374 IOWA DEPARTMENT OP AGRICULTURE 



This brings to us forcibly the need of some improvement in our 

 quality. It seems to me that your state has lost too much money in 

 that waj'. Iowa is not, however, the only state that is sustaining 

 those losses. The other large producing states show a similar loss 

 practically as great. 



These reports show more facts that will be interesting. Sixty-two 

 per cent of all those inspections for Iowa showed poor workman- 

 ship, which means either that the buttermakers were not properly 

 trained — that they were not doing as well as they knew how, or 

 else they didn't have proper equipment to handle the cream. Thir- 

 teen and five-tenths per ^ent showed mottles and 38.3 showed over- 

 worked and greasy body. I believe that the enterprise of the Iowa 

 creameries is great enough to provide sufficient help and proper 

 equipment and to require every buttermaker to be capable of over- 

 coming all manufacturing difficulties. Here seems to be a field for 

 some work which we have been inclined to overlook. The greatest 

 defect, however, in the quality of butter was caused by poor cream, as 

 over 82 per cent of all these shipments showed poor cream flavors. 



I haven't mentioned these facts to you for the purpose of criticis- 

 ing. I simply mention them so we can realize that we have a condi- 

 tion and not a theory which must be met. I believe there is but one 

 way to do this satisfactorily, and that is by grading cream and pay- 

 ing for quality. So long as the patrons of a creamery are per- 

 mitted to bring their poor cream and receive the same price that is 

 paid for good cream, there is no incentive to improve methods. In 

 fact, there is a tendency for the man bringing the good cream to 

 lower his quality. It is only human nature for us to become lax 

 under such conditions and we simply let go some of the little things 

 that perhaps have not taken much time. If we will grade cream and 

 pay for quality that condition will be changed, and in no other way 

 can it be so well done. Let us consider for a moment. If we have 

 a patron bringing cream of fine enough quality to be made into but- 

 ter that will bring that 3c premium and we have another bringing 

 cream that will only make a second or third, and it all goes together 

 and makes butter that scores, say 90, the creamery is very often 

 well enough satisfied with the results, but how about the patrons 

 furnishing good cream. Suppose we were to grade that cream and 

 make a dividing line. Suppose we would pay lie above for good 

 cream and lie below for poor cream. That would mean that the 

 patrons delivering good cream receive 3c more than the poor cream 

 patron. The patron bringing good cream would still be receiving Ic 

 less than his butter if churned alone would bring, while the poor 

 patron would be receiving Ic more than his butter would be worth 

 — but a far more equitable basis than paying for all alike. 



These facts, if we will follow them out far enough, will show to ua 

 that the only way we can be just with ourselves and with our patrons 

 is to divide the quality at the proper point. I can't say just where 

 that is, but each buttermaker can determine for himself. I do be- 

 lieve when you establish this system of grading, that it can gen- 



