The record-union., 1897-01-30
THE DAIRY BUREAU BILL.

The criticisms of the Record Union
yesterday upon the Dairy Bureau bill
were based upon the printed bill as
originally made public. The friends of
the measure have discovered the patent
objections to the bill relative to the in
junction that there shall be report
upon diseased animals made to the bu-
reau before action looking to the de-
struction of the afflicted animal can be
had. That provision was not desired by
the dairy people, and the substitute bill
now provides that when st is clearly
evident that an animal should be de-
suoyed there is to be no delay, but the
Bureau Agent is to act at once under the
advice Of the veterinarian called in.
That provision removes the main OBJ
lection made by the Record Union"
AS to the competency of the agent Sc
lected for a county or district, it is pro-
vided that he shall be one qualified by
practical experience in the handling of
dairy animals, to judge Of the necessity
for veterinary examination to ascertain
If they Should be killed. 1t would seem
that all men thus qualified are capable
of judging when a dairy animal shows
symptoms of disease. They then quar-
antine the COW and call in veterina-
Tian, and nave expert examination
made. This would appear to be fair
guarantee of exercise Of care. The
10 4;,,., ,l1
terrent influence. No dairyman viii
refuse to permit suspected cattle to be
quarantined, since refusal will invari-
ably result in the entire herd being Sc
questered, and the prosecution of the
business of the dairy brought to a
dead standstiu
With this understanding of the bill,
as reconstructed. the gravity Of the OBJ
lection of the Record Union" is re-
moved concerning the qualification Of
the agents of the bureau to determine
when an animal is unfit for dairy pur-
poses. For it is held by dairymen Of
prac teal and long experience, and we
learn that this is the judgment also OF
nigh scientific authority, that one
skilled by experience in the handling
of dairy cattle is competent to deter
mine when a COW is sick to the extent
of her demanding examination by a
veterinary surgeon.
1T IS held by the dairymen that the
duplication Of the tuberculin test is by
no means just in all cases. That IS to
say. en- animal may show by reaction
that st is affected, when II IS not to the
extent Of injury to the milk; that con-
ditiors Of q few hours duration, such
as a change Of weather. or confinement
for time, may put the animal into a
state in which the tuberculin test
would show reaction, though. in fact,
the animal IS healthy; whereupon, un-
der the agreement under which the ru-
berculin is received from the Federal
Government. the animal must be Killed.
Also, IT is held that an animal may re-
act under the test and still be useful for
breeding, her calves being removed i'm
mediately.
primary inspection need not of neces-
sity require the tuberculin test, the con-
sequence of which may be the death of
the animal, but that quarantlning may
intervene until it is positively deter
mined that the animal should be de-
stroyed This would seem to be entire
ly Just of course it presents an issue
as to whether. If there is reaction on
application Of the test, an animal ought
to be at once Killed; and the issue
whether because there is reaction there
fore of necessity the animal is of no
further use. But under the reformed
bill experience will prove how far
there may be conflict between theory
and practice in this respect, and which
is right
Another point made by the Record
Union is explained in behalf of the
dairy interests as to reimbursement OF
owners for animals destroyed, namely,
that it is believed that to more rapidly