INCREASING BUTTERFAT

Bay of Plenty Beacon, Volume 08, Issue 88, 10 July 1945, Page 5

INCREASING BUTTERFAT

MAXIMUM PRODUCTION AIM 1 Method of stock selection jOPOTIKI FARMERS PROPOSALS !• / With the point of "view that New Zealand will be always a potential primary producing and' that her dairy herds will play an increasingly [important role in the feeding of the starving millions in Europe •during the immediate 1 post-war ".yearSj an Opotjki Mr J. has given considerable time and thought to the question of improving our existing herds and of permanently eliminating the non-productive cows who have been the bane of many dairyists for years. His scheme was presented l to a BEACON representative recently and appears to be safe, practical and certain. ■Mr Armstrong who claims that his first thought on the subject of herd improvement was prompted by Lord Bledisloe's speech as far back as in 1933 f when he deplored the fact that i;he production was as low -as 2001bs per covv ; claims that his. .scheme is simple aM workable, particularly now that so many of the men from the lighting forces are indicating their desire to go on the land. Slaughter of the Innoccfnts In view of the fact that there are ; many herds averaging well over 300 ' lbs it can be readily seen that 1 in New Zealand there are thousands 1 -of farmers milking thousands of 1 , what can only be described as 'duds.' ' A farmer from the Waikato recent- ' ly stated that from his herd averaging over 300lbs butterfat he reared 1 only his. marked calves and sold the ( other heifers as 'bobbies' at a few ! shillings per head. ' { Here was a case of calves from ( perfectly good producing cows who 1 returned just 'a few shillings' to the breeder. But it is a typical case and the fact remains that annually we are killing -olf tens of thousands, oT 1 potentially good producing cows J •merely because they are not from l top-notch dams. A more shorty 1 sighted, policy could scarcely be ims agined, for in the 'bobby call" sea- t son we destroy the one and only < direct means of building our t ' while we are content 1 to go'on milking thousands of gen- t . uinely unprofitable cows. I There is surely a remedy to over,- $ -come such repeated folly. t Value of Herd Testing t The primary step to correct jjresent uneconomic drift nvould be to impose a compulsory herd test :in all bona fide supplying herds. At the present time testing is on a voluntary basis and the majority ol general suppliers do not bother. Either they are not fully alive to the benefits which accrue or else , •they honestly cannot afford it. But place the test sheet before their where it is shown that 'Smoky' .gives 4651bs and 'Lucy' the favourite .gives only 140lbs. They would soon wake up! If compulsory testing was introduced, either by Government assistance or through the, Dairy Fac- 1 tories dealing with their individual v suppliers, it would at one sweep f overcome the apathy which has hith- 1 erto been the majn stumbling block J to the industry. Government Stock r J Inspectors could operate with the \ testing dfficials and mark with the t broad arrow ? as culls all cows not t coming up to a standard of say— i 200lbs for a start. The standard could be hardened as time went on. I Safeguarding Farmers 1 It would be necessary to carefully . •mark all such cows, for they are all s too often passed on at the local j .sales, and the unsuspecting buyer j is the next victim 4 until he too j ■wakes up. By carrying the condemn- s cd mark each beast would advertise j its own shortcomings and thus farm- j ers would, be protected. I

Recent cases show glaring instan-> •-ces of and a singular ease was •that a fine looking cow which < -changed hands a number of times till it was proved under test that she gave only loOlbs. In the event of her going into an untested herd

she. would never have been detected and have been supplying heifer calves of dubious quality until she had died of old age. Today the , average cull' cow when discovered is passed on. Mark her unmista'keably and she goes on to her proper place—the butchers block. Government Pool Established Some farmers who are knowingly milking cows not up to standard are simply not financial enough to buy better stock to replace them. Mr Armstrong's suggestion is that, the Government' with its large, areas of unimproved Crown lands in different parts of the should improve these "blocks sufficiently to carry young stock. Instead of the thousands of potential good producing cows goiTig to Horotiu and. Westfield in the much-criticised 'bobby calf' trade Government buyers could purchase the cream of the calves from proved herds. These marked calves could be raised and grazed on the blocks aforementioned under proper care and supervision and sold back to farmers to replace their condemned culls each successive dairy season, under the'direction of the resident Stock Inspector. culls could be purchased to offset the price of the. younger stock or disposed of at market rates. The < main consideration is of course to get them out of the milking sheds and to have them replaced by prov- ; en cows of quality. (

Marked Calf Standard

Under H.T.F. it is necessary for a cow to produce 3001bs butterfat before she qualifies, to have her calf marked. To lift the standard throughout, so that all herds contained only marked cows it would be •necessary to reduce this figure temporarily possibly to say 2601b5. Our informant states, that he feels that farmers would gladly rear their own calves if they were assured of a reasonably good return for them as heifers. The. proceeds of the sales of these replace calves would be a welcome addition to their income. Profitable Scheme for State Should the scheme be adopted by the Government it could not help but be a source of profitable income for the State. Besides bringing in large tracts: of Crown land at present lying idle, it' would mean that even at reasonable prices a handsome turnover could be made from the re-sale of the calves which are hitherto only serving the 'bobby trade. It would mean too that the, production of butterfat would over a few years be possibly doubled and the added income would mean much to the Dominion as a whole.

There arc. approximately 6<H)OO dairy farmers in the Dominion and when it \Vas realised that there were an assured number of marked heifers at their disposal to replenish their herds i} at standard cost pricey they coul<§ not but welcome the schcme. The easiest of terms could be allowed in order to allow the smaller struggling farmer to ' main.tain his farm and stock in other directions without being heavily hit whilst endeavouring to build up his herd. Areas in the Bay Large Government-held areas in the Rotorua and Bay of Plenty districts would make excellent accommodation for such a pooling scheme as outlined "vyhile there are others in North Auckland and in Haw'ke's Bay. These are particularly suited to winter on and are all handy to large dairying settlements into which they could be drafted as. they were required. The scheme was once .submitted to the late. Hon. C. E. MacMillan then Minister of Lands; who was most favourably impressed with it and promised it support but did not survive the electoral route of 1935. It has also been favourably commented on by Mr C. Hume organiser for the Dominion Herd Testing Association. It has every prospect of lifting production, of protecting the farmer and of cleansing the herds throughout the Dominion of the greatest recognised handicap— ! the cull cow.