions surrounding the obtaining of milk, and one of its products, cream. The demand for this latter commodity, in contradistinction to that for milk, is constantly increasing, despite the fact that its production is surrounded with two important and condemnable features; namely, the age of the product coupled with the circumstance that the milk, from which the cream is obtained, is produced at farms over which the dealers have practically no oversight. Fully 95 per cent of the cream sold in Boston comes under one or both of the objections indicated. When it is known that in summer a small amount of cream, when delivered to customers, is from 36 to 72 hours old, while the bulk of it is from 84 to 108 hours old; and that in winter this commodity is from 120 to 144 hours old, it is seen that the element of freshness is somewhat remote. Farm inspection when milk is converted into cream is a negligible factor, and undoubtedly very few of the farms, from which this milk is obtained, have attained the dignity of dairies. In fact, from the data procurable, it is not unfair to assume that many of the places raising milk for cream purposes, have never been visited by representatives from the creameries or firms buying the milk or thin cream, which later is marketed as cream of varying degrees of density. Produced with this lack of oversight, the reason that concerns, engaged in the sale of cream, make no claims as to the cleanliness or freshness of the product, is apparent. While few of the creamery owners have any knowledge of the conditions on the farms, from which their product is obtained; many of the proprietors of farms, supplying the milk or thin cream, seldom if ever visit the creameries purchasing their products. Distance of many of these farms from the creameries, and the small amount of milk produced at a majority of them, is responsible for a system by which much of the product is taken to the creameries by collectors, individuals who go to a number of farms with a team, procure or transport the milk or thin cream to creameries. These farms are scattered all over Northern New England, as well as some parts of New York. Very little Massachusetts milk is converted into cream; the eighty-four creameries known to be supplying Boston with cream are located as follows:

[blocks in formation]

During periods of scarcity, cream is procured from creameries not included in the above list, which lessens the probability of knowledge of farm conditions; in fact many of the middlemen possess no information as to the creameries from which they procure either regular or temporary

supplies. Hence it is seen that creamery owners and dealers do not as a rule investigate the production or preparation of the product they handle, and that the clean milk issue has yet to gain a foothold in the cream business.

Infrequent collections of milk and cream from farmers, especially in winter, combined with irregular shipments of finished products to trade centers are further drawbacks to the supplying of fresh cream. The above methods of collections and shipments are followed to save expense, but no dealer in cream will claim that the quality is improved thereby. These lax systems are made possible by the fact that at all of the creameries the cream is heated before being sent to market. If it were not for this fact, the cream business would have to be conducted on a very different basis, and undoubtedly the amount of product would be materially curtailed. Thus the easy method of heating is the substitute for farm inspection, quick transportation and delivery.

Despite all of these adverse conditions governing production and handling, the demand for cream as before noted is constantly increasing and where in former years this substance was deemed a luxury it is now considered almost a necessity. But will this demand continue if there is no change in the existing farm, creamery and handling methods? This is a query which it will be well for those interested in catering to the public to consider, bearing in mind the present attitude of consumers and the decreasing consumption of milk.

In 1908 Boston consumed about 770,000 gallons of "light cream," containing from 15 to 20 per cent of fat, and 490,500 gallons of "heavy cream," which has a fat content of from 35 to 44 per cent. In addition to this, probably about 750,000 gallons of cream were shipped from the city to supply trade elsewhere. Much of the thin cream is prepared by diluting heavy cream, after arrival in the city, with milk or skimmed milk. This is done to save transportation charges, the heavy cream being less bulky than the light variety.

The quantity of milk used for the production of cream is fast becoming a factor of magnitude in the problem of procuring an adequate milk supply. Considering the fact that the sale of cream is constantly increasing, the obtaining of enough milk for the future requires serious consideration. Boston's daily consumption of cream averages about 2,110 gallons of light cream, and 1,344 gallons of heavy cream. Assuming the light cream to contain about 17 per cent of fat and the heavy cream about 40 per cent of fat, approximately the following amounts of milk would be required for its production: Light cream, 10,022 gallons; heavy cream, 13,104 gallons; or a total of 92,504 quarts of milk. That this amount of milk equals 39 per cent of the quantity of milk consumed daily in Boston, clearly demonstrates the importance of the cream industry and its bearing upon the milk supply.

While cleanliness is a necessary factor to good milk production, an ac

[ocr errors]

companying essential and one which can be complied with by every producer in this section of the United States, is that of an ample ice supply intelligently used. Dairymen of the present day should have acquired sufficient knowledge of the elements of proper milk production to recognize the necessity of cooling their milk quickly, and then maintaining a low temperature until the milk is delivered at the cars or to customers. Those who have not advanced their methods to the required degree, however, should have the need for quick and thorough refrigeration of milk products speedily instilled into them. The old devices, oftentimes worse than useless, and characteristic of many milk farms, are antiquated, and should not be tolerated. Ice in abundance, freely and intelligently used, is an essential to the production of what is now recognized as milk, as is the cow, and no farm is equipped for the raising of good milk unless due attention is paid to the ice issue. The time for excuses on this score is past; and while there may be opportunities for differences of opinion concerning other essentials of good milk raising, there can be none regarding refrigeration or its feasibility. The procuring of an ice supply in New England cannot be viewed as an expensive or impossible proceeding, and every dairy should annually store an ample supply to last, not only through the heated periods of ordinary years, but there should also be sufficient ice for the years of extreme high temperature, or where the warm weather is of long duration. This ice problem in its relation to milk supplies is not a fad, but a necessity, and should be considered as much a factor of the conduct of a dairy farm, as is the fuel for household or heating purposes, or the food required for the stock. Having the necessary ice it must be employed to accomplish the desired end without stint and whenever the temperature is such as to require it, and that means the greater part of the year even in this climate. Its use should be commenced early in the year, much earlier than has been deemed necessary heretofore, and should not be discontinued until the occasion for its employment is over.

Every contractor and milkman who purchases milk or cream from dairymen should make it a point to patronize only those farmers who have ample supplies of ice, and who use it freely and intelligently. The frequent use of a thermometer would be of value, not only in the purchase of milk, but also in furnishing information as to the cooling. While it is true that many dairymen are now employing ice liberally in cooling milk, progress in this direction is far from having reached the perfection desired.

There is another subject requiring further notice, and that is the method pursued by some dairymen in the handling of milk in the extreme cold weather. In their eagerness to prevent the freezing of the supply the milk is oftentimes taken into the kitchen and not infrequently placed behind the stove. Thus it is likely to be kept at a high temperature for several hours, affording opportunity for rapid bacterial development.

Samples actually subjected to this kitchen treatment have been found to contain bacteria running into the millions. Warm kitchens whether in farmhouses or elsewhere, do not afford desirable surroundings for the proper storage of milk. Producers should properly protect supplies in winter as well as in summer.

This demand for better conditions at dairies is already manifesting itself in increased interest in the health of the stock, from which milk is obtained; and in the future this inquiry on the part of consumers is destined to become more persistent and pronounced. This attitude on the part of the public is encouraging and indicative of coming insistence upon commendable surroundings for all milk production and handling. Here a pertinent query presents itself. Will it not be advantageous for those who are supplying milk to the public to forestall the inevitable, rather than to await the forcing of the issue by popular sentiment? There can be no question as to there being ample ground for public concern in the health of cows employed in milk production, in fact the only surprising feature is that this attitude has been so long delayed. A partial investigation covering a period of over four years, and unsatisfactory by reason of the demands of a busy office, disclosed nevertheless abundant evidence for the assertion that there is gross carelessness on the part of many milk producers as to the physical condition of their stock. Milk from gargety animals, and from others with apparent udder complications, or from other pronounced abnormalities, is frequently sent to market as though it was drawn from healthy stock. Unfortunately such milk does not usually possess characteristics whereby casual observation discloses its true condition, and unless detected by laboratory investigation, it is consumed by the public, and oftentimes, no doubt, to the detriment of physical welfare.

The undesirability of sending milk from diseased animals to market has not impressed itself upon the majority of dairymen. It has been necessary in many instances to resort to compulsory measures to secure the results desired. This state of affairs is significant, and demonstrates the protection which consumers secure when the question of products from unhealthy animals is entrusted entirely to the owners of the stock. Apparently if any consideration is given the subject, it is from the narrow and selfish standpoint of self-interest, which takes the form of unwillingness to lose a few cents' worth of milk, even though the health of human beings may be endangered by its subsequent use. It is difficult to draw any other conclusion, as many of these abnormal specimens are from animals where cursory examination shows their unfitness for milk production. That consumers are not given the protection which they have a right to expect, has been demonstrated on numerous occasions by the investigations which followed the finding of contaminated milk specimens. It is time that this condition was corrected, where the physical condition of cows shows their unfitness for milk production. Much progress has al

ready been made in this respect by inaugurating a policy of exclusion, but greater efforts should be put forth to compel dairymen to keep from their milk supply the product of all animals not free from suspicion. That such a course has been made necessary is not a state of affairs tending towards increasing the consumption of milk: it is a condition discreditable to producers. Consumers have a right to expect alertness from farmers in guarding their health at all times, and in what more practical manner can this protection be shown than by not sending to market milk from diseased cows?

This is not done, however, in all instances, and a recent case of such neglect undoubtedly produced illness in two young children, whose principal diet was milk. Investigation showed that the milk was from a cow which had an injured teat and the milk from the other three quarters of the udder, which was being used by the children above noted, contained much pus. To make this condition much worse, the morning of the day that this matter was investigated, a new man in charge of the milking had put the milk from all four teats into the supply. None of the milk should have been employed for food at any time after the cow injured herself. This was a repetition of what has occurred many times since 1905. Well may consumers lose faith in those producing milk, when such conditions are constantly arising. Dairymen have it in their power to materially reduce the amount of milk infected with pus organisms. That it is not done demonstrates their disregard for the consumer's interest, and the necessity for greater discrimination on the part of purchasers in the choice of those who supply them with milk.

The matter of the tuberculous cow is an engrossing topic, and one destined in the future to arouse great public interest; and while it appeals strongly to consumers, the latter, according to present indications, are not to be allowed to monopolize the subject, as many progressive dairymen are either discussing it or have had their herds freed from diseased animals. Boards of health have already taken action in this matter, and the example of the health authorities of Montclair, New Jersey, have already been followed by Chicago, New Orleans, Minneapolis, St. Paul, and by no less than nine cities in Wisconsin. In this latter state, Milwaukee has been a leader, and is already in litigation with antagonistic dairymen, with excellent chances of the authorities winning in the attempt at milk supply purification, by demanding the tuberculin test. At present, according to Russell and Hoffman,* "over 25 per cent of the population of the state" of Wisconsin will be protected by ordinances of this character, if properly enforced. But Wisconsin's endeavors in this direction have not been confined to the adoption of regulations demanding the exclusion of milk from tuberculous cows, as during the last three years the Agricultural Experiment Station, the State Live Stock Sanitary Bulletin No. 175, Russell & Hoffman. A three-year campaign against tuberculosis,

P. 15.

« ForrigeFortsett »