THE DAIRY FARM.

Hauraki Plains Gazette, Volume XXXV, Issue 4709, 9 June 1924, Page 4

THE DAIRY FARM.

TESTING, BREEDING, & FEEDING. MEANS TO INCREASE PROFITS. In a general way the three words in tiie second line of the above headings may be said to constitute the golden key to success in dairying. There are, of course, other more or less important factors which enter into the business, but, granting that they are of normal character, it can be fairly assumed that the dairyman who regularly tests the producing capabilities of the individual members of hig herd, and who follows that practice by breeding along sound lipcs, and supplies his animals with a generous, well-balanced ration, will inevitably secure a higher return per head than the man who neglects to test, and who conducts his breeding and feeding operations in a careless or indifferent manner. The truth of this has been repeatedly demonstrated in relation to both grade and purebred herds. In the improvement of the returns from herds a noteworthy influence has been exerted by the members of the dairy division of' the Department of Agriculture and by those who direct many of dur co-operative daily companies. These men cannot be too warmly commended for the excellent work which they are performing. They naturally have closely studied all the phases of dairy management. While endeavouring quietly and aclfully to remedy existing weaknesses, they have sought persistently to encourage a spirit of healthy rivalry among the dairymen in the various centres in which they are engaged, and in that connection have been very instrumental in organising and fostering herd-testing associations. TESTING REVELATIONS. Old ideas are said to die hard. That is certainly true in dairying. For example, notwithstanding the great amount of reliable data, available, there are dairymen who maintain that a cow may be a good producer in one season, and a poor or indifferent produce)' in another. Hence they declare thiit testing work has little value. Undoubtedly local factors, such as sickness, accident, and so on, do operate. Under normal conditions, however, with abundant feeding the same cows will be at the top of the herd in every year, while those naturally in-

ferior in productive capacity will iu-t variably be at the bottom. TESTING PROVES THE BULL. Herd test association work proves that the' majority of the leading herds carry the blood of the best strains of the dairy breeds. Many I oils from the best producing cows have been introduced into those localities where herd testing has been tackled in earnest. Very few dairymen can affor.l to purchase pure-bred females, but the certain information of the advantages accruing from the use of pure-bred bulks will, greatly influence dairymen to secure a bull from highproducing ancestry of the breed that they fancy most. A common statement has it that the bull is half the herd. Undoubtedly in this country the present low average production per cow must be largely attribteud .to the animal that it "just* a bull” and nothing more. While scrub or grade bulls fail to improve production, it is true in a measure of pure-bred bulls, for all such are not necsesarily good dairy animals. But as showing what can be done by working along practical lines the Danish dairy farmers are said to have uoublcd the average yield per cow in 26 years. ONLY RELIABLE GUIDE. The main reason for testing Is to put every cow in her true position in the herd, according to her producing ability. With this knowledge gained, automatically there is received other valuable information essential to progress. Surer progress is made when the producing value of each cow known, for there i,s less of the element of luck, and more of the element of control. It has been said that herd test association work is not likely to assist, in building up the dairy industry because culled cows are being sold oh the market to the best ,advantage, an 1 arc therefore likely to return to the herds of non-testing owners. Frankly, it must be admitted that association members are more interested n themselves than in the welfare of the industry, and further, that they ceitai'ily are not paying a fee for testing their own cows in the interests of their brother farmers. The industry does benefit though, for testing owners are not breeding from the lowest producers ; consequently to that extent fewer lowgrade animals will be raised in each district, and definite knowledge is available of each animal that is rear-

ed. But while the movement remains voluntary the objection raised is likely to remain. Under a State controlled compulsory system the position would immediately assume a different aspect. Some system of branding cull cows would be imperatively necessary. In an average year, after making due allowance for the difference that exists between farms and farmers, any mature cow working under normal conditions and failing io produce 1751 b cf butter-fat should carry no other mark than that of the spayer’s knife.

Type is not a sure indicator of production. Testing lias proved that there may be as great a difference as 10111 b in tiie yield of butter-fat from each of two cows of similar type and on similar feed. Yet many meu claim to be able to pick the good producers on type and other so-called infallible signs, such as the colour of the milk, the yellow pigment in the skin, or the escutcheon, and notwithstanding that it is common knowldegc that cream rising on a bottle of milk may vary greatly in percentage of butterfat. this is accepted in some instances as a sufficient test.

it is readily admitted that most of the high producers are of good daily type. But there are cows of dairy type and strong constitution that arc not only indifferent milkeis, but unprofitable dairy cows. Experience time and time again has proved this to be the case. —Advance,