TOWARDS A PERFECT MILK MARKET^ 



By J. Elizabeth Donley, Research Assistant in 

 Agricultural Economics and Farm Management 



Not so many years ago the farmer drove up to his customer's home, ladled out 

 milk into a can or jug on the steps, then drove on to the next house. This milk 

 probably cost the consumer six or eight cents a quart. Now, milk usually travels 

 miles and miles from the time it leaves the farmer until it reaches the consumer in 

 a bottle, and moreover, the cost is about twice as great. 



Many a consumer still remembers those days and now and then when he pays 

 for his milk thinks "they" are putting something over on him. He realizes that 

 the general cost of living is higher, but not that much higher. He realizes also 

 that someone else has come into the picture — the dealer — ■ knows he also must 

 be paid, but still and all, it does not seem quite fair to pay so much per quart for 

 one of life's essential foods. He gets emotional about it. 



The farmer, on the other hand, also remembers those days and invariably 

 thinks that the old days were better. He feels oppressed by the higher cost of 

 commodities which he purchases, for he receives no more now for his milk than 

 in the old days, and often not nearly so much. How can he ever make any profit? 



And then there is the dealer — the newcomer. Modern urban life requires 

 more milk, in a more sanitary condition. This necessitates bringing it in from 

 greater distances and pasteurizing it, as well as taking care of any surplus. This 

 is the dealer's job, plus that of distributing the milk at convenient times in con- 

 venient form to the consumer. The dealer also is unhappy, for the farmer com- 

 plains that he is paid too little for his product and the consumer complains that 

 he is charged too much. These complaints make excellent copy for newspapers 

 and hence the complaints sound even louder. 



In 1935 the New England Research Council decided to tackle this vast problem 

 in this section of the country to see if, after the facts had been gathered and 

 pondered over, some solution might be made. 



In Massachusetts two secondary markets, Springfield and Worcester, have 

 been and are being studied as a part of this long-range project. In Springfield 

 much detailed work has been done in all phases of milk marketing, in an effort 

 to bring some order to this market. Only the supply side, however, of the Worces- 

 ter market has been mapped and analyzed, and that more or less superficially, 

 for the results seem to justify this approach. As the work which led to this 

 conclusion is revealed, it will be apparent that the Worcester market is abnormal 

 in one respect — it is quite normal. There are, to be sure, some channels through 

 which the supply of milk is obtained which might be improved upon, but this is 

 true of any market, and unless we wish more government control, those channels 

 of supply will remain as they are. Cooperation can do much, but only so much. 

 The consumer is justified in disliking to pay for duplication of service, but in 

 Worcester there is very little duplication in getting the milk to the market. 



The distribution of milk to the consumer in Worcester has not been studied, 

 but if there is no more duplication in that phase than there is in obtaining the 

 milk from the farmer, the consumer should decide that he is not paying for extra 

 services and that his milk is not expensive, but rather is an economical food 

 of which more should be consumed. 



^The data for tliis bulletin were collected by Chester Smith for his thesis entitled, Some Economic 

 Aspects of Marketing Fluid Milk in Worcester, Massachusetts, submitted for the Master's Degree 

 at Massachusetts State College in 1937. 



