L—l2a.

11

J. PARLANE.

11. Why?— Because it is very unhandy in working cows in large mobs, especially in connection with horned cattle. We, ourselves, handle a great many Ayrshires, very sensitive little animals, and often a cow will stand in a race and defy the others, and unless you use a lot of force you cannot shift her. 12. You are not iv favour of even floors. Why?—On account of the slipping of the cows. We think the particular clause should be better defined. Our floor is concrete, but we had it cut, before it had set, every 3 in., so as to make a place for the cows' feet to catch, and the even surface of the regulations, it seems to me, would prevent this. A rough concrete floor with sufficient slope should be better. 13. How far should the drop be behind the cows? —In the housing of cattle the drop should not be less than 3 in. 14. I mean the distance from the back of the cow to the drain? —It should stand up as close to the heels of the cow as it is possible to leg-rope. It should always stand up as close as possible. 15. If a house and stockyard are now within 30 ft. of each other, would it be a hardship- to remove them?—l think it would be a very great hardship. I know many dairies, short leases, and even freehold farms, with up-to-date houses and good cowsheds having concrete floors. In these cases it would be a great hardship. 16. What of the case of a new place?—lt is all right then. It is a mistake to have animals too close to the house. 17. You have had a good deal of experience. Could there be any improvement in the matter of inspection?— That is a very difficult question to answer. I have no experience of inspection except in one district, and in tßat district a very great improvement could be effected. 18. Where do you think there might be an improvement?—l think Stock Inspectors should have their duties properly defined, and it should be an Inspector's duty to visit a dairy periodically. It should be the Inspector's duty to give advice wherever he possibly could. I think a man of tact and ability should be employed who could give advice on many subjects. I know even, in other districts, where Inspectors have apparentl}- not been eager to advise farmers. A man in that position should be able to advise and tell you how to detect disease of the udder. 1 think the Dairy Inspectors should be under closer supervision. 19. You would rather welcome inspection? — I would welcome inspection if there was a thoroughly qualified man who could give us help. I thoroughly approve of the work the Depart ment is doing in giving the Inspectors instruction. 20. There should be a boarded fence, you say, between the yard and the shed. Would not corrugated iron be as good or better ?—Yes, anything to prevent the dust. 21. Mr. Rhodes.} You take exception to section 29—that is, in respect to housing any other animals. Were you referring to calves? —No. 22. Even where there is an open shed, do you object to boxes for calves at one end?— Yes, it is not a good plan to have the calves too close. Calves fed on new milk have a rather disagreeable odour. 23. What is the general custom in Canterbury? —I believe that in some cases they have calves in part of the cowshed. As far as the general custom is concerned 1 can hardly say. I very often find calves out at tether. Not so many calves are reared about Christchurch, and my experience has been mainly there. 24. As regards calves, you approve of the regulations?— Yes. 25. Section 30, in regard to calves being at or near the cowshed : Is it a fact that very often the cowshed is in the open paddock, with the yard at one side, and the calves are in close proximity on the other side? —Occasionally, but not a practice. 26. Even at the back of the shed"?— No. If they are not confined they take the back of the shed for shelter, and may deposit there, which would be objectionable. 27. It would mean putting the fence 30 yards away? —I think most dairymen recognise that they should have a calf-paddock, and that the calves should be kept separate from the cows. 28. Hon. Mr. McNab.] You say that regulations should be framed dealing with dairy inspection?— Yes, I really believe they should. Unfortunately, many dairymen are not particular, and you must have regulations. 29. Is it possible to draft one set of regulations, or even two, that would meet all the conditions and cases we know exist?— Well, I think the only thing to do is to strike a happy medium. Get some practical man, and make the regulations suitable as far as possible. The main point is to educate the farmer. 30. But under any style of regulations, whether you strike the happy medium or not, must not a great deal rest on the wise administration of the regulations?— Yes, a very great deal, but in any case there should be power of appeal before action is taken in the Court, unless in any very clear breach of the regulations. 31. What form of appeal would you suggest? —Arbitration. The Chief Stock Inspector for the district or two Stock Inspectors. 32. You see the system of appeal in clause 33?— Yes. 33. Could that be modified or altered to meet your views of arbitration?— Well, I think so. Of course, it is a very knotty problem. What we are referring mostly to is in the case of the old Act of 1898, where everything must be to the satisfaction of the Inspector, and no redress can be got even at a Magistrate's Court.. 3i. Clause 34 states, "Any person committing a breach of any of these regulations is liable to a penalty not exceeding five pounds " There is no opinion of the Inspector about that, except in three cases, and in these cases there is a modified form of appeal. In regard to one of them you suggest a standard form of cooling?— Not quite a standard form. You could use different methods as long as the milk is cooled down immediatly to 65°.