MILK SURVEY OF THE CITY OF ROCHESTER 13 



1915, Detroit, Mich. (U. S. Department of Agriculture, Bulletin 

 No. 639. "The Market Milk Business of Detroit, Mich., in 1915," by 

 C. E. Clement and C. P. Warbor.) 



The data was collected during the months of September and 

 October, 1915. 



The methods of enquiry consisted of an examination of the dealers' 

 books and an inspection of the business. 



The subjects covered included : Statistics of the supply, cost of col- 

 lection in the country, cost of handling in country stations, investment in 

 the country, freight, investment in city plants, investment in delivery 

 equipment, average daily sales, cost of handling in city plants, cost of 

 delivery labor, cost of delivery expense, loss on surplus. 



This report is most interesting because of numerous tables showing 

 the different costs. It points out that previous to the adoption bv the 

 City of Detroit of a milk pasteurizing ordinance there were 158 retail 

 dealers, and three months after passing of the ordinance there were only 

 68 plants in which milk was prepared for distribution. 



The chief recommendations are that country plants be standardized 

 in building and equipment, and that there is economy in the sale of milk 

 from city stores. 



1916-1917, New York State. (New York State Assembly Commit- 

 tee; Senator Chas. W. Wicks, Chairman.) 



This survey occupied a period of about six months under an appro- 

 priation of $25,000. 



Methods of enquiry included: Public hearings, at which witnesses 

 were examined representing dealers, producers, and consumers; exam- 

 ination of dealers' books by expert cost accountants, and of producers' 

 accounts. 



Subjects covered included especially the milk supply of New York 

 City; the statistics of the supply; investment in the country; freight; 

 investment in city plants ; investment in delivery ; average daily sales ; cost 

 of handling, labor ; cost of delivery, other expenses ; loss on surplus ; and 

 also a study of dairy farm costs, including cost of labor, cost of feed, 

 other farm expense ; and prices charged consumers. 



Figures were obtained from all of the larger milk companies in New 

 York City, and from many dairy farms. The report shows that the in- 

 crease in cow population in New York State has failed to keep pace 

 with the increase in human population. 



The Committee concludes that: 



"During a period of several years the dairy farmer, laboring industriously and 

 thriftily as he might, was not able to secure such reasonable price from the sale of 

 dairy products in this State as to earn a fair labor and invested capital return. 

 The Committee is constrained to believe that the average dairyman is as thrifty and 



