In Britain, the first of these advantages applied up to the early years of the 1900's but with the development of the railway system the 'city dairy' fell into a gradual decline. The practice of milking in front of the customer was not
followed in Britain, but the law was strictly enforced whenever adulteration was detected. This certainly did not ensure that milk was never watered-down, neither did it mean that high-quality milk was supplied at all times. Indeed, milk quality issues were a major concern at the time and local authorities increasingly took steps to improve the housing of cattle and the quality of milk. The introduction of the tuberculin test and checks on total bacterial count, Coliform organisms, keeping quality and the classification of milk (Grade A. standard) contributed to
the improvement in quality. Further improvements can be attributed to the phased eradication of bovine tuberculosis in the national herd and in recent years to compulsory pasteurisation.

The fate of the British city-dairy was essentially decided on economic grounds. It simply became too expensive to import feed for the animals from rural areas. With the coming of the railways and other forms of improved transport, improved milk handling and cooling, it was much cheaper to import milk than feed. It seems likely that as Hubli-Dharwad expands this will be true of that city. Further, dung produced in the city has to be carted to the field when it is used as a fertiliser and while it has commercial worth, there must be a cost of transport that reduces its value below that it would command if it were produced where it was needed. However, as long as milk produced in the rural areas is distributed in unhygienic fashion, and as long as the populace prefers 'milk fresh from the cow' the urban and peri-urban milk producer may well prevail.