LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
" THE MILK-SHORTAGE AND WHY "
Stet,—In an article entitled " The Milk-Shortage and Why," your con- tributor Mr. Lamartine Yates makes some extremely debatable state- ments on points which I think I am, as a dairy-farmer, competent to discuss. A reader of the article might have supposed that the short- age of imported cattle-foods had come as a surprise to the cattle- owner, and Mr. Yates stated that it is not clear what plans the Government made to meet the situation. Mr. Yates also stated that the fodder-output in this country is declining. The Ministry of Agriculture began to issue warnings of tht coming shortage in Octo- ber, 1939, and during that winter initiated a campaign aimed at in- ducing farmers to become self-supporting so far as possible by the winter of 1940. The campaign asked farmers to plant marrow-stem kale, mangolds, swedes, cabbage, and to make molassed silage from spring grass, and from aftermath following hay. The fodder-output of this country as a result increased and is still increasing. An acre of grass will give at the outside 2.5 tons of hay for winter feed, kale frequently gives over 25 tons, and mangolds will give as much as 35 tons. The mixed farmer with arable and dairy is being treated sanely and fairly by the War Agricultural Committees who watch the interests of the milking cow with care; in my own case 81 out of 156 acres have been ploughed and 4o acres of the plough-land are down to fodder-crop. In spite of an apparent loss of acreage the cows gain very considerably from both the bulk of food and nutrients contained in it. I have not installed straw-pulping tanks because I find I am so well off for fodder, but I have seen the process demonstrated by official demonstrators and have been convinced of its efficiency. The Government are spending a good deal on popularising this method of converting part of the grain-crop acreage to fodder. It is my experi- ence that the position has been made perfectly clear, and that the policy of the Ministry of Agriculture has been thoroughly sound on the fodder-question.
I find Mr. Yates' remarks on fertility incomprehensible: two grain-crops will run land right out without manures; if you have no dung you must use artificial manures, artificial manures are scarce and are mainly composed of imported chemicals; disposing of the bullock would create a heavy additional demand on shipping space. It is essential to remember that it is conceivable that the harvest of 1944 may also be a war-time harvest and there is a limit to the fertility we are now cashing. Grassland used as pasture builds up fertility slowly, we are drawing now on the reserve built up since the collapse of grain-prices between 1920 and 1923, and exhausting it at a fearful rate. " To refuse to risk sacrificing a little fertility in war- time is rather like refusing to liquidate overseas investments." The comparison is inept; a sounder comparison would be with some method of manufacturing aircraft or war-materials that would pro- duce a large quantity now while creating derelict factories for 5943 and 1944. Exhausting fertility now might leave us still more dependent on foreign food-supplies at the end of another year of shipping-losses and of German technical advance in shipping attack.
The proposal that all raw milk should be made into butter is odd for a number of reasons. There is not the equipment for one thing, and there is not the personnel for another; it would be necessary to equip a factory to make the machinery, divert metals from other industries to make the machinery, equip a number of factories in regions at the moment dealing in raw milk, and train personnel. It might be done in about 18 months, but it would probably take longer. Overcoming these difficulties and arriving at the result one would have the public being offered an unpalatable drink and a cer- tain quantity of butter instead of a perfectly balanced food which requires no manufacturing process whatever. It takes 2+ gallons of milk to produce t lb. of butter if the milk is of the average quality, 16 ounces of butter are obtained at the sacrifice of 20 pints of milk. It is difficult to see what the point of the conversion would be. One can only ascribe the suggestion to a personal preference for butter.—
Previous page
