BENEFITS OF COW-TESTING.

Dominion, Volume 3, Issue 903, 24 August 1910, Page 8

BENEFITS OF COW-TESTING.

'-; NEW ZEALAND "'■'" FIGURES.**"-"* ' Shaking'arKa'upokb'h'ui: (Tfi'rdiiaki) in advocacy or''the lorjmiuon--there oi a cow-testing .association,. -Messrs. Cuddio (Dairy Commissioner) and'Siiii'letou delivered addresses- oi general: interest to dairymen.' ~. '~-'' ~,'.",,' Mr. (JujU'lie.'.dciclarectfliflt', there was no more 'important*question to-day, as alfecting .tn'oVilairy Yai-uieW'.'tuau, that of ascertaining tho- value; of;the ; individual cow.: It- He- was. asked- toi stato',.in what way anyone could make more money out .of, /dairying :he-would at once say by weeding out tile' unprofitable cows, liefore a farmer undertook to improve his •herd it-was essential he should hud out which, cows 'were the best. Mere guessing as' to "Wb.icli:"c6ws~ were'.'best would nor do-at-all,- farmers-had,,been:.guessing far too long.' Koine had," bden.; foolisu .enough, to tiiink that they could pick but good cow's, but.'they. w6uld~.be found to be tar from correct.:' There" was not a dairying district in . the Dominion which had come anywhere near the maximum production. '

■The Etornal Example, Once.more Denmark was Pjuoted as an example." 31r7 was a little less than-fitly years ago since dairying became -.'established .in ; that,- country. Shortly alter-the disastrous war with Prussia things were in. a .very bad' state from an agricultural point of view and the outlook was very gloomy. In their extremity the people turned their attention' to cattle-raising- and .''particularly .to dairying. The' stock they had at'that time was about as poor as one could imagine! To-day Denmark had one of the most useful breeds of dairy cattle that could; be.'got;.ariyVhe're;'' aiid"tlley were '"improving—working 'Up, by, t selection. A matter of 25 years ago'the average but- : ter-fat' production per 'cow '■' ffdm that : country was 1301b., to-day the average was about 2001b. per cow. A start was made with, one cow-testing association, and the success of this was evident-in that there were now more than 500, with about 12,000 members. : The number- of cows they had ■on record was about 190,000.- When visiting - tho ■ farms inDenmark one feature ithat appealed to him more than anything else was the amount of interest taken in the productiveness of the .'.cattle. It.was a. characteristic' of- the modern Dane not only to show what he was'doiug.but Jiow. he was going about-it. 'Many of "the farmers could tell from memory exactly what each cow, had'done during the season. On. some .farms the details were placed on blackboards in the byre, showing 'the amount of 'milk, .the butter-fat produced, and the test. Some of the Danish -farmers who had herds of about 30 cows had very high butter-fat averages. Their plan i was that something like 15 or 20 farmers would join together and employ a man for testing. This man was employed in taking samples and in weighing the milk oil' the individual cow in each herd. -The official carried his ap- , paratus with him,. and it was usual for a farmer to convey him to the next farm. ...The only qualification for membership was that' a farmer must agree to the 'weighings and sampling of the milk for testing on the days stipulated. Our New Zealand farmers had just as much intelligence as the Danes, and he could see no reason why they should not follow tho Danish example.

Figures from Dalefield.' Mr. Singleton referred to the foitantion of Vthe>VX)alefield Cow-testing 'Asso-' ciation,.,which had been started with about 800 cows. After; one year's'- working it,.had,-.heeni'.found :that, by- figuring out,tie-return for .each ;co,w, from the, date-of calving, the-, average -was 68001b. of nvjik,-; the test a ■ sha'dftYover"Ji3 l ß,-.,and ; )ratteivfat:'-2621b.; ; .. ..This ;...wa's._p'i'obably. a -little -;tigheri.;'tKait -r the;'average 'would ..be - at.,\tl\9':factory,^aEd-ilyasJ'crjditing ;. a' cow - with whatever it' gave" from the date ...of. calving. ...That average also included ! 'cows culled "'out'' during .'the-sea-son., It„.wns, thought that it would be interesting to see the,'effect of "this work another milking season; ■ There. were some.of the dual-purpose cow type, and they .were not .milking,- like .the special dairy cow type. -..Some, milkgd nine or ten- months and -others: dried toft- at seven ■or;,eiglit...months..;,; Tho...;a'verage return of .the. latter was just on: 60001b.. of milk' and, 2271b. of;butter-fat,"• whilst those in profit;.'from eight to nine..; months gave 71001b. of milk.on:the average-and 2761b. of ;;butter-fat. There Were 266 cows in that association .milking over, nine months, giving -an-average °£ 76001b. of milk and ah average of. 2971b. of .butter-fat. .Tho longer the* lactation period the. higher the'.prpdU'ct'ipn in each case. ; ' There were a nuniber of two-year-neifers,:,and th'e"ayer3iS !, amount of butter-fat-'was lMlb.';''still'MtjTwas': found the range 'was from'.'iOSlb'.: to'26Blb.'

'Futile Guesses. . Before the testing was started tie farmers were, asked to, select- their best eight cows—as if any..'dairyman could be relied on to dp; that., pn looking over , the results at the end-.of' the"season it' 'was'; found' 'that" not" one „(SfA',th:e twentyfive ■ members was ,able to do so. The Department officials"'were not. surprised n't that, but there' was not''one member who could pick tho best eight cows, let ialone place them in ; .theii>ii'ght- order. He could; give-:.:many; instances •: where' 'some :were far out..: ■ One farmer bad;a cow that gave 3741b. of butter-fat, and had not thought it up to one that gave 2161b., the one giving 2161b. "had been selected by the. farmer as one of the best. Another man had a cow that returned. 3591b., but' had thought that a' ;cow-.that;'gave was •a'-ibetter.,-Was 'it '.n'ot. ( tf>ir tjjjr&nme thHt) calves-were beihg'-kept for dairying jjurgoses from some' of ithose"lbwrproducihg cows while the' progeny,, of those .giving, the- higher returns were beiug knocked on the. head? ; But the farmer.might'just as well'build up a herd from "the best animals'lie had, and it did not require much working out to snow how to improve the herds. Then some farmers thought that tho cow giving.-most milk at the; height of the season was '■ the''best."""They had one cow giving 3Gjlb. a day at the, flush, and its butter-fat was 1911b. Another cow gave 311b. at the ilusb, yet bad 3121b. of fat for the. season, a difference of .£7 7s. with butter-fat nt Is. a lb. On.another farm one cow gave 6911b.;'0f milk, Whilst iier butter-fat total-was:'249lb, for-the season, i In the same herd was an animal that gave 461b. at the flush, but it returned 4261b; of fat, a difference of £8 175.. in value. It was-only fair to assume that :the majority.,-of dairymen culled out - the -wrong animals.

Culling and Profit. There had been some culling on at Dalefleld; the farmers would not Keep those' cows proved to be duffers. The charts wcro sent out with an: indication of'the best and worst cows in the herd, and when the charts came back the bad cows\ would bo marked off as sold. Continuing, Mr. Singleton said what one far-mer'-bad previously considered his best cow was culled out before the season was half over. 1 In one herd of 18 cows tho average for the season was 2741b. of fat. Four of those animals were culled, so that the average - of the other 14,.,wa5, 2911b. If the four culled were replnced by heifers up to the herd average there would bo an increase in fat. of lOJlb. petcow. Another - herd averaged . 2721b. of butter-fat, and if five were culled and replaced similarly it would increase the herd average 111b. per cow. He then instanced an'eight-year-old cow that milked 253 days and gnre 3151h. of butter-fat, against a five-year-old that milked 225 days and returned 1901b. At Is. a pouud butter-fat, one relumed .£l7 nnd,. tho other £0 105.,. Allowing the. cost of keeping thecow, including labour, interest on shed, tinware, etc., provision for manuring, to be about J,'S for a butter cow and J!9 for n cheese cow, the first animal would have, given a profit of ,£8 2s. Id. and the latter 10s. sd. -It would take fourteen cows 'of the poorer type to give as much profit on the. one referred to. In another herd one. cow: gave <io4lb. of fat and another' 18-tlb. After deducting the .£9 for cost of keep us previously tho returns would.be .£ll 4.5. Bd..against Is. 6d. Iu that casc-.it'would' take-50 cows of tho poorer typo to give- the'not;profit of the one. This was "what' cow-testing

was bringing to the notice of the dairy farmer. A small herd was generally given, better attention than a large herd, but this was not always the'case. One man in the Dalefield Association had a herd of over. 40 cows, and the butter-fat average was., over 2901b. The testing simply meant that farmers had to recognise the individuality of each cow.

An Outcome." 'Vn..'outcome of tho gathering was that an association with a start of twentytwo mem bora was formed. Mr. C'uddio said that tho Department would probably start next month, and Mr. Singleton stated that the cost of bottles, etc., would be about fourpeuce or fivepenco a cow. 11l reply to a question, Mr. Cuddiesaid it did not necessarily mean that testing would result in'an increased butter-fat test at tho factory, but an increase : in' the quantity, of milk and a consequent larger amount.of-. fat. '.He believed lie was right 'in saying that the cow that held tho world's record for butter-fat had only a 3.6 test.'

What is Required. Tlio propo?al was (said Sir. Cuddio) that, farmers should undertake to weigh and take samples o.f their milk on two days, night and morning, in the month and -forward these' samples to ,tho factory to be tested. The time that . this Mauld occupy would not be more than one .minute or a minute and a. half, per coh-. This was only on two days a month, and was quite enough to figure out. tho individual value of each cow, as had already been, proved by experience. The dairy factory would be asked to supply steam and a room for the testing. The Department would supply a man to do the testing and also figure out the returns every month. Each member would receive a statement showing the production of each individual .cow- monthly, so that at the end of the season they would know., exactly what each cow had returned. -He would like to emphasise the fact that the'weighing and sampling must-be dono in reference to-every cow that was milked by the members, >or the returns would not be fair. He explained that each member would require a small outlay, on a'bottle-for-each-cow's milk,;a small weighing machine, and a box to take.the bottles to tho factory. He' would like tho testing done about the middle of the'month. To meet tho case of people who used a double bucket on their milking plants tho testing could be continued for: a week-or more; By testing-. bisstock a man would know exactly what they were doing, and ; a man in the dairy business for butter-fn't ; returns would, not depend on the. saleyard for his dairy stock, but would recognise that it would pay better to, breed from .his proved best' cows. - •■ -'