Enhancing Quality Standards of Raw Milk: Validation of Good Manufacturing Practices In
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ENHANCING QUALITY STANDARDS OF RAW MILK: VALIDATION OF GOOD MANUFACTURING PRACTICES IN THE SUPPLY CHAIN
Baseline Study Report
SAMARTH-NMDP/FORWARD Nepal
July 2016 Acknowledgements:
The study team duly thanks farmers, milk collection and chilling centre personnel, and milk transporters and acknowledges their sincere and honest engagement and response during the entire course of this study. Their deep engagement in the assessment of the present practices and behaviour had been instrumental in documenting this baseline information in the present state. Enumerators' role in simplifying and ranking the practices and behaviour in a quantifiable manner where appropriate is highly appreciated. The study team on behalf of FORWARD Nepal and Samarth-Nepal Market Development Programme (NMDP) would like to extend its special thanks to UK aid for providing us with the financial assistance for conducting this study. The continuous guidance and support the team received from the key market actors of the raw milk supply chain namely, CDCAN, DIA, NDA, NDDB, DLS, DFTQC and Samarth-NMDP management had been of immense value during the course of implementing the GMP validation project including this baseline study. The team would like to extend its sincere gratitude to all of them. Acronyms ADS Agriculture Development Strategy BDS Business Development Service BIMSTEC Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation CCs Collection Centres COB Clot-on-Boiling DANIDA Danish International Development Agency DDC Dairy Development Corporation DDP Dairy Development Policy DFTQC Department of Food Technology and Quality Control DLS Department of Livestock FAO Food and Agriculture Organization of the United National FORWARD Forum for Rural Welfare and Agricultural Reform for Development G, S, Ti, Ta, M, D Gyanoday, Setidevi, Timal, Tanahun, Manakamana, Dumarwana GAP Good Agricultural Practices GMP Good Manufacturing Practices GoN Government of Nepal GVAHP Good Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Practices GVAHP Good Veterinary Husbandry Practices HACCP Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Points HH Households MBRT Methylene Blue Reduction Time MCCs Milk Chilling Centres mL millilitre MoLD Ministry of Livestock Development NBSM Nepal Bureau of Standards and Metrology NCS National Council for Standards NDDB National Dairy Development Board NMDP Nepal Market Development Programme NPR Nepalese Rupees OIE World Organisation for Animal Health SAARC South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation SE Standard Errors SNF Solids Not Fats SPSS Statistical Package for Social Sciences TPC Total Plate Counts UN United Nations WTO World Trade Organization Table of Contents List of Tables List of Figures Executive Summary Impacts of poor quality of raw milk are reflected in short shelf-life of processed products, limited range of finished dairy products in the market, reduced opportunity to supply milk in export markets, and additional costs incurred in food preparation which is borne by the processors and the consumers. Negative impacts on human health though not adequately investigated are obvious and often encountered. In order to address the above-mentioned constraints, Samarth-NMDP is building the capacity of the stakeholders to improve the quality standards of raw milk through an action research on the raw milk supply chain in six pilot sites. The selection of the pilot sites were done in consensus with the major dairy stakeholders; CDCA, DIA, NDA and DDC. The main aim of the action research is to validate in field the draft good manufacturing practices (GMP- developed by Nepal Dairy Development Board)) in the raw milk chain from farm till the milk chilling centres. The objectives of the intervention are: To establish and validate the application of draft good management practices of raw milk supply chain from producers to milk chilling centres. To increase farmers’ income through incremental increase in the sale of milk with improved milk quality.
Within the framework of the intervention, a baseline study was conducted from April to July 2016 to establish pre-intervention scenario of the project. The main objectives of the baseline study were to investigate and document the following status: Benchmark of current husbandry, milk handling and chilling practices and behaviour in raw milk production and supply chain and Quality parameters of raw milk at different points in the supply chain.
This report outlines the findings of the baseline study carried out on a total of 231 dairy households, 38 collection centres, 25 transporters and 19 milk chilling facilities operating within the network of the six pilot sites of Bara, Makwanpur, Kavre, Nawalparasi and Tanahun districts of Nepal. The methodology included review of secondary information, field surveys of farms, collection centres, and milk transport system, and laboratory investigations of milk samples, and data analysis using SPSS and Microsoft Excel. Secondary review revealed that despite reasonably good legal and policy arrangements existing in principle, there is substantive gap in their effective implementation. Enforcement of two Acts, namely, Food Act 1966 and Animal Health and Livestock Services Act 1998 and enshrined relevant regulations within these Acts are the essential governing frameworks in the raw milk supply chain. For various reasons it appears that both promotional and regulatory agencies of the government are not adequately engaged in facilitating and regulating quality standards of raw milk, though this is an issue related to food quality and public health. Moreover, there appears to be a huge gap between our international commitments with certifying bodies such as Codex Alimentarius commission, World trade organization (WTO), OIE and prevailing practices. At the government level, some efforts on formulation of strategic programmes and plans have been made, for example, Agriculture Development Strategy (ADS) defines activities related to output on sustainable farming with established and adopted Good Agricultural Practices (GAP) and Good Veterinary Husbandry Practices (GVHP) in the value chain. Important policy commitments relevant to improving quality standards of milk are also embodied in the 40 points commitment recently released by the Ministry for Livestock Development (MOLD 2016). The provisions include awareness campaigns and appropriate programmes on prevention and control of zoonotic diseases, self-sufficiency in milk and milk products within the next three years, promotion of production of quality feed and regulation of its standards, promotional and regulatory systems for quality assurance of milk and milk products from farm to consumers and so on. However, such policies, strategies and plans are yet to be translated into executable programmes and projects. The survey findings on socioeconomic parameters of farm households reveal mean yield of the crossbred animals is far below their breed potential - for cattle 1,821 (range 300 - 3734) and for buffalo 1,288.0 (range 300 - 2888) litre/lactation. This wide variation within population indicates there is enough room for increasing milk productivity by introducing selection of top performing subset as future parent stocks, and by improving feeding and husbandry practices. Average milk produced per household was 11.05 (± 0.49 SE) litres/day and milk sold/household was 9.36 ± (0.46 SE) in last one year. Likewise milk consumed was 2.04 (± 0.09 SE) litres/per HH during the same period. The annual mean income/HH from sales of milk in the six pilot sites is NPR 160,680.0. This income in cash is substantial for a smallholder farmer suggesting dairy could be one of the important sources of cash income of rural smallholders in areas where formal milk collection network and marketing exists. Analysis of poverty profile reveals there are 11% below the poverty line considering cut of income at 1.25 US$/capita/day. The same stands at 62% while we considered cut off income at 2.5 US$/capita/day. Baseline status with reference to each step of the GMP draft standards is compared and reported. The key steps and parameters reported are on feeding practices and animal nutrition, animal health, housing, personal hygiene of milking personnel, routine milking practices, milk filtration practices, storage at home, and cleaning of milk utensils and transport cans at the farm level. The adoption of these practices is far below acceptable level of the GMP requirements at the farm level. Similarly, Management of CCs is very poor in all respects of GMP requirements. There is inadequate awareness and lack of specific knowledge and skills in handling milk among the CC personnel. The infrastructure, utensils, equipment and facilities at CCs are of primitive state, many of them of non-food grade that are likely to further add contaminants to collected bulk milk. Time management at collection centre is inefficient. All the CCs and MCCs must improve their facilities and reorganize their collection schedule so that the milk reaches MCCs within a stipulated time of about three hours of milking at the farm. Such milk can be subjected to chilling before it is spoiled. If timing of collection and delivery to MCCs is managed appropriately, actors will minimize adulteration of milk currently practiced to correct the compromised quality of the milk. Many factors are influencing the quality of raw milk. Milk as it is secreted from the udder of a healthy cow has no or very low bacterial numbers. As milk is a complete food (for micro- organisms too), their number increases with time at ambient temperature. Further contamination of raw milk due to poor milking methods, inadequate cleaning of milk equipment and poor personal hygiene and subsequent multiplication of the micro-organisms over time is severe as evident from the present study. Good production and herd management practices help ensure low bacteria counts and reduce the risk of the presence of pathogens in the raw milk. Further microbial growth can be checked by chilling milk at the earliest possible time. MBRT test appears to be the most reliable test for screening milk samples for quality. In the MBRT test the time taken to disappearance of the colour of the dye in milk was noted. Interpretation has been made with reference to following details:
Quality of milk MBR time Approx. Approx. bacterial count shelf-life at 40C per ml Good 5 hour or more 40 hrs Below 5,00,000 Fair 2 to 5 hours 30 hrs 5,00,000 to 40,00,000 Bad 20 minutes to 2 hrs 10 hrs 40,00,000 to 2,00,00,000 Very bad 20 minutes or less Less than 10 hrs Above 2,00,00,000 Source: BIS (1981) cited in NDDB (2001).
The laboratory analysis of the milk samples of the farm level revealed that raw milk supplied by 75% of 231 sampled farmers was of fair to good grade with MBRT ranging between 2 to 5 hours however, those of CCs and MCCs is further deteriorated to an extent much higher than anticipated level of deterioration as time lapsed. Several management problems contribute to this deterioration, these gaps and reasons are quantified and reported in details in the subsequent chapters. Microbial growth can be checked by chilling milk at the earliest time. Good production and herd management practices help ensure low bacteria counts at source and reduce the risk of the presence of pathogens in the raw milk. Good-quality raw milk is required to make good-quality dairy products. Degraded raw milk cannot be improved during processing, and defects often become more pronounced at the processor level. Therefore, it is important that raw milk be produced and handled from farm to chilling centres under conditions that do not reduce its quality. However, there is lack of anticipated consistency of milk quality across different tiers of the chain. For example, the evidences of the acidity tests, alcohol tests, MBRT and microbial counts suggest milk quality is compromised by adding preservatives and neutralizers at higher points of the raw milk supply chain. In the process of adoption of GMP, participatory development of voluntary standards first and the incentives accrued from reduced spoilage and enhanced shelf-life of milk products will help prepare market actors to become proactive in preparing and enforcing mandatory standards and legislative measures for regulating the raw milk quality. The key recommendations, among others, made from this study include creating awareness by letting market actors know the consequences of their practices, and filling the knowledge gaps through intensive training on GMP steps at all level of the supply chain -from farm level to MCCs Similarly, periodic milk testing by standardizing MBRT and alcohol tests in Nepalese context in alignment with international standards and introduction of these two tests as standard tests for milk acceptance/rejection and milk pricing at all the three levels of raw milk supply chain is essential to ensure minimum quality standards of raw milk - both in voluntary and mandatory auditing of raw milk. It is also recommended that an evidence based policy advocacy for the first two years be made as a preparatory exercise for amendments and enforcement of the Acts and laws for the regulation of raw milk quality. 1. Introduction
Agricultural Development Strategy (ADS) of the Government of Nepal (GoN) recognizes dairy as one of the top five commodities with the potential for growth and commercialization (MOAD 2015). The topography, climate and farming system of Nepal are conducive to dairy production and its commercialization, however, raw milk quality issues are the barriers to harnessing this potential (DIA et al 2015). The impacts of poor milk quality are severe both on growth of the dairy sub-sector and on public health in Nepal. Such impacts are reflected in short shelf-life of processed products, limited range of finished dairy products that can be manufactured, reduced access of surpluses to export markets, and the additional costs incurred in food preparation that have to be borne by the processors and the consumers. Similarly, transmission of zoonotic diseases, milk and water borne diseases, and food poisoning appear to be the direct impact on public health that might be argued for further scientific investigation and substantiation. Developing and adopting a system of Good Manufacturing Practice (GMP) for the supply of raw milk to the processing industry is widely accepted as a fundamental step that must be adopted to achieve improved raw milk quality. Recognizing this issue has become a fundamental necessity, Samarth-NMDP supported two major studies on milk marketing situation in Nepal in the year 2015 (NDDB 2015). These studies reveal most of dairy smallholders in Nepal do not adopt even the minimum methods/skills of clean milk production practices at farm level. Similarly, problems exist at the collection and chilling centres while handling the milk, its storage and processing. Dairy processors believe, if chilled raw milk meets the minimum standards, they can maintain that standard in the higher milk supply chain to produce dairy products that are safe to consumers. In this context, NDDB Nepal prepared a draft document on "GMP standards for the raw milk supply chain in Nepal" that was supported by Samarth – NMDP. A baseline study was conducted from April to June 2016. The study was conducted after a rapid assessment, identification and detailed mapping of six pilot site chilling centres namely, Setidevi Milk Producers' cooperative, Kavre; Manakamana Milk Producers’ cooperative, Makawanpur; Dumarwana Mil Producers Coop, Bara; Tanahun Milk Producers Coop Association, Damauli, Gyanodaya Dairy, Sunwal, Nawalparasi and Timal Multipurpose Cooperative, Timal Kavre. The main objective of this study were to investigate and document: Benchmark of current husbandry, milk handling and chilling practices and behaviour in raw milk production and supply chain and Establish milk quality parameters at different points of the supply chain.
This report outlines the outcome of the baseline study carried out on a total of 231 dairy households, 38 collection centres, 25 transporters and 19 milk chilling facilities operating within the network of the above six pilot sites.
11 2. Methodology
2.1 Secondary data - review of past efforts The documents reviewed included specific studies, policies, acts, regulations, standards and roles of market actors.
2.2 Sources of primary data The main sources of the primary data for this study were collected using questionnaire surveys of farm households, milk collection centres, milk chilling centres and milk transporters. Similarly, laboratory analysis of milk samples from the milk samples of farmers, CCs, MCCs was undertaken to generate information on milk quality parameters.
2.3 Surveys 2.3.1 Preparation of questionnaire Four different semi-structured questionnaires were prepared, shared with FORWARD and Samarth-NMDP technical team. The questionnaires were field tested and administered for surveying the sample households, milk collection centres, chilling centres and the transporters (Annexure I, II, III, and IV). 2.3.2 Selection and training to enumerators
Twelve enumerators were selected on competitive basis for the field surveys. The main competency criteria for their selection included basic education (minimum bachelor completed), familiarity with rural context and basic animal husbandry practices, basic understanding of dairying and its hygienic requirements, and past experience in field surveys. A one-day training was organized for them on project orientation and questionnaire details. 2.3.3 Sampling and surveys: The dairy farmers registered as members with the primary cooperatives, private collectors affiliated to partner MCC and supplying milk in the current year (based on farmers' list maintained at the milk collection centre) constituted the population frame for selecting farmers. A total of 21 milk collection centres out of 38 were selected randomly as a population frame for sampling farm households for surveys. A total of 231 HHs out of 3,699 farmers of the sampled CCs (about 6 % of the population) were randomly sampled for the HH survey. All the collection centres, chilling centres and transporters operating in milk supply chain of the six pilot sites were surveyed for generating primary information on CCs, MCCs and milk transporters. Thus, 38 Collection centres, 19 chilling centres and 25 transporters were interviewed/observed.
12 2.4 Laboratory investigations
Sample collection Milk samples were collected from farmers while he/she was delivering milk at the CC, from collection centres while the respective CC was delivering milk to MCC and from the pool of MCC before chilling. They were collected in aseptic plastic bottles with the help of sampling tool/spatula. Spot analysis was conducted for number of tests namely, organoleptic, temperature recording, adulteration, alcohol, and methylene blue reduction time (MBRT). Further, they were labelled, placed in ice packaging and transported to the laboratory for microbiological investigation that included total plate counts (TPC) and total coliforms. Upon arrival to a laboratory, samples were transferred to a refrigerator (at 4°C) and then placed in an incubator for culturing within 24 hours. Alcohol test: For routine testing, 2 mL milk was mixed with 2 mL 68% alcohol in a test tube (68 % Ethanol solution was prepared from 68 mL 96% alcohol and 28 mL distilled water). Clot on Boiling (COB) test: Five mL of milk was taken in a test tube and boiled over Bunsen burner/gas stove. Observation was made for presence or absence of clots/precipitate. Normally, milk samples having acidity below 0.20% as Lactic acid show negative results. Acidity test: 10 mL of milk sample were pipette, 3 drops of phenolphthalein was added and titrated with 0.1 N NaOH till the pink end point. Acidity was calculated using the formula:
Per cent acidity as lactic acid= mL of NaOH x 0.1 x 0.009 x 100 ------mL of milk sample
Organoleptic test: was carried out by directly smelling and/or tasting of milk samples at source. Methylene blue reduction test (MBRT): Microbes in milk consume dissolved oxygen present in the milk, resulting in reduction of the methylene blue dye. Higher the microbial load the quicker is the reaction. For this test, methylene blue tablets were dissolved in distilled to prepare 0.005% solution. One mL of this dye was added to 10 mL of milk sample in a test tube placed in a water bath at 370C (Vlab 2013). The time taken to disappearance of the colour of the dye in milk was noted. Interpretation was made with reference to following details: Table 1: MBRT and corresponding bacterial load Approx. Quality of milk MBR time Approx. bacterial count per ml shelf-life at 40C Good 5 hour or more 40 hrs Below 5,00,000 Fair 2 to 5 hours 30 hrs 5,00,000 to 40,00,000 Bad 20 minutes to 2 hrs 10 hrs 40,00,000 to 2,00,00,000 Very bad 20 minutes or less Less than 10 hrs Above 2,00,00,000 Source: BIS (1981) cited in NDDB (2001)
Total plate count (TPC) and total coliforms: The spread plate method was used for enumerating the bacteria (IDF, 1991). Serial decimal dilutions of raw milk samples were made in
13 0.1% buffered peptone water (CM 0509 Oxoid, England). One hundred micro‐litres of milk sample was spread in duplicate over the dry sterile plates of Nutrient Agar (M001 Himedia,
India) and Violet‐Red Bile Agar (VRBG: M049 Himedia, India) for TPC and coliforms respectively.
The plates were then covered, inverted and incubated at 37°C for 48 hours. A colony counter was used to count the colonies on the plates and the results were recorded. Coliforms were identified as pink colonies on VRBG. Colony counts per ml were calculated using the formula given in the manual of NDDB (2001).
2.5 Data analysis All survey data were managed in SPSS for analysis, using a template developed on the basis of interview questionnaire/schedule. Finally, data was analysed using SPSS software and Microsoft-excel. Laboratory data of the milk analysis were managed in excel sheet, analysed and interpreted separately.
3 Results: The findings of this study are described below and include key lessons from the past efforts, relevant policy issues, survey findings and the results of the laboratory analysis of the milk samples.
3.1 Past efforts on promotion, regulation of raw milk quality - Policy issues As Nepal is a member of the World Trade Organization (WTO, 2004), food safety related issues has become one of the priority areas of the government of Nepal at the policy and programme level. It has been an urgency for the government and dairy industries to bring about improvement in the quality and hygiene of the milk produced in Nepal in order to serve the local consumers as well as to streamline the surplus, if any, for export meeting the international standards. However, implementation of the policies, programmes and governance did not occur to the extent they deserve. Regulation of the raw milk standards and safety is enforced through Nepal food Act of 1966. However, the Act does not cover the quality of raw milk from the farm to the chilling centres’ level. This has been completely missed. There is a general belief amongst the concerned authorities that food safety related rules and regulations are basically for inspecting and analysing end products only. At present, adoption of codex principles and guidelines focussing on preventive measures to produce safe milk and milk products is not in practice. Enforcement of two acts, namely, Food
14 Act 1966 and Animal Health and Livestock Services Act 1998 and the respective regulations within these acts is highly essential. Animal health and livestock services act 1998 and regulations 1999, in principle, have been enforced for healthy production, sale and distribution of animal and their products. The act also regulates import and export of livestock, their products and livestock production material. However, the enforcement of these acts and regulations is weak and is yet to be translated into actions. Department of Food Technology and Quality Control (DFTQC) is responsible for regulating dairy products in the market and ready to eat food while DLS is for primary production and some processing activities (DLS is promoting some of them). However, there are substantial gaps and overlaps in the roles and responsibilities of these organizations which make the regulation process more complicated. DFTQC has the mandate to enforce rules and regulations regarding food safety and quality management to ensure the availability of safe and quality food. Following mandatory tasks of DFTQC draw attention of dairy stakeholders in terms of application of GMP standards in raw and processed milk and milk products in the country. Licensing Inspection for compliance Standardization and harmonization of foods in alignment with SPS related rules, regulations and standards. Certification for export and import.
However, for several reasons it appears both promotional and regulatory agencies of the government are not adequately engaged for quality assurance of raw milk in its supply chain. Raw milk in itself is an important food stuff of public health concerns and the most important integral element of inputs necessary to manufacture finished dairy products. Department of Livestock Services is a promotional and regulatory agency for the implementation of rules and regulation in animal production. Enforcement of Animal Health and Livestock Services Act 1998, Animal Health and Livestock Services Regulation 1999 is under the jurisdiction of this Department. Animal disease surveillance, regulation of drug and hormone used in dairy animals are some of the areas that requires DLS attention. The country has to comply with the rules and regulation of the international organization and agreements. Nepal is the member of following international organizations that directly or indirectly demand compliance by GoN on the food safety related policy, rules and regulations. Codex Alimentarius commission World trade organization (WTO) Food and agriculture organization (FAO) of the United Nations (UN) South Asian association for regional cooperation (SAARC) World organization for animal health (OIE) Bay of Bengal Initiative for Multi-Sectoral Technical and Economic Cooperation (BIMSTEC)
There appears to be huge gap between our international commitments and the prevailing practise on the ground. National Council for Standards (NCS) is the government body responsible in approving and endorsing Nepalese standard. Nepal Bureau of Standards and Metrology (NBSM) acts as the secretariat for the NCS, which prepares the country standards (Nepal standard) of food
15 products and methods of food processing. There are about 18 milk and milk products listed in the Nepal Standards related with milk and milk products and its processing, transport and storage (DFTQC 2009), however, raw milk is not part of it.
In 2001, NDDB and DANIDA conducted a Benchmark Survey of Quality of Milk and Milk Products in Nepal (FAO 2010). The survey has shown that many of the products do not meet the minimum compositional standards laid out by the Food Act and the major issuewas in the microbiological quality of the milk.
3.2 Policy environment
Dairy Development Policy (DDP) Dairy Development Policy, 2064 (2008) approved by GoN, is in principle a positive and comprehensive guiding policy for overall development of the dairy sub-sector. One of the elements of the policy focuses on making milk and dairy products easily available to the consumers through quality improvement and regulation. It comprises consumer targeted public awareness programs for promoting consumption habit of more milk and dairy products. The policy sets commitments for regular quality monitoring of the market milk and dairy product. This policy incorporates most of the key elements of the GMP requirements that includes consumers’ awareness about keeping methods, consumption duration, consumption methods of the milk and products, preparation and implementation of appropriate packing standard of milk and dairy products, implementation of milk collection and processing, code of practice at the milk chilling centres and dairy processing factories, and strengthening of laboratories at different levels for ensuring quality of milk and dairy products. For the implementation and monitoring arrangements of this policy, NDDB and other related institutions are made responsible. NDDB is also required to prepare necessary working procedure for implementing the policy and also for taking initiative to make necessary amendment on the existing legal provision for implementing this policy. This GMP validation intervention from Samarth-NMDP is a first systemic step towards realizing the DPP in action. The evidences generated from this action research will form the foundation for setting standards of raw milk in the Nepalese context and for revisions of this policy, if required.
Agriculture Development Strategy (ADS) The ADS recently approved by GoN recognizes that competitiveness of Nepalese products have been compromised due to lack of quality. The ADS defines activities related to output on sustainable farming with established and adopted Good Agricultural Practices (GAP), Good Veterinary Husbandry Practices (GVHP) in the value chain. Again, there is a gap in translating these policies into executable programmes. Similarly, ADS further recognizes the need for formulation of standards for Good Agricultural and Veterinary and Animal Husbandry Practices at production farms and good manufacturing practices at dairy processing units. These standards need to be customized to make them suitable to the socioeconomic and agro-ecological conditions and needs to be comparable to
16 international standards through interaction frompublic and private sector. This, in principle, becomes most relevant to dairy sub-sector. The focus need to be on farm sanitation and hygiene, practices to prevent use of hazardous chemicals and antibiotics in livestock production process, and strict adoption of GMP standards across the milk supply chain and including finished products.
Ministry of Livestock Development (MOLD) - 40 points commitments: Some of the important policy commitments relevant to improving quality standards of milk embodied in the 40 points commitment recently released by the Ministry for Livestock Development are (MOLD 2016): awareness campaigns and appropriate programmes on prevention and control of zoonotic diseases Self-sufficiency in milk and milk products within the next three years Promotion of production of quality feeds and regulation of its standards Promotional and regulatory systems for quality assurance of milk and milk products from farm to consumer levels.
It is high time to anticipate that MOLD will translate the DDP and policy commitments stated above into executable programmes and projects across the country.
3.3 Survey Findings Survey findings are described in two sections, the first section covers the socioeconomic descriptions of the farm households and the second one describes the baseline status compared against the draft GMP step/standards. 3.3.1 Socioeconomic description of dairy farming In the pilot sites of the GMP validation project, about 11 per cent of households are headed by female member of the family, which is far below the national average of 25.7 per cent implying males tend to stay at home in families engaged in milk production and sale. Overall, about 57 per cent of respondents of this survey are female members of the family. Family size of the household in the study sites was 6, considerably higher than the national average of 4.88. Among the sampled families, half were Brahmin followed by Janajatis, Chhetris and Madeshis. Timal has predominantly Janajatis followed by Chhetri while Gyanodaya site had predominantly Madhesis followed by Brahmin and Chhetris.
Land size and livestock holding Overall 98 per cent of households in the pilot sites own land, with a mean land holding of 18.14 kattha (range 1.0 to 220.0). Almost all farmers kept livestock. Average number of dairy livestock holding per household was 3.45 (± 0.23 SE) with 1.27 adult cattle and 0.82 adult buffalo. Livestock holding showed a significant but weak positive correlation with family size (r = 0.236 p ≤ 0.05) and land holding size (r = 0.312; P≤ 0.05). Of the land owning HHs about 65 per cent have allocated land for forage cultivation with mean area of 3.69 kattha (range 0.5 to 40.0).
17 Maximum land allocated for forage cultivation was found in Manakamana site. Livestock holding has a positive correlation (r = 0.464; P ≤ 0.01) with land area allocated for forage cultivation. This correlation should have been much stronger, implying there is still more need to tie up forage promotions programmes in dairy pockets to make this association stronger to achieve reduction in cost of milk production. Direct observations reveals most of the dairy animals are crossbred types - cattle either are Jersey or Holstein Friesian crosses and buffalo Murrah crosses. The average yield of these animals under ideal management conditions is anticipated to be more than 3,000 litres/lactation for cattle and 1,600 litre/lactation for buffalo. However, mean yield of these crossbred animals is far below their breed potential - for cattle 1,821 (± 726 SE) (range 300 - 3734) and for buffalo 1,288.0 (±573.0 SE) (range300 - 2888)) litre/lactation. This wide variation in productivity indicates there is enough room for increasing milk productivity by introducing selection of the top performing animals as future parent stock and also by improving feeding and husbandry practices.
Highest milk yield per lactation in cattle was observed in Dumarwana site and the lowest in Timal. Similarly, the highest milk yield per lactation in buffalo was found in Manakamana site and lowest in Tanahun A weak positive correlation (r=0.185; P≤0.05) was observed between milk yield of cattle and amount of water consumed by the animal per day. Similar association was also evident in buffalo (r=0.247; P≤0.01). Provision of water to dairy animals considering maintenance (about 40 to 50 litre/day) and production (about 4 litre for each litre of milk produced) will significantly improve the productivity of the dairy animals.
Milk production, consumption and sale On average, milk produced in a HH in the last one year was 11.05 (± 0.49 SE) litres/day and milk sold/HH was 9.36 ± 0.46 litres/day. Likewise milk consumed/HH was 2.04 ± 0.09 litres/day for the same period. This minor discrepancy between response and derived figures for consumption (derived consumption equals 11.05 - 9.36 = 1.69 vs responded consumption of 2.04 litre/HH/day) might have resulted from rinsing of milk utensils after milking and transfer. This implies that farmers do not add water intentionally to increase the milk volume. It appears farmers recognize the current pricing practice of milk is based on Fat, SNF and total solid content of the milk.
Price and income from milk Overall, average price per litre of milk was NPR 49.5 (± 0.66 SE) for the past one year period. The prices for milk were different in different sites with Tanahun having the highest and Manakamana the lowest (Table 1).
Table 2: Milk sold by HHs and corresponding annual income for milk sale Volume sold in last one year Price per litre Sites (mean ± SE) Income per HH/annum (mean ± SE) Dumarwana 47.82±1.18 2999.14±234.48 148,367.2 Ganodaya 48.31±1.16 3253.27±590.12 156,449.8 Manakamana 46.14±1.44 3752.69±429.54 170,034.4 Setidevi 47.87±1.49 3965.58±257.63 186,223.6
18 Tanahun 54.14±2.58 3312.24±551.51 172,402.1 Timal 51.44±1.90 2720.19±306.84 135,003.0 Overall 49.21±0.70 3286.56±169.66 160,681.2
The annual mean income/HH from selling of milk in the six pilot sites is NPR 160,680. This is a significant income in cash suggesting dairy could be one of the important sources of cash income of rural smallholder dairy farmers in areas where formal milk collection network and marketing exists. Analysis of poverty profile considering cut of income at 1.25 US$/capita/day reveals there are about 11% HHs below the poverty line. The same stands at 62% while we considered cut off income at 2.5 US$/capita/day.
Milk Loss Farmers reported that milk loss at the HH level occurred during milking, selling, transportation and due to other various unforeseen circumstances like strikes, calamities, etc. However, milk loss from rejection due to quality issue at the CC was almost absent, though losses at home due to milk spoilage was reported. Farmers reported that they did not take such milk to the CC.Overall,24.2 percent i.e. 56 of 231 HHs reported loss of milk during various stages from milking to transportation to CCs (Table 2).
Table 3: HHs facing milk loss during marketing of milk Per cent HHs facing milk loss while handling raw milk Sites No Yes Dumarwana(n=57) 75.4 24.6 Ganodaya(n=34) 76.5 23.5 Manakamana(n=30) 56.7 43.3 Setidevi(n=32) 65.6 34.4 Tanahun(n=48) 97.9 2.1 Timal(n=30) 70.0 30.0 Overall(n=231) 75.8 24.2
The major reason for milk loss farmers reported are poor storage facilities resulting in clotting in areas where there is one time collection a day. Other reasons stated are unforeseen circumstances like earthquake, Bandhs and road blockade. Likewise 12.5 percentage of HHs reported loss of milk during milking and transportation to CCs. The highest quantity, i.e. about 90% of the milk loss was due to bad storage facilities and unforeseen circumstances. However, loss during milking, transportation and selling was reported negligible in comparison to losses due to unforeseen circumstances (Table 3). Total loss of milk was less than 1 percent (about 0.60 percent) with respect to total milk sold and total income in a year in all the sites.
Table 4: HHs facing milk Loss in various stages Percentage of Total milk loss in Total loss in Stages Reasons HHs one year ( Litre) Income(NPR) Milking 12.5 Poor handling 193 9,380 Poor rural road and poor handling of Transportation 12.5 41 1,897 vessels
19
Selling 3.57 Poor handling of Vessels 2,360 58 Blockade, earthquake, poor storage Other 71.43 3619 170,361 facilities and clotting 183,998 Total (N=56) 100 3911
It was surprising to note that milk loss due to spoilage of milk at CCs and MCCs is almost absent. Baruwa CC of The Gyanoday Dairy of Nawalparasi reported a loss of one batch of their storage (about 1,000 litres) in one year (personal communication). Considering the poor quality of the milk at some CCs and MCCs, it is speculated that some manipulative efforts to alter milk composition is practiced. Such adulterations made or neutralizers used may not be detectable in a cross-sectional study like this, as such cases are sporadic. Longitudinal studies overtime will become more relevant in future and should be the part of routine tests of MCCs and processors.
3.3.2 GMP steps for hygienic milk production: farm level practices and behaviour
(NB: site ranking: D= Dumarwana, G = Gyanodaya, M = Manakamana, S = Setidevi, Ta = Tanahun and Ti = Timal)
Animal Nutrition:
One of the major reasons for reduced productivity and altered composition of milk appears to be associated with inadequate feed and water supplied to the dairy animals. Dry forage especially rice straw forms the major chunk of the diet (Table 4). Observations reveal that ingredients rich in protein sources such as cakes and pulse/bean by products are lacking in concentrate feed. Legume green biomass in green forage segment is also extremely low. Water feeding is also limited. There is a knowledge gap among farmers about the water requirements of an individual animal based on physiological maintenance - let us say by body weight/size and the milk it is producing.
Table 4. Quantity of water and feed supplied to dairy animals in GMP pilot sites Average quantity of diet ingredients in a day Livestock Water (litre) feed (Kg) Straw/Dry Forage (Kg) Green forage (Kg) Cattle 53.62 4.22 8.80 11.73 Buffalo 51.75 3.57 8.96 11.44
GMP step: Animal Nutrition Standards to be achieved Required activities to Baseline status and potential impacts meet GMP standards
20 The diet shall be balanced, Feeding: Free access to The feeding schedule followed for within the farm and animal quality forage (legumes + cattle in general was 53.62 litre of constraints, to optimize the non-legumes) and provision compositional quality of the of a balanced diet. water, 4.37 kg ration feed, 8.8 kg dry milk. Free access to water straw and 11.73 kg of green forage per (Maintenance + 4 lit for each animal per day. The feeding schedule Milk shall not be adulterated litre milk produced), with any extraneous substances preferably ad libitum. for buffaloes was also reported within intended to give false the same range (Table 4). constituent quality test readings. Legume forages and protein sources of the concentrate is too low against the recommended combinations of the balanced diet. Feed will only be sourced from a supplier/manufacturer Water supply is restricted, (2 - 3 times a that have a certificate of quality assurance. day), quantity is neither proportional to milk yield nor ad libitum.
Feed source not defined, predominantly homemade - wheat and rice brans being the main constituents. It seems farmers will not shift to factory made feed in the near future (based on FGD inferences). It is good that farmers did not practice supplementation of any kind in animal diets with an intent to alter milk composition to get higher price.
Animal Health
The study focused on whether any animal health recording system existed so that the health services, disease occurrence and drugs used could be traced. Such system will allow traceability of contaminants of milk. However, no reliable animal health recording system existed at the farm level (Table 5) except a few notes or prescriptions here and there. Department of Livestock Services, Animal Health Directorate has a system on reporting of epidemics of animal diseases, if any, in districts/locality, butlacks recordings at the individual farm level. This information management system of the DLS is inadequate towards achieving traceability at the farm level.
Table 5: Status of maintenance and checking of livestock health records Response per cent (n = 231) Parameters Yes No Maintenance of health records 2.6 97.4 Checking of health records 1.7 98.3
21 GMP step: Animal Health Standards to be Required activities to meet Baseline status and potential impacts achieved the standards Milk used for human Health/medical records Activities deemed necessary for consumption should not be allow common diseases to maintaining animal health records were infected with mastitis organisms, blood cells, be identified to take nearly absent. colostrum, extraneous measures to prevent milk hormones, drugs, or other contamination. Ignorance and lack of information has harmful substances. Recording of medicine, promoted repeated occurrence of vaccines, anthelmintics, common diseases leading to milk antibiotics used will allow contamination with microorganisms, the correct drug withdrawal and increased chance for occurrence of periods to be observed for drug residues in milk. dairy animals under treatment. Sites Ranking: M>Ta> G> D> S> Ti
Animal housing
Housing conditions determine the level of contaminants likely to enter in raw milk therefore, are very important factors to consider for the production of good quality milk. Housing conditions, specifically flooring and their cleanliness status become important at the farm level. Floor slope, drainage, bedding materials were the key elements examined and relative assessment and ranking were made based on enumerators understanding (Figure 1). The facilities observed were ranked 'very bad' to 'very good' as perceived and coded as appropriate in the Nepalese farming context.
Figure 1: Housing conditions of livestock shed in sites
GMP step: Housing Standards to Required activities to Baseline status and potential impacts be achieved achieve the standards Cattle and buffalo Dryness of the floor and Based on enumerators visual observation and lying areas shall be the bedding material- ranking, about 40% of the livestock houses dry and clean. The animals shall have minimize incidence of were in unacceptable conditions (Figure 1) in clean flanks, and diseases such as mastitis terms of dryness of the shed. Wet sheds are teats should be free which affects milk quality, more likely to be the source of infection for from flies other pests. beds should be dry to contagious diseases like mastitis and also for Surrounding minimize bacterial contaminants while milking that increase the areas should be contamination. microbial load of the milk at source. tidy and safe for Sites ranking: G> S> M> D> Ta> Ti Cleanliness: Beds and About 51% of the farm houses were of
22 cattle and beddings should be kept unacceptable conditions (Figure 1) in terms of people. free from dung which will cleanliness. This is one of the major factors keep udders clean. affecting the cleanliness of udder and thereby causing contamination of milk while milking itself. S> G> Ta> Ti> M> D Space: Animals should Space provisions in the Nepalese context were have enough space to observed to be satisfactory. move and lie freely. S> G>M> Ta> Ti> D
23 Personal Hygiene of farmers/milking personnel Awareness of personal hygiene requirements, behaviour and preparedness for bringing this into practices were assessed through interviews and direct observations. This particular step of the GMP practices appears to be the single most important element farmers ignore to execute to achieve hygienic standards. Direct observations reveal that these activities contribute the most to foreign particles and microbial load to the raw milk at farm level.
Figure 2: Personal hygiene of milk handlers
GMP step: Personal yHgiene Standards to Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts be achieved Farmers who are Cleanliness: Provision of Cleanliness of most of the milking personnel milking should have soap, toilet and hand and milk handlers was found to be just clean hands, free from any infectious washing facilities and satisfactory to very bad. Dirty hands, cloths conditions. clean hand drying cloth, and inappropriate/wrong behavioural Spitting/smoking potable water quality and practices of milk handler are major sources of should not be allowed whilst clean cloths. It reduces contamination of milk. milking. contamination risks to milk. It was noted that less than 20% of the milking personnel had acceptable level of personal Sick persons should not be hygiene for milking and milk handling related milking/handling the tasks (Figure 2). There are quite a few milk. behavioral practices to change, even in "satisfactory" rank. G> Ta> S> Ti> M> D
Sickness Policy: To More than four fifth of HHs reported milking prevent people with or handling of milk by other healthy members contagious conditions of family or neighbour when the milk handler carrying out the milking. or milking personnel are sick.
Cleanliness of milking and milk storage utensils/equipment
During the survey direct observations were made on the utensils used for milking, milk transfer, storage and transport. Enumerators, as they perceived following the norms set during enumerators’ orientation training, ranked qualitatively the status for the parameters elaborated below.
24 GMP step: Cleanliness Standards to be Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts achieved All such equipment should be Cleaning of milking and Cleanliness of milking vessels, storage cleaned as soon as possible vessels and transport cans was after use. The cleaning process storage vessels and shall render it free from fat, transport cans: Use of observed satisfactory to very bad in protein and bacterial deposits. appropriate chemicals majority of HHs. Only about 16-20 per These equipment must be which remove milk cent of HHs had clean utensils. stored in the clean condition, preferably in direct sunlight, deposits and sterilize the Moreover, there was no consistency in ready for reuse. equipment. Plastic use of cleaning chemicals. scouring pads shall be Dirt, fat and other deposits in such used to assist the utensils will harbour microbes that will cleaning process. contaminate milk and grow to significantly greater number during the phase before chilling and reduce milk quality. G>Ta>S> M> Ti> D
Sites Cleaning substance used for Cleaning Utensils Ash Detergent Powder Soap Liquid soap Water only More than one Overall (n=231) 4.8 16 16.5 0.4 3.9 58.4
Figure 3: Per cent HHs showing cleanliness of milking, storage and transport cans
Milking practices Adoption of routine for achieving hygienic milk was assessed based on following parameters. Observations and responses received are presented in Table 6 and figure 4 below.
25 Table 6: Practices before and after milking of animals Parameters Per cent response (n = 231) Yes 28.1 Washing and drying of udder before milking No 56.7 washing but not drying 15.2 Yes 74 Provide feed/water just after milking No 26 Yes 54.1 Discard of milk in case of systemic sickness and mastitis No 28.6 No disease noticed 17.6 Yes 4.3 Foremilk and check it for any abnormality No 95.7 Suckling 59.3 Pot feeding 20.3 Feeding calves Both 3.5 No feeding 16.8 Aluminium can/bucket 34.2 Stainless steel can/bucket 16.1 Milking vessels Plastic bucket 17.3 More than one 18.6 Others 13.8
Udder cleanliness: None of the farmers used to clean the udder to the extent GMP standards demand (Figure 4). More than 43% of the farmers used to milk from dirty udders and teats.
Figure 4: HHs with level of udder cleanliness
GMP step: Milking Practices Standards to be Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts achieved A simple, repeatable, Milking routine adopted Milking routine was practiced by only 28.1 routine of milking needs to be the same for all per cent of HHs specifically by washing should be used that prevents milk from animals and should include and drying the udder before milking, while being contaminated washing with clean potable 15.2 per cent reported only washing, not with dirt and other water and drying before drying. Majority of the farmers did not harmful substances, is safe for the animals, milking. The drying shall be have any such practice in routine (Table 6). and minimizes the with soft clean paper or a G> S> Ti> Ta> D> M risk of udder diseases. clean cloth. It helps to remove dirt and dung, Udder cleanliness was observed reducing possible milk satisfactory to very bad in most of the contamination. dairy animals. The impact of absence or improper washing and drying of udder may cause dung contamination, soiling and entry of other solids that contaminate milk. Post milking routine: Food About three-fourth HHs provided feed or and water offered water to animals immediately after
26 immediately post milking milking. This is good practice. If not keep animals standing whilst practiced it may cause animals with open closing their teat canals. teat canals to lie down allowing dirt and bacteria entering into the teat canal and causing teat/udder infections. Ti> M> D> S> G> Ta Check abnormality/ Only 54.2 % HHs reported that they discarding unfit milk: discard milk from infected dairy animals, Milk from animals that are while 28.4 per cent reported not doing so producing colostrum, or whose milk at all; 17.5 per cent of HHs reported they is within the drug withdrawal period must be discarded and kept out of had not encountered any such kind of the human food chain. Milk diseases. 95.7 per cent HHs do not check contaminated with blood, clots and foremilk for abnormality. Milk other harmful substances must also be discarded. contaminated with high bacterial loads and drug residues, such as antibiotics, are of significant health risk to humans. These milk contaminants even at low levels will contaminate larger quantities of milk further up in the supply chain. Results by sites: Check abnormality: M> S> D> Ta> Ti> G Discarding milk: : G> S> M> D> Ti> Ta Feeding calves: it is advisable About 60 and 20.3 per cent of HHs were to milk out all of the milk found feeding calves through suckling and from the animal and feed pot feeding respectively. Some farmers calves separately from were following both practices. another clean bucket. There S> M> D> Ta> G> Ti shall be calf feeding buckets which are not used for milking. Milking vessels should be Large diversity was found in type of vessels made of aluminium or used in milking. Use of aluminium bucket, stainless steel and are of the plastic bucket and stainless steel bucket design that is easily cleaned. was observed/reported. Plastic buckets are often difficult to keep clean and are often used for multiple purposes, which pose contamination risk to milk.
Milk filtration: Only about 50% farmers used to sieve the milk while transferring to storage/transport cans (Table 4). They use different types of materials for sieving the milk at home. Cleanliness of the sieve they use is also amatter of great concern.
Table 7: Prevalence of milk filtration practice and types of filters used Parameters Per cent response (n = 231)
27 Yes 52.4 Adoption of milk filtration practices No 47.6 Stainless Steel 3.5 Cloths 8.7 General 1.3 Plastic Filter 7.8 Filter types Tea Filter 33.2 More Than One 5.2 No Use 40.3
GMP step: Milk filtration Standards to be Required activities baseline status and potential impact Achieved
All milk must be Milk filtering: foreign bodies such Only 52.4 per cent of HHs reported filtered effectively as milk clots, dirt and hair must adopting milk filtering practice, many before being placed in storage vessels. be removed from milk before the intermittently. storage period to minimize bacterial growth and M> G> Ta> S> D> Ti contamination
Filter Types: rigid cleanable plastic 40.3 per cent HHs were not using any filters should be used. If muslin cloth is types of milk filters, while 33.2 and 8.7 to be used, it must be used only for this purpose. per cent of HHs reported using of tea filter and 8.7 cloths for milk filter. With poor shed and animal sanitation, milk filtering is an essential tool for removing dirt from milk that could be stored at high temperatures. Using dirty filters only adds more dirt to the milk.
Storage of milk at farm household:
The practices such keeping evening milk for selling it next day, dirty utensil, keeping milk at warm temperature are key reasons for milk spoilage in areas where only one time collection is made. In Manakamana, Dumarwana, Gyanoday and Tanahun two times collection is practiced in general. One time collection is practiced in Setidevi and Timal sites.
Table 8: Storage of milk at household level No 78.9 Milk storage overnight for selling it on the next day Yes 21.1 No 68.4 Keeping milk can overnight in cold water Yes 31.6 No 94.4 Wrapping milk can with wet cloth Yes 5.6 Mixing of materials in milk for its preservation and/or fat/SNF improvement No 92.6
28 Yes 7.4
GMP step: Storage of milk at farm Standards to be Required activities Status and potential impacts achieved
Milk should be Storage overnight/ evening milk About 22 per cent reported of storing stored /transported in chilling: milk cannot be taken milk overnight for selling it for next day. clean containers. Its temperature shall be immediately to a chilling facility; Overall, evening chilling practices were reduced to 5°c as it should be covered and not good in the HHs. 68.4 per cent of soon as possible after allowed to cool naturally. HHs reported not keeping milk can in milking. To improve cooling it is advised to cold water and 94.4 per cent of HHs stand the covered milk storage vessel reported of not wrapping of the can with in a container of clean cold water overnight. wet cloth. The bacterial growth will be An alternative method is to wrap a wet rapid where cows are dirty, filters not clot over the surface of the milk used, unfit milk not discarded, vessels storage container and leave overnight. not cleaned etc., and also resulting in Care must be taken to ensure reduced milk shelf-life. that cooling water must not contaminate the milk. Immediately after milking is finished, milk shall be taken to the chilling centre Adulteration practices: milk Adulteration practices were reported in shall not be contaminated with about 8 per cent of HHs only. any extraneous substances such Adulteration substances used degrade as sodium bicarbonate, sugar the milk quality and facilitate faster and urea with the intention of degradation and are also unfit for human extending the life of the milk, consumption. and creating false quality test G>S> Ti> Ta> M> D readings.
3.3.3 GMP steps at collection centres: practices and behaviour The survey findings of the collection centres are interpreted based on routine tasks carried out there. Enumerators directly observed all the tasks at all the 38 collection centres, interviewed the CC in charge and made direct observations on facilities, utensils and equipment being used there. The findings are presented in the tables and figures below:
Table 9. Milk sampling and testing Yes 71.1 Calibration of the testing tools No 28.9 Yes 42.1 Display of standard milk sampling procedure No 57.9
29 Yes 68.4 Maintaining records of the test results No 31.6 Yes 50 Traceability: coding of samples No 50
Figure 5: Cleanliness of sampling tools and testing area
GMP step: Milk Sampling and Testing Standards to Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts be Achieved Sampling shall be Cleanliness: Sampling Cleanliness of sampling tools and testing area done using a equipment and testing was observed satisfactory to very bad in standard procedure, with area shall be clean and not majority of CCs. calibrated cause any additional Poor cleanliness contribute to false results of equipment and bacterial contamination to the testing, which mislead. should use the minimum volume the milk. necessary. Where Calibration: All the 71.1 per cent of CCs practiced calibration of possible, a system equipment and testing testing equipment mostly with assistance from of traceability chemicals shall be their main processors. should be developed. calibrated at least annually There is lack of adequate and accessible service or when different batches system for getting testing equipment calibrated. of testing chemicals are It is expensive as well. used. Methods: Standard 42.1 per cent of CCs displayed standard milk documented procedures sampling procedure. Contamination between shall be used that are samples will negate some results when testing displayed for farmers to for various parameters like antibiotics. see that have a positive contribution to the maintaining of good practice. Testing and recording: All CCs conducted tests for fat, over 75 per cent The record of results shall be for SNF, over 25 per cent for acidity and over 15 stored in a permanent retrievable per cent reported practicing different tests as format. It shall be available for farmers to check their own per need including alcohol, coliform, and lactose records, if necessary. and COB tests. Only 68.4 per cent of CCs reported recording of milk testing results. All these tests conducted at the CC level lack adequate authentication and reliability as equipment, calibration, test environment and standard procedures are not up to the mark and lack information for verification.
30 S> D> Ti> Ta> M> G Traceability: to allow full Half of CCs reported coding of milk samples traceability of milk back to while others reported no coding of milk the farmers' level, samples. duplicate samples shall be kept in refrigerators for No practice of taking duplicate samples existed. seven days. When there is no coding, tracing the source will be impossible.
Table 10: Milk filtering at the CC level Parameters Per cent response (n = 38) Steel Filter 2.7 Cloth filter 34.2 General filter 7.9 Filter types Plastic filter 34.2 Tea filter 2.6 More than one 10.5 Others 7.9 Yes 28.9 Guidelines for filter cleaning No 71.1
GMP step: Milk filtering at the CC level Standards to be Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts achieved All incoming milk Filter types: filter type shall be Large variation was reported in use of shall be filtered muslin cloth, rigid food grade filter type. 34.2 per cent of CCs with appropriate filter which will not plastic or stainless steel. reported using cloth and plastic filter, harm milk quality. while 10.5 per cent CCs reported using Filter shall be more than one filter. Also steel filters, changed periodically during general tea filters and locally available the unloading materials were also used for filtering. period to allow Cleaning: If during use the filter Only 28.9 per cent of CCs reported identification of the becomes heavily soiled it shall be application of guidelines for filter source of contaminants. cleaned or changed for a clean cleaning. one. After every use, it shall be cleaned with standard cleaning Unclean filter in itself harbours procedure. If muslin is used it shall microbes and becomes the source of not be allowed to touch the microbes in the bulked milk. surface of the filtered milk.
Storage in churns and vats Table 7. Milk storage provisions Storage vessels Aluminium can 34.2 Stainless steel can 2.7 Plastic container 26.3
31 More than one 34.2 Other types 2.6 Minimum 0 Storage Time (Hours) Average 2.82 Maximum 16 Shady Place 71.1 Storage Place Open space 28.9
GMP step: storage in churns and vats at CC level Standards to Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts be achieved Storage of un- Storage vessels: Aluminium cans and plastic containers were chilled milk shall Churns and vats shall be made up used in considerable number of CCs. CCs are be for the of stainless steel. shortest possible using different types of vessels for storage time purpose. Dirty containers stored in the open during hight ttemperature are a reservoir for bacteria which will damage the milk that is stored in them. Storage time: holding time Average milk storage or holding time in CCs was of un-chilled milk, awaiting found 2.83 hrs, with maximum of 16 hrs. transport shall not be more than 1 hour. Storage Place: Storage Over 70 per cent of CCs reported storage of milk location shall be shaded in shady places while 29 per cent reported from direct sunlight, to storage in open spaces. minimize the risk of milk Bacterial growth in milk is partly a result of temperature. reheating. Holding milk at high temperatures causes rapid bacteria multiplication and reduction of milk quality. D> M> S> Ta> G> Ti
32 Cleaning of surfaces and equipment that directly come in contact with milk
Table 8: Cleaning of surfaces and equipment that directly come in contact with milk Hand 100 Methods of cleaning Cleaning in place 0.0 Very Good 0.0 Good 7.90 Testing of water quality used for cleaning Satisfactory 36.8 Bad 31.6 Very Bad 23.7 Enough 57.9 Water availability at CCs Not Adequate 42.1 Very Good 0.00 Good 21.1 Facilities for cleaning milk cans at CCs Satisfactory 52.6 Bad 23.7 Very Bad 2.60 Yes 94.7 Cleaning of milk cans immediately after use No 5.30 Yes 89.5 Cleaning of utensils after every use No 10.5 Before use 7.90 Interval of cleaning of utensils After use 56.3 Both 36.8 Surf 39.5 Soap 2.6 Liquid detergents 31.6 Cleaning chemicals Water only 5.3 More than One 18.4 Others 2.6 Very Good 0.0
Good 23.7
Absence of fat deposition in the storage vessels Satisfactory 39.5
Bad 21.1
Very Bad 15.8
GMP step: Cleaning of surfaces and equipment that directly come in contact with milk including pumps, pipe work, vats, etc. Standards to be Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts achieved All equipment should Method: all milk contact All the CCs reported cleaning by hands be cleaned as soon as equipment including pumps, (manually) (Table 11). possible after use. All milk residues, fat, pipe work, vats etc. shall be Milk residues and molds are a reservoir for protein and other cleaned using standard CIP bacteria and drug residues that can contaminate substances likely to method after every use. subsequent batches of milk causing decreased cause bacterial growth quality and spoilage. should be removed. Potential cleaning hazards such
33 Both the inside and as taps, corners and inside roof Note: CIP does not appear to be feasible in CCs outside of equipment surfaces of tanks shall to be at the present stage due to small scale of should be cleaned. operation. manually cleaned if necessary. Water quantity and quality: About 58 per cent of CCs reported The quantity of water readily adequacy of water for cleaning available shall be in excess of purposes. However the testing for cleaning requirements. Water water quality was not a routine quality shall be tested on practice. Water quality used for annual basis and any treatment cleaning purpose was observed required carried accordingly. satisfactory to very bad in most of CCs. Facilities for Cleaning: Easy Over 70 per cent of CCs reported access, provision of potable satisfactory to good facilities for water and other required cleaning of milk cans. facilities shall available. Cleaning chemicals: About 40 per cent CCs use surf. 32 per cent use liquid detergent for cleaning purposes, while use of soap, only water and more than one chemical was also reported. Effectiveness of Cleaning: Majority of CCs reported cleaning of The effectiveness of cleaning shall be milk cans and utensils after use. checked every week. Potential Likewise absence of fat deposition on cleaning hazards such as taps, pipe bends and inside roof surfaces of storage vessels was observed tanks need to be checked more satisfactory to very bad in majority of frequently. CCs.
Table 9. Cleaning of surfaces and equipment that do not come in direct contact of milk
Parameters Per cent respondents (n = 38) Dry cleaning (seeping) 21.1 Cleaning by water only 50 Methods of cleaning Cleaning by liquid detergent 21.1 More than one method 7.8 Daily 11.1 Walls Weekly 55.6 Monthly 33.3 Daily 84.2 Interval of cleaning Floor Weekly 13.2 Monthly 2.6 Daily 3.7 Weekly 29.6 Ceiling Monthly 44.4 Yearly 22.3
34 GMP step: cleaning of surfaces and equipment that do not come in direct contact of milk Standards to be Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts achieved
All non-food contact Method: All production Half of CCs reported cleaning by water while, surfaces should be area walls and floors 21.1 per cent CCs reported dry cleaning and clean and free of dirt deposits. They should should be cleaned daily. cleaning by liquid detergent. CCs used more be free-draining and Equipment should be sited than one method to clean such surfaces and capable of drying to allow easy access to equipment after cleaning. walls. High level cleaning should be carried out on a Dirty walls, floors etc. harbor insects, yeasts and molds amongst other items can contaminate milk and reduce scheduled basis. its quality.
Effectiveness of Cleaning: Majority of CCs reported cleaning of floors The effectiveness of daily, cleaning of walls weekly or monthly, to cleaning shall be checked even at yearly intervals. every week. Internal checking/inspection by supervisors is almost absent - is not a routine practice.
Personal Hygiene of milk handlers at CC
The parameters of this GMP step were assessed mainly through direct observation and judgement on the facilities available in CC premises, and hygiene conditions of the following aspects. The summary of findings are presented in figures 6 and 7.
Figure 6. Observation on personal hygiene and facilities at CCs
Figure 7: Application of Policies
GMP step: personal hygiene of the CC personnel Standards to Required Activities Baseline status and potential impacts be achieved All operators Personal Cleanliness: Personal cleanliness was observed should There shall be clothing policy which satisfactory to good, with about 10 per maintain good minimizes the risk of contamination to cent bad to very bad. milk level of Facilities: There shall be clean and Toilet and hand washing facilities were hygiene and hygienic toilet and hand washing observed satisfactory to good in more dress. facilities. Soap shall be available at than four-fifth of CCs, while bad to very
35 all times and a clean hand drying bad in about one-fifth of CCs. cloth. Water quality shall be potable. Sickness policy and other policies: CCs reported variation in application of There shall be a sickness policy to policies. Sickness policy was applied by prevent people with contagious most of CCs and glass policy by least. conditions, working/visiting near Proper application of these policies will milk. There shall other policies in reduce the possible contamination of use such as Jewellery, visitor milk by jewelries, unwanted visitors and management and Glass policies. glass pieces. (NB: Jewelry and glass policy refer to precautions to avoid milk ornaments worn and glasses while handling milk (e.g. bangles worn, glasses in surrounding, broken glass in windows, electric bulbs and so on)
Pest Control
About one in four CCs have some measures to control pest in their premises and house (Figure 8). It was observed that movement of several insects including flies contribute to contamination of raw milk in most of the CCs.
Figure 8: CCs applying pest control measures
GMP step: Pests control at CCs Standard to be Required Activities Status and Potential Impacts Achieved Pests such as rats, Pest Control Activities: There Only 23.7 per cent CCs were cockroaches and flies shall shall a policy in place to control reported applying pest control be controlled so that they do harm milk quality pests and the effectiveness of measures. methods shall be checked Rats and vermin carry dirt and periodically diseases that are a considerable risk to milk contamination and also to human's health.
Table 10. CC Infrastructure and CCs premises Parameters Response Per cent (n=38) Yes 76.3 Adequacy of physical infrastructure No 23.7 CCs premises (Safety & no pollution) Very good 0.00 Good 10.5
36 Satisfactory 52.6 Bad 26.3 Very bad 10.5
GMP step: CC infrastructures and its premises Standard to be Required Activities Status and Potential Impacts achieved Surroundings must be clean, Observation of site: sites shall Safety and pollution of surrounding tidy, safe and secured to be checked regularly and areas was observed satisfactory to avoid any contamination of milk. action taken to ensure that the bad in most of CCs, while only 10.5 standard required is per cent reported good conditions. maintained. Adequate Adequacy: adequacy of Over 75 per cent of CCs reported infrastructure should necessary equipment and adequacy of Physical infrastructure be maintained. infrastructures shall be in the CCs. checked and maintained. Inadequate Physical infrastructures hinder maintaining cleanliness and hygiene.
Personnel management at CCs Assignment of specific jobs to individual staff is essential. The training needs depend on nature of the job assigned. In majority of the pilot CCs, no defined job descriptions were assigned to personnel working there.
Figure 9: Job description and training Received CCs
GMP step: CC personnel management with defined job descriptions Standards to Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts be achieved The team should Job Description: There shall Only 34.2 per cent of CCs reported clear be adequate to be clear job descriptions for description of roles and responsibilities in meet all the staffing needs of each member staff which are CCs. the facility communicated to the team. Training received: Training 68.4 per cent of CCs reported at least a needs shall be assessed worker/staff of the CC received some kind of annually or when new training related to management of CCs and employees are taken on. milk production/handling Training provision shall match Lack of training creates gaps in awareness, these needs and a negative attitude amongst staff members. Lack of training indicates a further gap in knowledge transfer mechanisms.
Routine checking and inspection of CCs and farmers
37 Table 11: Inspection of records and cleanliness Yes 78.9 Self-inspection of CCs for records and cleanliness No 21.1 Yes 52.6 Third party inspection of CCs for records and cleanliness No 47.4 Yes 73.7 MCCs inspection of CCs for records and cleanliness No 26.3 Yes 44.7 Inspection of dairy farmers by CCs No 55.3
GMP step: internal – auditing by supply chain actors Required activities Baseline status and implications Checking/inspection of 78.9 per cent CCs reported self-inspection, 52.6 per cent reported CCs and Farmers: There third party inspection and 73.7 per cent CCs reported inspection by shall be regular checking MCCs for cleanliness and records at CCs. Likewise only 44.7 per cent of the various of CCs practiced inspection of member dairy farmers. rerecorded and Checking through auditing is the main control mechanism of ensuring that quality cleanliness. control systems and procedures are followed.
3.3.4 GMP steps at milk transport level: behaviour and practices Bulking of milk and carrying to MCCS for chilling is one of the key activities that can influence milk quality. Cleanliness of the vessels used, water quality, time in transport and personal hygiene are the key elements of this GMP step. The finding of the baseline assessment on these parameters are summarized in the table 15 – 17 and figures 10 – 12. Bulking of milk into large vessels Table 12. Cleanliness of food contact utensils and vessels Yes 100 Easy access for cleaning of carrying vessels/utensils No 0 Yes 92 Cleanliness of milk-cans and equipment after use No 8 Very Good 0 Good 8 Cleanliness of loading pump and pipes Satisfactory 64 Bad 20 Very Bad 8 Very Good 0 Good 12 Absence of fat deposition in the transport vessels Satisfactory 36 Bad 40 Very Bad 12 Aluminium can 52 Stainless steel can 4 Types of transport cans Plastic drum 28 Tank 16
Figure 10: Availability of water and water quality testing
38 Table 13: Inspection of vessels and utensils
Yes 72 Self –inspection of milk transport vessels/utensils No 28 Yes 24 Third party inspected the milk transport vessels/utensils No 76
GMP step: bulking of milk into large vessels Standards to be Required activities Baseline status and potential Impacts achieved The bulking of milk Transport mode /vessel CCs were found using aluminium cans, steel must not compromise type: Bulk holding vessels cans and plastic drums. large volumes of milk, The containers made of a plastic are of l low density or further reduce the must be made of and can be easily scratched. These scratches harbor milk quality. aluminium or stainless bacteria and decrease milk quality. The containers steel. They shall not have with narrow necks prevents operator’s access during openings that restrict manual cleaning. access for cleaning. Cleaning standards are poor where these tanks are used, increasing the risk to milk quality. Cleaning: All in-milk All the transporters reported easy access for contact transport cleaning of milk carrying vessels and equipment including utensils. 92 per cent of transporters were pumps, pipe work, vats found cleaning of vessels immediately after etc. shall be cleaned using use. standard methods after Poorly cleaned pumps are a considerable every period of use. risk to milk quality. They increase the . bacterial load of the milk and potentially contaminate the milk with oil, and metal fragments. This is particularly the case where mild steel pumps are in use instead of stainless steel. Water quality and About 85 per cent of transporters reported quantity: the quantity of adequacy of water for cleaning. However water readily available only 24 per cent reported testing thewater shall be in excess of quality that is used to clean the vessels. cleaning requirements. Water quality shall be tested on annual basis and any treatment required carried accordingly. Effectiveness of cleaning: Cleanliness of loading pumps and pipes was The effectiveness of cleaning observed satisfactory to very bad in majority shall be checked every week. of CCs, while only 8 per cent CCs were Potential cleaning hazards such as taps, pumps, pipe bends and observed good. Likewise absence of fat inside roof surface of tank need deposition was observed satisfactory to very to be checked more frequently. bad in most of CCs.
39 Inspection: regular 72 per cent of transporters reported self- inspection shall be carried. inspection in place and only 24 per cent transporters reported third party inspection of transport vessels and utensils for cleanliness. In the absence of training and with the difficult role transporters do play, checking on their standards of performance is essential to minimize the risk of contaminations of all kinds.
Transfer of Milk
Table 13: Traceability of milk and transport provisions Parameters Response % (n = 25) Yes 60 Records and traceability of milk batch No 40 Yes 84 Transport back up No 16 Yes 96 Preventive maintenance of vehicle No 4 Very Good 0 Good 12 Cleanliness of vehicle Satisfactory 52 Bad 36 Very Bad 0
GMP step: transfer of milk Standards to be Required Activities Status and potential impacts Achieved Records and Traceability of Milk Batch: 60 per cent of transporters reported records and The records and batch identification shall traceability of milk batch. This is applicable to ensure the traceability of the milk transported. CCs only. This will ensure the correct milk will be Tracing individual farmers is beyond the scope at delivered to the right destination. present. Transport back-up: An effective transport backup system shall be in place to ensure that About 85 per cent of transporters reported back Transfer should be the correct response is made if a problem up transport in case of any problems. made as quickly and arises. Preventive Maintenance of Vehicle: There safely as possible. Above 95 per cent of transporters reported shall be preventive maintenance schedules in preventive maintenance of vehicles used in There should be no operation and there shall be a stock of critical transportation of milk. risk of mixing spare parts batches that may Cleanliness of milk transporting result in cross vehicle was observed satisfactory to contamination. bad in majority of transporters, Cleanliness of Vehicle: All vehicles used in while 12 per cent transporters were transportation shall be cleaned daily. observed good. Poor cleanliness causes bacterial load of milk that can increase rapidly via dirty equipment which comes into contact with large amounts of milk.
40 Personal hygiene of the personnel engaged in milk transport
Figure 11. Cleanliness and clothing of milk operators
Figure 12: Application of policies
GP step: personal hygiene of the milk transporters Standards to be Required Activities Status and Potential Impacts Achieved All operators must Personal cleanliness: There Personal cleanliness and clothing was maintain good levels of shall be clothing policy which observed satisfactory to good in hygiene and dress. Operators must perform minimizes the risk of majority of transporters. the dual role of transport contamination to milk In the absence of any training, poor personal driver and food operator hygiene represent a risk to milk quality. to the higher standard of food operator. Sickness policy and other Transporters reported variation in policies: There shall be a application of policies as per sickness policy to prevent organizations’ policies. Sickness policy people with contagious was applied by most, followed by glass conditions, working /visiting and jewelry policy. near milk. There shall other Bacteria from sick staff members present a policies in use such as considerable risk to milk quality. This is made worse by long periods of time milk is held above Jewellery, Visitors, and Glass refrigeration temperature. policies.
Personnel Management
Figure 13. Job description and trainings received
GMP step: Management of Personnel engaged in milk transport Standards to be Required Activities Status and Potential Impacts Achieved The team should be Job Description: There shall be a 48 per cent of transporters reported clear adequate to meet all clear job description for each description of roles and responsibilities of the staffing needs of the facility. member staff which is staffs. communicated to the team Training Received: Training Only 8 per cent transporters reported at needs shall be assessed annually least a worker/staff in CC attaining some or when new employees are sort of training related to proper
41 taken on. Training provision transportation of milk. shall match these needs. Proper training will improve awareness. Without it, there will be little or no awareness of the impact of their current practices/behaviour that result in a poor standard of milk
3.3.5 Milk Chilling Centre
The survey findings of the milk chilling centres (MCCs) are interpreted based on routine tasks carried out there. Enumerators directly observed all the tasks at all the 19 milk chilling facilities of the six pilot sites. They interviewed the MCC In charge and made direct observations on MCC premises, facilities, utensils and equipment being used there. The findings are presented in the tables and figures below:
Milk sampling and testing
Figure14. Cleanliness of sampling tools and milk testing areas at MCCs
Table 14: Milk sampling and testing practices at MCC Parameters Per cent response (n = 19) Yes 68.4 Calibration of the testing tools No 31.6 Yes 31.6 Display of standard silk sampling procedure No 68.4 Yes 78.9 Maintaining records of the test results No 21.1 Yes 36.8 Traceability: coding of samples No 63.2
GMP step: milk sampling and testing at MCC Standards to be Required Activities Status and Potential Impacts Achieved Sampling shall be Cleanliness: Sampling Cleanliness of sampling tools and testing area done using a equipment and testing was observed satisfactory to good in majority of standard procedure, calibrated area shall be cleaned and CCs, while cleanliness of sampling tools and equipment and not cause any additional testing area of about one fourth MMCs was should use the bacterial contamination to observed bad to very bad. minimum volume Results from milk testing are only useful where the testing necessary. Where the milk. facilities are not significantly contributing to negative possible, a system results. of traceability should be Calibration: all the 68.4 per cent of MCCs practiced calibration of developed. equipment and testing testing equipment, while 31.6 per cent chemicals shall be reported otherwise. calibrated annually or if Confidence in the testing equipment is essential if data is different batches of to be credible and the milk supply chain actors are convinced of any progress that can be made. chemicals are used. 42
Methods: standard Only 31.6 per cent of MCCs reported displaying documented procedures of standard milk sampling procedure. shall be used that are Contamination between samples will negate some results displayed for farmers to where testing for a trace of contamination such as antibiotics, water and hygienic quality is carried out. see
Testing and recording: the All MCCs reported Fat test, over 78.95 per cent record of results shall be reported SNF test, 31.25 per cent MCCs stored in a permanent reported Acidity test Mixing test and26.32 per retrievable format. It shall cent of MCCs reported Lactose test. While boil be available for farmers to test and temperature test was carried out by check their own record if only about 5.26 per cent MCCs. 78.9 per cent of necessary. MCCs reported Recording of Testing results. Adulteration and antibiotic contamination are a risk to milk quality, fermenting milk processing procedures and human health. Traceability: To allow full Only 36.8 per cent of MCCs reported coding of traceability of milk back to milk samples while others reported not coding the farmer's level, of milk samples. duplicate samples shall be kept in refrigerators for seven days.
Milk unloading and filtering
Table 15: Cleaning of unloading pumps and pipes Parameters Response(n=19) Yes 31.6 Cleaning of unloading pumps and pipes No 68.8 Yes 36.8 Filtration guidelines No 63.2
GMP step: Milk unloading and filtering at MCC Standards to Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts be achieved The bulking-up Permission to Unload: Milk arriving Permission to unload milk at MCCs was of incoming at the chilling must have cleared its granted by MCC Head/Manager. 52.63 milk must not compromise the tests and correct permission given per cent of MCCs reported verbal grant quality standard before the milk is accepted to the from the MCC head. of the entire centre and is added to a bulk volume sample. Cleanliness of Unloading Pipes and 68.4 per cent of MCCs reported Pumps: Where pumps and pipes are cleaning of unloading pumps and pipes, used to unload milk, there should be while 31.6 per cent MCCs reported of appropriate type and food grade. otherwise.
43 Filtration Guidelines: All incoming 63.2 per cent of MCCs reported of milk shall be filtered with an provision of Filtration Guidelines while appropriate filter. Filter shall be 36.8 per cent of MCCs reported absent changed periodically during the of such guidelines. unloading period to allow identification of the source of contaminants. Muslin filters shall not touch the surface of the filtered milk. Milk Holding Time: o pre-chilling Average of 90.21 minutes with holding of milk. maximum of 720 minutes and minimum one minute.
Chilling and cleanliness of chillers
Table 16: Cleaning of chillers Acid detergent 52.6 Cleaning chemicals Alkali detergent 47.4 Surf 36.8 Soap 10.5 Cleaning agents Liquid detergent 15.8 Water only 5.3 More than one 31.6 yes 42.1 Hot water used in cleaning No 57.9 Self 36.84 Committee 21.05 Checking the cleaning effectiveness DDC 21.05 Food technician 5.26 No Checking 15.80
GMP step: Chilling process and cleanliness of chillers Standards to be Required Status and Potential Impacts Achieved Activities
Chilling to achieve 40 Chill vat type 84.2 per cent of MCCs were found using chill vat, C temperature 5.3 per cent were found using plate chillers and 10.5 per cent of MCCs were found using both types of chillers for chilling purposes (Table 20). Cleanliness of all the Cleaning 52.6 per cent of MCCs were found using Acid facilities/equipment reagents; while 47.4 per cent were found using alkali reagent for cleaning of chillers. Maximum MCCs were reported using surf as cleaning agent, followed by liquid detergent and soap. 31.6 per cent MCCs were found using more than one cleaning agents. 42.1 per cent of MCCs were using hot water for cleaning purposes. Checking Maximum MCCs reported self-inspection of
44 effectiveness of effectiveness of cleaning, followed by consumer cleaning committees and DDC. 15.8 per cent reported no such checking,
Cleaning of surfaces and equipment that directly come in contact with milk
Figure 15: Cleaning of surfaces and equipment that directly come in contact with milk
Table 17: Observation of facilities for cleaning Very Good 0.00 Good 31.6 Facilities for cleaning milk cans Satisfactory 42.1 Bad 26.3 Very Bad 0.00 Very Good 0.00 Good 15.8 Regular testing of water quality Satisfactory 21.1 Bad 26.3 Very Bad 36.8
Figure 16: Absence of fat deposits
GMP step: Cleaning of all food contact equipment, including pumps, pipe work, vats, etc. Standards to be Required Activities Baseline status and potential impacts Achieved All equipment should Method: All food contacting 84.2 per cent of MCCs reported cleaning be cleaned as soon as equipment including pumps, of cans and equipment after use. More possible after use. All milk residues, fat, pipe work, vats etc. shall be than 70 per cent of MCCs were observed protein and other cleaned using standard CIP to have satisfactory to good facilities for substances likely to method after every use. cleaning cans. Only 15.8 per cent of MCCs cause bacterial growth should be removed. Potential cleaning hazards were found displaying methods of Both the inside and such as taps, corners and cleanliness. outside of equipment inside roof surface of tank Written and displayed procedures have a positive should be cleaned. shall to be manually cleaned if contribution to maintain good practices. necessary.
Water Quality and Quantity: Only 15.8 per cent of MCCs were found to The quantity of water readily have good provision of cleaning water available shall be in excess of quality testing. Water quality testing was cleaning requirements. Water observed satisfactory to very bad in quality shall be tested on majority of MCCs. Poor quality of water annual basis and any used in testing negates the results of treatment required carried testing and misleads. accordingly. 45 Effectiveness of Cleaning: Fat deposits overtime due to improper The effectiveness of cleaning shall cleaning practices was considerd as an be checked every week. Potential indicator of cleanliness. The level of cleaning hazards such as taps, pumps, pipe bends and inside roof absence of fat deposition in vat covers surfaces of tanks need to be checked and storage vessels was observed more frequently, for milk fat, protein satisfactory to good in majority of MCCs. and dirt depositions. While absence of fat deposition was observed satisfactory to very bad in majority of MCCs. Poor removal of fat, protein and bacterial deposits cause a build-up in pipelines, taps, plate exchanges, tanks. This situation will always compromise the quality of milk passing through the equipment and negate any improvements made at the farmer level. High bacterial loads on food contact areas will result in high bacterial loads in milk.
Cleaning of surfaces/equipment that do not come in contact with milk Figure 17. Cleanliness of surfaces and equipment that doesn't come in contact with milk
GMP step: Cleaning of all non-food contact equipment, including pumps, pipe work, vats etc.
Standards to be Required activities Status achieved All non-food contact Cleanliness of Non-contacted Cleanliness of non-food contact surfaces should be clean Accessories: areas was observed satisfactory and free of dirt deposits. All production area walls and floors should They should be free- to bad. 10.5 per cent of MCCs be cleaned daily. Equipment should be sited draining and capable of were observed good. to allow easy access to walls. High level drying after cleaning. Repeated touching of walls, doors etc. cleaning such as ceilings should be carried transports this dirt to operators’ hands out on a scheduled basis. and then to equipment.
Personal Hygiene
Figure 18: Observation of personal hygiene and facilities at MCCs
Figure 19: Observation of personal hygiene and facilities at MCCs
46 GMP step: personal hygiene of MCC personnel Standards to Required Activities Status and potential impacts be achieved All persons Personal cleanliness: There shall be Personal cleanliness was observed should clothing policy which minimizes the satisfactory to good. However 15.8 per maintain good risk of contamination to milk. cent MCCs reported bad condition. level of hygiene Facilities: There shall be clean and Hand washing and toilet facilities were and dress. hygienic toilet and hand washing observed satisfactory to good. 10.5 per facilities. Soap shall be available at cent of MCCs had such facilities in bad all times and a clean hand drying conditions cloth or paper towels. Water quality shall be potable Sickness policy and other policies: Sickness policy was adopted by about There shall be a sickness policy to 90 per cent of MCCs while visitors, prevent people with contagious Jewellery and glass policies were conditions, working near milk. followed by 31.6 and 31.6 and 42.1 per There shall other policies in use cent of MCCs respectively. such as Jewellery, Visitors and Glass Pathogens from sick members of staff can policies. contaminate milk.
Pest control measures
Figure 20: MCCs applying pest control activities
GMP step: pest control at MCCs Standards to be Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts achieved Pests such as rats, Pest Control: There shall Only just over one-fourth of MCCs were cockroach and flies a policy in place to found applying pest control activities in MCCs should not be controlled so that they do harm milk control pests and the to prevent contamination. quality effectiveness of Rats harbor Wyle’s disease, Listeria m., and E.coli are methods shall be a considerable hazard to humans. S>G> Ta> Ti>M>D checked periodically.
Cleanliness of MCC surrounding areaCleanliness of premisses becomes very important to minimize the entry of dirts and contaminants into MCC milk plants, pipe systems, floors, equipment and even for hygiene of the personnel. About half fo the MCC had muddy, earthen premisses with liklihood of entering dust/dirts from premisses to milk chilling facilities (Figure 21).
Figure 21. Observation of surrounding area
47 Energy back-up facility: about 70% of the 19 MCC had energy back systems.
GMP step: MCC facilities and cleanliness of MCC premises Standards to be Required activities Baseline status and potential impacts achieved Surrounding area must be Observation of site Safety and pollution conations were clean, tidy, safe and Sites shall be checked observed satisfactory to good in quite of appropriately secured to regularly and action taken to fewMCCs. However, it was observed bad in avoid any contamination ensure that the standard of milk. required is maintained. 26.3 per cent of MCCs. Energy back-up There shall be adequate Maintenance of Power About 70 per cent of MCCs were found power back up to ensure backup: having energy backup in case of load the continuous power Back-up power supply shall supply. shedding or power shortage situations. be adequate to maintain the However, most of the generators are not required cooling chain. operated in needy time.
MCC personnel management Figure 22: Job descriptions and training received by MCC personnel
GMP step: Management of MCC personnel Standards to be Required Activities Status and Potential Impacts Achieved The team should be Job Description: There shall be 68.4 per cent of MCCs reported clear adequate to meet clear job descriptions for each description of roles and responsibilities of all the staffing needs of the facility member staff and staffs in MCCs. communicated to the team. Training Received: Training 63.2 per cent of MCCs reported at least a needs shall be assessed worker/staff in MCC attaining some of annually or when new training related to management of MCCs employees are taken on. and milk production. Training provision shall match Lack of training creates lack of awareness and a these needs negative attitude amongst farmers. It also indicates a further gap in knowledge transfer mechanisms.
Internal inspections of MCCs, CCs and farmers Table 18: Inspection of Records and Cleanliness Yes 100 Self-inspection of MCCs for records and cleanliness No 0 Yes 78.9 Public body inspection of MCCs for records and cleanliness No 21.1 Yes 73.7 Processing centre inspection of MCCs for records and cleanliness No 26.3 Yes 84.2 MCCs inspection of CCs for records and cleanliness No 15.8
48 Yes 57.9 Inspection of Dairy Farmers by MCCs No 42.1
GMP step: Internal checking, inspection and auditing by MCCs Required Activities Status and Potential Impacts Self-inspection of MCCs. All MCCs reported self-inspection. About 78.9 per cent reported public body inspection and 73.7 per cent MCCs reported inspection by processing centres for cleanliness and records at MCCs. Likewise, 84.2 and 57.9 per cent of MCCs were found inspecting CCs member dairy farmers. The depth of inspection in terms of milk quality appears shallow. In depth checking through a self-audit system is the main control mechanism of ensuring that quality control systems and procedures are followed.
3.4 Results of laboratory analyses of milk samples All on-the spot tests for milk composition and quality assessment were carried out at the CC and MCC facilities. For microbial investigation different laboratories, namely the facilities of Hetauda Dairy, Pokhara Bigyan and Prabidhi Campus, DFTQC Kathmandu, and DDC Balaju were utilized. The GMP validation team had difficulties with accessing standard laboratory services for getting milk samples analysed. It was noticed that there was gap in preparedness of these laboratories for rendering the service in need, therefore additional efforts and costs had to be born to get these services. The results of the laboratory investigation are presented below:
3.3.4 Organoleptic and adulteration tests Of the three hundred milk samples from farmers’ container tested by smelling for abnormal flavour, nearly 13% were found stale or acidic giving abnormal odour. Similarly, of them about 6% were adulterated. The incidences of adulteration were positive for salt and neutralizer. However, some farmers stated that salt might be observed during late lactation especially when the cow is pregnant - this holds true scientifically as well. Among the samples of collection centers and milk chilling centers, two samples of Kavre sites were found adulterated with neutralizer. 3.3.5 Methylene Blue Reduction Time (MBRT) tests The MBR times of most of the farmers’ milk samples from Bara, Makwanpur, Tanahun and Nawalparasi sites were between two to five hours that reflect fair quality milk samples in terms of microbial load. But majority of milk samples from both sites of Kavre had MBRT less than 20 minutes (figure 1) and can be graded as very bad quality milk. Figure 23. Results of MBRT tests of farmers' milk samples
The investigation revealed 225 of the 300 farmers' samples had MBRT two hours or more implying quality of the raw milk of majority of the farmers while they deliver their to CC is of an acceptable range in terms of microbial load (Figure 23).
49 The milk samples of Setidevi and Timal had shorter MBR time which mainly is associated with one time a day collection. In these sites farmer keep evening milks overnight for selling next day. This practice help increase microbial population in the milk they sell.
The milk with MBRT two hours or above has approximately 30 hours of shelf life and the poor (bad) quality milk with MBRT less than two hours has a shelf-life of less than 10 hours at chilling temperatures (40C). Similarly, the MBR time of the milk samples from CCs and MCCs were also observed and results reveal less than one-third of the samples had MBR time two hours or more (Figure 24).
Figure 24. Results of MBRT tests of milk samples from CCs/MCCs (n = 53)
In contrast to 75% farm level samples that havemore than two hours MBR time, only 29% samples from CC and MCC level exhibited more than two hours MBRT. It appears that the milk quality deteriorates the most in the process of collection, transit storage and delivery from CC to MCCS. Poor hygiene (of persons and utensils along with high ambient temperature) and longer time span spent in the process contribute the most to this deterioration, though improvement after bulking was anticipated. This demonstrates there is deterioration of milk quality significantly at CCs and MCCs due to several reasons. The obvious gaps in GMP steps they follow at CCs and MCCs (please refer to practices and behaviour at CCs and MCCs above) are contributing to this level of deterioration. Further it should be noted that no milk rejection was observed in the chain implying various adulteration measures followed to lengthen the life of milk and mislead the routine tests such as acidity and alcohol tests. 3.3.6 Acidity, COB and alcohol tests The acidity of the normal milk ranges between 0.14 to 0.16%. Additional lactic acid produced due to consumption of lactose in milk by the microbes renders milk to become sourer. It was observed that milk having more than 0.2% tend to clot on boiling. The natural acidity of milk is 0.14 - 0.16%. Figures higher than this signify developed acidity due to the action of bacteria on milk sugar. The bacterial contamination might be due to unhygienic practices during milking, dirty milk carrying utensils as well as higher environmental temperatures. Of the 300 samples tested in six sites, milk samples of about 80% farmeers from Bara, Makwanpur, Tanahun and Nawalparasi sites had less than 0.18 acidity, however, the same from Setidevi and Timal sites was less than 50%. In contrast about one- third of the milk samples from CCs/MCCs had acidity less less than 0.18 which implying only one-third of the samples of acceptable quality. Longer holding time after collection from farmers or the longer transportation to the chilling centres (Figure 25) appears another critical factor responsible for deterioration of milk in its supply chain. Figure 25. Results of Acidity tests of farmers' milk samples
50 Figure 26. Results of acidity tests of CCs/MCCs' milk samples
For the COB tests, except Timal site, nearly hundred percent of the farmers’ milk samples were negative for COB tests (figure 26). The protein network of the milk samples become weak at higher acidities so, most the higher acid containing milks clot on boiling. However, early lactation and salt adulteration may result in clot formation even in low acidity.
Figure 27. Results of COB tests of farmers' milk samples
Three fourth of the milk samples from CCs/MCCs were found negative for COB tests (figure 27). Though there is significant amount of milk samples with positive COB test, CCs/MCCs blend the milk at chilling centres and try to overcome the acidity till they dispatch the milk to the processing industry. Such milk might not clot on boiling, however fails to sustain the further processing steps to produce quality products from it.
Figure 28. Results of COB tests of CCs/MCCs' milk samples
All the farmers’ milk samples of Makwanpur site and more than 95% from Bara and Tanahun sites were negative for alcohol (68%) tests. Nearly 33% from Gyanodaya, 50% from Setidevi, and 75% from Timal sites’ samples were positive for this test (Figure 29).
Figure 29. Results of alcohol tests (68%) of farmers' milk samples
Similarly, more than half (57%) of the milk samples from CCs/MCCs were found negative for alcohol tests (Figure 30), 43 % were positive. Positive alcohol test signifies compositional alteration/degradation of the milk proteins and sugar and imply an alarming condition unsuitable for further processing of such milk to manufacture specific products. Moreover the shelf life of the raw milk and its products at ambient/chilling temperatures is compromised.
Figure 30. Results of alcohol tests of CCs/MCCs' milk samples (n = 53)
51 Microbiological tests Total Plate Counts (TPC) Summary of the results of TPC tests of farmers’ milk samples have been presented sin figure 31. More than two third of the samples had TPC below 500, 000/mL of milk. This indicatesthat the shelf life of such milk would be more than 40 hours at chilling condition. Nearly one fourth of the samples were of average microbial quality, with TPC between five, to forty hundred thousand/mL of milk and the proximate shelf life of such milks could be 30 hours at 4°C. One tenth of the samples had high microbial count, TPC above 400, 0000/mL. As stated in vlab.amrita.edu, (2013), the average shelf life of such milk would be ten hours or less at 40C.
Figure 31. Results of TPC tests of farmers' milk samples
Similarly, results of TPC tests of CCs/MCCs’ milk samples are shown in figure 32. More than three fourth CCs/MCCs’ milk samples were found TPC below five hundred thousand. Nearly one tenth of the samples were of average (TPC between 500,000 to 4,000,000thousand/mL) and one fifth were of poor microbiological qualities having TPC above 4,000,000/mL.
Figure 32. Results of TPC of CCs/MCCs' milk samples
Majority of the farmers’ milk samples appears to be of acceptable quality when compared with collection centres and time consumed in collection and transit storage at CCs at ambient temperature. Similarly, time taken to transport milk due to poor road and transportation facilities is another factor. Milk was held at least 2-3 hours at collection centres and more than two hours to take to chilling centres. During this, the microbial population would be multiplied tremendously resulting increased acidity, toxins and oxidation reduction.
Similarly, total coliforms tested in farmers’ milk samples showed that about one fourth samples had no coliforms, 45% samples were having less 100,000/mL coliforms and nearly one third were of had more than this (Figure 33).
Figure 33. Results of total coliform of farmers' milk samples
Figure 34 Results of total Coliforms in CCs/MCCs' milk samples (n= 46)
The prevalence of coliform organisms in the collection and chilling centres samples increased. Only one-fifth of the 46 CCs and MCCs samples were absent of coliforms, about 77% had moderate coliform counts of under one hundred thousand while 4% samples had heavy coliforms counts (figure 34).
52 Such an increase of TPC may be explained as a result of gaps in adoption of GMP steps. Moreover, the quality of water being used for cleaning might also contribute to this increase in microbial load. Lack of cooling technology, the use of plastic containers which are difficult to wash compounded by longer time in collection and transportation of milk from farms to selling points contributed to the increased TPC as all these factors favour bacterial multiplication in milk. Similarly, contamination of milk with coliforms may be attributed to unhygienic milking environment or other sources of faecal contamination including unclean udder of the cow during milking, unsafe handling and inappropriate personal hygiene. Coliforms from faeces of human origin cannot be ruled out if propoertoilet and washing facilities are absent and personal hygiene is poor. The presence of coliforms specifically E. coli in milk may pose health risks through infection to people especially if not well pasteurized. (Kivaria et al 2006 and Adesina et al, 2011).
53 4 Conclusion and Inferences There is lack of consistency of milk quality across different points in the raw milk supply chain. The evidences of the acidity tests, alcohol tests, MBRT and microbial counts suggests milk quality deteriorates in different points in the supply chain. There is a tendency of some actors of the supply chain to correct this compromised quality by adding preservatives and neutralizers at higher points of the raw milk supply chain. This is an emerging issue to be addressed by recognizing and internalizing the consequences of current practices - key intervention to correct such practices is through education for behaviour change. Management of CCs is very poor in all respects of GMP requirements. There is inadequate awareness and lack of specific knowledge and skills in handling milk among the CC personnel. The infrastructure, utensils, equipment and facilities at CCs are of primitive state, many of them of non-food grade that are likely to further add contaminants to collected bulk milk. Time management at collection centre is inefficient. All the CCs and MCCs must improve their facilities and reorganize their collection schedule so that the milk reaches MCCs within a stipulated time of about three hours of milking at the farm. Such milk can be subjected to chilling before it is spoiled. If timing of collection and delivery to MCCs is managed appropriately, actors will minimize adulteration in milk to correct the compromised quality of the milk. Many factors are influencing the quality of raw milk. Milk as it is secreted from the udder of a healthy cow has no or very low bacterial numbers. As milk is a complete food (for microorganisms too), their number increases with time at ambient temperature. Further contamination of raw milk due to poor milking methods, inadequate cleaning of milk equipment and poor personal hygiene and subsequent multiplication of the microorganisms over time is severe as evident from the present study. Good production and herd management practices help ensure low bacteria counts and reduce the risk of the presence of pathogens in the raw milk. Further microbial growth can be checked by chilling milk at the earliest possible time. Improved raw milk quality will result in reduced spoilage of milk while processing, improved quality of processed milk and its products, and paves ways to manufacture high value milk products. In the process of adoption of GMP, participatory development of voluntary standards first and the incentives accrued from reduced spoilage and enhanced shelf-life of milk products will help prepare market actors to become proactive in preparing and mandatory standards and legislative measures for regulating the raw milk supply chain.
5 Recommendations
Recommendations are made in two sections targeting (i) the ground level execution of the GMP steps and (ii) evidence based advocacy for creating enabling environment through policies and programs at the national level. (i) Recommendations for on the ground implementation and scaling up of the GMP steps: . Raw milk is poor mainly because of ignorance, lack of knowledge and skills. Creating 54 awareness letting them know the consequences of their practices is necessary. Filling the knowledge gaps through intensive training on GMP steps at all level of the supply chain -from farm level to MCCs is essential. . Introduce two times milk collection/day in areas where it becomes feasible. One time a day collection appears to be the factor that encourages adulteration. . For periodic milk testing, it is essential that MBRT and alcohol tests be introduced in practice. In addition to routine tests on milk composition, these two tests be adopted as standard tests for milk acceptance/rejection and also for pricing at all the three levels of raw milk supply chain. . At farm level programmes on intensive on site trainings on GMP steps and skills nationwide need to be conducted. Additional promotional support to replace non- food grade milk utensils is also necessary in smallholder settings. . Introduce a system farm record keeping - there is interest and appears to be doable in areas where there is formal milk collection network. . Adopt a practice of voluntary internal inspections across the chain - processors need to supervise at the farm, CC and MCC level. HACCP system processors plan to introduce should accommodate input supply chain as well. At CC level: . Manage milk collection task so that milk is delivered to MCC within three hours of milking. Allocate about one hours from farm to CC, about two hours for collection process and less than one hour for delivering to chilling centres. . Invest for the improvement of CC infrastructures and its premises, water facilities, drainage, space for cleaning of farmers' milk utensils are important part of this action. MCC level . Manage energy/power back up: there are instances when generators were not operated even during critical hours need for milk chilling . Improve, infrastructure, cleanliness of chilling centre facilities and its premises . Conduct intensive learning while doing trainings to personnel working there - major focus must be on milk handling techniques, personal hygiene and behavioural change . Adopt sale of milk to processors preferably on annual contract basis defining quality, quantity and effective period of contract. Variation in milk volume based on seasonality might also be considered in the contract.
(ii) Recommendations for creating enabling environment through Policy Advocacy The study revealed that there are gaps in existing Acts, laws, policies and their enforcement/implementation in the field. Several policy issues have emerged that need attentions from the Government and the key market actors in the years to come to achieve improved quality standards of raw milk in the country. Some of the important policy and strategy issues are summarised below.
55 Table 19. Gaps in existing Acts, regulations and strategies and suggested policy revisions. Acts Current status SN GMP baseline evidence Policy revision/actions /Policies /issues Raw milk must be an integral part The Act is silent on the quality of of quality control system of dairy Milk analysis reveals raw milk industries. Regulation of the 25% of farm level and General belief of authorities is Advocacy: facilitate for amending raw milk standards 63% at CC/MCC milk food safety related rules and Act and rules through DFTQC and and safety needs to 1 samples are bad or very regulations are basically for MOLD/MOAD be enforced bad (MBRT < 2 hours) inspecting and analysing end • Define quality standards through Nepal with unacceptable products only. of raw milk Food Act of 1966. microbial load • Define hygiene standards of CCs, MCCs and dairy plants. Risk: milk pricing mechanism is complex, Pricing based on quality is required. DDC is the price setter. Higher price for quality milk - processors don not recognize it. This situation favours more incentives for import of whole milk powder/skimmed milk powder - a chronic reason for milk holidays. Animal health and livestock services Act 1998 National Animal Health Policy and regulations Facilitate to formulate Animal Animal health/treatment to translate laws in action is 1999. Health policy - customize in line records are absent at the absent (yet to be formulated) with country needs and OIE farm level. Performance of Veterinary specifications - for raw milk and More than 60% farms Service (PVS) - gap analysis milk products, husbandry have fair to bad animal completed by GoN and World practices, drugs and biologicals). husbandry practices. organization for Animal Health Diagnostic facilities for zoonotic (OIE) and milk borne diseases Less than 30% farmers adopt hygienic milking Compost making process in GAP practices. Good Agriculture Practices About 50% farmers do guidelines in place 2 Advocacy and technical support not discard milk during for AH policy and GVHP udder infections, Hygienic Veterinary and Animal formulation Husbandry Practices (GVHP) Milk withdrawal during (yet to be formulated) animal treatments is Food Act 1966 rarely practiced. Absence of raw milk standards: Awareness through media introduce standardized test to Less than 10% farmers assess milk quality have received trainings in hygienic milk Lack of long term programmes, production only one or two token projects are engaged.
Risks: farmers may not be in position for capital investment in animal housing to meet the GMP requirement. 3 Less than 10% farmers Agriculture Dairy is priority two of the first Standards be worked out in two have received relevant Development five commodities identified for steps trainings in hygienic Strategy (ADS) - VC development. (a) set voluntary standards milk production. translation into in a participatory way programmes of (b) Build on mandatory dairy value chain Harmonized raw milk standards standards based on Infrastructure and development. are yet to be formulated. voluntary standards hygienic facilities are poor. Country level programme in line The standards need to be with ADS is absent. customized to Nepalese needs and comparable to international Promotional support for standards improvement of infrastructure • Technical assistance for including milk chilling facilities. standard formulation and harmonization - concerned 56 market players are (DLS, MOLD, NSC, MOAD and NBSM. • Facilitate in planning for harmonization of standards for dairy sub-sector. There is wide gap Mass awareness, between GMP draft and Limited implementation capacity Capacity building both in current practices in Market actors not prepared technical and governance part in adoption of GMP steps - Dairy M4P approach awareness, keeping Development Weakness in implementation (DFTQC, DLS, MOLD, NDDB) methods, Policy (2008) Laboratory services for milk 4 implementation of milk Weak partnerships/ coalitions/ analysis collection and processing alliances of dairy market actors. code of practice at the Strategic partnership among dairy milk chilling centres and Inadequate business trust in raw market actors1 for formulation and dairy processing milk marketing implementation of factories, laboratories programme/projects nationwide. facilities. Advocacy for Agreements relevant to GMP - Raw milk in Nepal is of customizing/aligning in-country Compliance with Codex Alimentarius commission, poor quality standards. standards with GoN's international international World trade organization, Food 5 SPS measures prevent agreements/ commitments commitments and and agriculture organization and export possibility of agreements World Organization for animal Nepalese dairy products. Research/review – publications health (OIE) and sharing Risk: Epidemic and endemic diseases including transboundary animal diseases (TADs) and zoonotic diseases if continue to prevail will limit our competence for export of raw milk and certain milk products.
Limitations of the study The data points of surveys are mostly sourced from retrospective recalling of the respondents and their response accommodates the figures/events occurred in last one year. The observations and rankings made by enumerators on different parameters of GMP steps might pose variations in individual's perceptions though efforts for uniformity in ranking was made during the orientation training in the way internal audit system would take place in practice while GMP is fully adopted. The results of the microbial analysis vary greatly for several reasons. For example, the time in transit during transport of milk sample to laboratories, personal differences in sampling techniques, exhaustion of milk sugars and its impact on microbes (increased acidity), differences among laboratories and technicians working there and other factors might have contributed to this wide variation. The study team believes despite this circumstance the spectrum of microbial load and corresponding milk quality holds true. Quantifying the effect of each of these variables was beyond the scope of the present baseline study. More controlled experiments are needed for further scientific validation.
1 Please refer to key roles of different dairy markets actors in GMP adoption
57 6 References:
Adesina A, Oshadi A, Awoniyi T A M and Ajayi O 2011. Microbiological assessment of cow milk under traditional management practices. Pakistan Journal of Nutrition 10(7): 690 – 693. DIA, CDCAN and Saadhya (2015): Study report on milk supply chain management practices in Nepal and recommendations for its improvement https://foodsafety.foodscience.cornell.edu/sites/foodsafety.foodscience.cornell.edu/files/shar ed/documents/CU-DFScience-Notes-Milk-Flavor-Defects-Sensory-Eval-04-10.pdf IDF (1991). Handbook on Milk collection in Warm Developing Countries. International Dairy Federation IDF 100B. IDF Doc. No.9002, International Dairy Federation, Brussels, Belgium. Kivaria MF, Noordhuizen M T P J and Kapaga M A (2006). Evaluation of the hygienic quality and associated public health hazards of raw milk marketed by smallholder dairy producers in the Dar es Salaam region, Tanzania. Tropical Animal Health Production 38 (3): 185 – 194. MoAD (2015). Agricultural Development Strategy (ADS). Ministry for Agricultural Development, GoN. MOAD, Kathmandu. MoLD (2016). Formation, current status and commitments of the ministry of Livestock Development, GoN, MOLD, Kathmandu NDDB (2001). Laboratory Handbook for Dairy Industry. National Dairy Development Board, Harihar Bhawan, Pulchowk, Lalitpur, Nepal. NDDB 2015: Development of GMP standards: GMP standards for the raw milk supply chain in Nepal Vlab.amrita.edu, (2013). Methylene Blue Reductase Test. Retrieved 26 July 2016, from vlab.amrita.edu/?sub=3&brch=73&sim=1630&cnt=1.
58