The Farmville herald. (Farmville, Va.) 1957-current, 1957-06-14

iiHtl SNdLG SSHdiOl, maui BuSat
o invited him to give the dairy
ion controversy His appearance
comedies with the June obsery-
ance or Dairy Month,
Stating that holding the Com
"as is is one of goals of
the state organizat on of dairy
men, he said. We belive the
Commission is rendering a real
service to producers distributors
and the consuming public. he
declared.
Vital To Economy
A former Prince Edward sup
ervisor from Leigh district, Pal
mer expressed the opinion that
abolishing the Commission would
stop growth Of Virginia dairy in
dustry at a time when it is be-
coming vital part of the Com
monwealth's economic life.
H. charged that Commission
opposition is far from widespread.
and rests chiefly with the Rich
mond newspapers. few big food
and ice cream chains. We have
been surprised that SO few peo-
pie have appeared in opposition
during the current investigation
of the Commission by a Virginia
Legislative Council committee,
he said
Palmer said the industry needs
controls because of the heavy in
vestment required and because Of
the special planning required to
insure a continuing supply of
wholesome milk to Virginia COM
munitieS.
At an investment of $1,000 per
COW. Prince Edward county's l.
$40 COWS represent a dairy in
dustry of s1.849,00O on which
dairy farmers pay taxes in the
county The income from these
cows annually at $500 per COW is
S739,600 much of it spent in
Farmville In the entire Farmville
trading area. Palmer estimates
the income from dairy farms is
approximately $3.50 900.
Standards High
The Virginia dairy farmer has
cooperated with the Departments
of Public Health and Agriculture
and has spent large sums in san
itary buildings and equipment to
insure the high quality OF Viz
ginia milk produced.
Virginia consumers have bene-
fitted beyond the current prices
paid for milk. We have had no
milk borne epidemics for Is
years or more-a record of which
We are proud. How could any
thinking consumer encourage the
tearing down Of high capital ia
vestment and such a high quality
milk supply which is Of such i'm
portance to their health and Wel-
fare?'. Palmer asked.
He pointed uot that estimates
place at IS per cent the total of
all Y. S. milk produced and sold
under controls. Much of it is un-
der federal control since the U. S.
Department of Agriculture may
place federal marketing order
in effect when requested to do SO
by 66 2/3 per cent of the produc-
ers supplying a milk market.
If the Milk Commission is
abolished. ! am sure that the
dairy farmers Of Virginia would
apply for and get a Federal order
their only recourse to save them
from economic failure" he added.
Not Stacked
Retutlng the charge that Viz
glnias three-msmber Commission
IS stacked" in favor of the in
dustry. Palmer said that in it's
70 years on only two occasions
have industry members zone pro-
Queer, one distributor voted
against the consumer member
most Of their decisions have been
unanimous.
In defending his opinion that
abandoning controls does not re-
duce consumer prices. Palmer
cited figures from: 1p uncon-
trolled markets; 90 federal con-
troll markets and 90 VIRGINIA
control markets, as follows.
In IS Virginia controlled mark
cts the producers get $6.43 per
hundredweight. distributors have
9l7 cents spread and the con-
sumner pays % cents per quart.
In federal order markets pro-
ducers get s5.4l per hundred
weight, the distributor spread is
1884 cents and home delivered
price per quart is 24.47 cents.
In uncontrolled markets at
Baltimore, Chattanooga. Albany
y. n, and Charleston, S. c., the
producers get from s5.85 10 s6.e5
per hundred weight. but the re-
tan price is the same in all - IS
cents quart.
N these uncontrolled markets
the average price to producers il
oo cents per cwt. less than in
Richmond, while the consumer
pays the same. ] believe that these
llgures prove that resale nrice