Part 7

HANDLING THE MILK.

Prompt and efficient cooling.--If prompt (a), 5; efficient (b), if 50° F. or under, 5; over 50° and not over 55°, 4; over 55° and not over 60°, 3; over 60°, 0; if neither prompt nor efficient, 0 10 Storing at low temperature.--If 50° F. or under, 5; over 50° and not over 55°, 4; over 55° and not over 60°, 3; over 60°, 0 5 Protection during transportation to market.--If thoroughly protected (iced), 5; good protection, 4; partly protected, 2; otherwise, 0 5 --- 100

SCORE.

If total score is 90 or above and each division 85% perfect or over, the dairy is EXCELLENT (entitled to registry).

If total score is 80 or above and each division 75% perfect or over, the dairy is GOOD.

If total score is 70 or above and each division 65% perfect or over, the dairy is FAIR.

If total score is below 70 and any division is below 65% perfect, the dairy is POOR.

Detailed scores of the twenty-five dairy farms entered in the dairy-farm contest.

------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------- | Cows |Stables | Milk |Milking |Handling| Total |(perfect|(perfect| house |(perfect|of milk | score Farm No. | 20 | 25 |(perfect| 15 |(perfect|(perfect |points).|points).| 20 |points).| 20 | 100 | | |points).| |points).|points). ------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------- 1 | 10.0 | 14.0 | 2.0 | 10.0 | 5.0 | 41.0 2 | 11.0 | 14.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 0.0 | 42.0 3 | 4.0 | 14.0 | 8.0 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 46.0 4 | 8.0 | 3.0 | 12.0 | 10.0 | 15.0 | 48.0 5 | 7.0 | 8.0 | 16.0 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 51.0 6 | 10.0 | 11.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 15.0 | 53.0 7 | 11.0 | 13.0 | 13.0 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 57.0 8 | 18.0 | 10.5 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 58.5 9 | 15.0 | 8.0 | 10.0 | 12.0 | 15.0 | 60.0 10 | 12.0 | 13.0 | 11.0 | 10.0 | 15.0 | 61.0 11 | 12.0 | 18.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 15.0 | 62.0 12 | 10.0 | 21.0 | 8.0 | 10.0 | 15.0 | 64.0 13 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 17.5 | 10.0 | 20.0 | 64.5 14 | 12.0 | 12.0 | 11.0 | 10.0 | 20.0 | 65.0 15 | 12.0 | 16.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 20.0 | 65.0 16 | 12.0 | 22.0 | 12.0 | 10.0 | 10.0 | 66.0 17 | 19.5 | 16.0 | 7.0 | 10.0 | 15.0 | 67.5 18 | 12.0 | 23.0 | 11.0 | 13.0 | 10.0 | 69.0 19 | 12.0 | 16.0 | 16.0 | 12.0 | 15.0 | 71.0 20 | 7.0 | 19.5 | 18.0 | 10.0 | 20.0 | 74.5 21 | 14.0 | 20.5 | 16.0 | 10.0 | 20.0 | 80.5 22 | 12.0 | 18.0 | 17.0 | 15.0 | 20.0 | 82.0 23 | 11.5 | 21.0 | 19.0 | 12.0 | 20.0 | 83.5 24 | 12.0 | 23.0 | 15.0 | 15.0 | 20.0 | 85.0 25 | 19.5 | 21.0 | 17.0 | 12.0 | 17.0 | 86.5 ------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------- Average | 11.6 | 15.4 | 11.8 | 10.8 | 14.5 | 64.1 Average per | | | | | | cent perfect| 58.0 | 61.6 | 59.0 | 72.0 | 72.5 | 64.1 ------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------+--------

PRINCIPAL DEFECTS FOUND.

The greatest defects on the dairy farms were found to be the lack of cleanliness of the cows and the nonapplication of the tuberculin test. This test had been applied to only five of the twenty-five herds, and as it counted 8 points in the score the low average for the cows is thus explained. The cows in fifteen of the herds were more or less dirty. The water supply was generally good. The average rating for the cows was 11.6 points out of a possible 20.

The next greatest defect was found in the construction, equipment, and cleanliness of the milk houses. Many farms had no milk houses or special rooms for handling the milk, some were lacking in the proper equipment--particularly coolers and facilities for heating water. The water supply and utensils for the milk house were generally good. Seven out of the twenty-five received a perfect score for cleanliness. The average score for all of the milk houses was 11.8 points out of a possible 20.

The third lowest rating was given to the stables, which scored 15.4 points out of a possible 25. The greatest defect here was the lack of cleanliness, although the light and ventilation were frequently deficient. The construction as a rule received a good rating, and the cubic space per cow was generally satisfactory.

The cleanliness observed in milking was generally good, and the method of handling the milk satisfactory. These two branches of the dairy work rated 72 and 72.5 per cent, respectively.

VALUE OF THE CONTEST TO CLEVELAND.

The following letter points out very clearly some of the results which followed the contest in Cleveland:

CLEVELAND, June 4, 1907.

Prof. C. B. LANE, Assistant Chief, Dairy Division, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SIR: Certain very definite beneficial results may be traced to the milk exhibit and contest held in Cleveland on March 16, 1907. It was of special value from an educational standpoint. Few of the dairymen supplying milk to Cleveland previous to the contest had any appreciation of the significance of the inspection required by the city and submitted to it largely from necessity. The various addresses and discussions demonstrated the method and the value of the inspection. The dairymen present came to understand the importance and significance of improved methods of handling milk, and many of the recommendations made have since been adopted. The dairymen also felt pleased at the attention and interest of the Government officials in Cleveland’s milk producers.

With the inauguration of the inspection by the Cleveland Board of Health considerable opposition developed among the dairymen, and in some cases open enmity. With a thorough understanding of the object of the inspection this opposition has ceased and the inspection is now sought and welcomed. Cordial relations now exist between the dairymen and the inspection department. The holding of the contest and exhibit definitely contributed to this kindly feeling. Friendly rivalry has been developed among the dairymen. The visit of the inspector is looked forward to; his suggestions are usually promptly complied with, and his subsequent visits result in a higher score for the dairymen generally. The general attitude of the dairymen toward an inspection system is well illustrated by a letter recently sent by several representative dairymen to the board of health:

We milk producers, who ship milk to the city of Cleveland, desiring to make and ship milk of good quality and to observe the sanitary regulations as prescribed by your honorable body, respectfully ask that each and every person shipping milk to the city of Cleveland be required to take out a permit to be issued by your honorable body, revocable at your pleasure.

That said permits shall be classified as 1 or 2. That dairies which score 50 points or above be classified as No. 1, and all dairies which score below 50 points be classified as No. 2. That all milk dealers, shippers, and peddlers who sell milk in the city of Cleveland be required to apprise their customers by placard or otherwise at all times of the class of milk that they are offering for sale, and in case of failure so to do, or in case of said milk dealer, shipper, or peddler offering for sale milk shipped into the city of Cleveland without a permit, said milk dealer, shipper, or peddler’s license shall be forfeited.

AUSTIN HERRICK. W. A. MILLS. H. F. BICKER. S. H. MIZER. O. H. BENNETT. E. BOWEN. H. E. POST. G. W. ADAMS. W. H. CHAMBERS. A. F. DRESHER. C. E. RILEY.

The exhibit also had a beneficial effect upon retailers. This class has come to realize the value of sanitary milk production. Before making the season’s contract they inquire into the rating of the dairies in question, discriminating against those having a low rating, and frequently paying a premium for milk from a high-scoring dairy. There is at present an almost universal demand for a repetition of the contest annually, and the interest and participation in the contest next year would be many fold that of this contest.

(Signed.)

H. G. SHERMAN, M. D., Chairman Committee on Municipal Sanitation.

C. W. EDDY, M. D., Chief of Inspection Division, Public Health Department.

THE VALUE OF MILK CONTESTS.