June, 1940] Transportation of N. H. Milk 9 



Even should capacity operations with some of the present equipment 

 be obtained, there may be (and usually are) further opportunities for 

 increased efficiency by employing trucks of greater capacity. Each of 

 these adjustments will necessarily result in a smaller number of trucks, 

 either of the same or greater capacity than those now in operation. This 

 immediately reduces labor costs and should cut down not only the num- 

 ber of trucks, but the total distance traveled (though it may increase 

 the distance a particular truck is driven each day). 



Another principle kept in mind in reorganizing these routes has been 

 reduction of truck mileage to a minimum. (This, of course, is subject to 

 limitations of size of truck which may be driven economically over a 

 particular road.) The reason that total mileage has been given so much 

 importance is that while there may be economies in reducing the num- 

 ber and increasing the capacities of the trucks hauling milk to a particu- 

 lar market, such economies are much smaller than those obtained by 

 eliminating unnecessary mileage traveled and by using trucks to their 

 full capacity. 



In general, where distances from the plant are great, there are econ- 

 omies in employing a system of loop routes with stub routes leading 

 off: them. Such a system enables the economies of a truck of large 

 capacity operating over the hard surfaced roads with relatively few 

 farm stops and long distances, to be combined with smaller trucks travel- 

 ing over side roads collecting from farms and bringing milk in to the 

 main road.^ Indeed, in many cases, it would be impracticable to at- 

 tempt to drive a truck greater than 11^ or 2 tons rated capacity over 

 the back roads on which many of the farmsteads are located. 



Where the milkshed is compact and roads radiate out from market, 

 there are no particular economies in employing large trucks, as in order 

 to secure capacity loads a large truck would need to come very near, if 

 not into, town at intervals during collection. There trucks of smaller 

 capacity, and consequently lower operating costs per mile, could be em- 

 ployed, and in order to be used with greatest efficiency could collect 

 milk over more than one route daily, unloading the milk from the first 

 route and then collecting the second. Limitations on the number of 

 routes which such a truck could collect would depend upon the time at 

 which dealers require milk to be delivered at their plants. However, 

 there would often be opportunity for the same truck to bring in at least 

 two routes and thus increase the daily income from hauling to a level 

 sufficient to maintain equipment in operation, wliile producers were 

 charged a relatively low rate. 



^ See Hammerberg, et al., opus cit. Theoretical considerations developed in this paper 

 sugg-est that for short routes, relatively small trucks will be most effective, while longer routes 

 are most advantageously handled by medium sized or large trucks. It was suggested that "the 

 variable cost per cwt. mile would be smaller for large trucks than for small trucks, that the fixed 

 cost per cwt. probably would be smaller, but that the cost of making the farm stops would be 

 larger for the large trucks. In short .... that large trucks have an advantage as far as 

 actual hauling is concerned, but that small trucks are more eflicient from the collection standpoint. 

 This has led to the development of a type of farm to plant transportation that combines a large 

 truck with several smaller trucks. The small trucks .... perform the farm collection plus 

 as much of the hauling as is necessary to bring the scattered farm milk to some point on the 

 main route, while the large truck picks up the milk at these concentration points and hauls it 

 to the plant. In this manner it is possible to take advantage of the economies peculiar to each 

 size of truck." 



