Any loss of weight after the milk leaves the farm is a cost to the dealej. 

 L'nder the present system, the loss from handling and spillage is borne by 

 the producer who must accept the weight as taken at the processing plant. 

 Lifting of cans is eliminated, which will reduce labor requirements. There is 

 a high rate of back injury among truckers. The tank method will reduce 

 risk of injury and physical exertion requirements. In time this might enable 

 insurance rates to be reduced and also make working conditions more pleasant. 



No effort will be made to evaluate many of these advantages in 

 terms of dollars. Some of them are subjective costs which can best be 

 measured by each individual. For example, greater accuracy in the butter- 

 fat test may or may not be possible and a change in the bactejia count may 

 make little difference in the price dealers will pay. Loss of weight from 

 spillage, however, is more obvious and some evaluation is possible. 



Producer Loss From Spillage 



The first stage in the handling of milk in cans when spillage may occur 

 is at the farm when milk is poured from the pail to the can or from can to 

 can. The second stage is in trucking cans from the farm to the plant. If cans 

 are too full or if the road is particularly rough, some spillage is expected. 

 The loss will very likely be in cream unless the milk has been agitated. 



The third stage is in the dumping of milk from cans to be weighed. This 

 loss may occur in dumping from can to weigh tank or from overloading of 

 the weigh tank, but the most important loss is from milk residue left in the 

 can later to be washed out. This residue may also include cream frozen to 

 can covers. After the milk is weighed further spillage is a loss to the dealer. 



In an experiment in Vermont, cans were drained for 60 seconds on a 

 rack after the milk had been poured into a weigh tank. There were four 

 ounces of residue in each can. This is .29 percent of a 40-quart can or about 

 2 cents per hundredweight at $6.00 milk which could be saved.* 



Higher Price of Farm Tonkf 



The initial price of the farm tank is higher than the initial price of a 

 can-type cooler. If the time has arrived when investment in some type of 

 cooler has to be made, the difference in the price of each must be evaluated 

 in terms of the convenience and probable savings of one type over the 

 other. A comparison of the older type can cooler with the farm tank indi- 

 cates the higher initial price of the farm tank as installed. 



Gallons 



60 6 $1200. 6-40's $520. 



100 10 1600. 8-40's 600. 



150 15 1875. 12-40's 875. 



^Appendix 1. 



* Statement by Alec Bradfield, Associate Professor, University of Vermont, at a 

 meeting in Durham, N. H., August 11, 195.3. 



fThe prices of tanks used in this bulletin are average price and some variation 

 can be expected between manufacturers. 



6 



