IMPROVING DAIRY HERDS.

Shannon News, 3 August 1923, Page 3

IMPROVING DAIRY HERDS.

BY RAISING PRODUCTION STANDARD. A PRACTICAL PLAN. The question of the scrub bull is one that is agitating the minds of all progressive dairymen at the present time. New Zealand is the biggest, exporter of dairy produce in the world, but whilst this is so, it is an undeniable fact_thait the production of the. country could be. more than doubled without he necessity of running a single extra cqw. The average per cow over the whole of New Zealand was at the ,last taking of statistics on the subject, slightly over 17()lbs ■of butter-fat' per year, whilst individual herds run under similar conditions, but with careful selection and breeding are producing between three and four hundred lbs. These facts are beyond question, but the thing that the average farmer of New Zealand has not yet grasped is that such improvement in returns'is’within his individual reach—that there is no magic attached to the process, and that although there are problems to be faced in raising the national standard to the higher level, it can only be achieved through the. cumulative efforts of the individual farmer along simple .and already clearly understood lines. GROPING IN THE DARK Unfortunately, the idea that progressive methods are something for the other fellow is too prevalent in New Zealand, and undoubtedly the fact that such improvement necessitates the expenditure of a certain amount of capital before a return is received, has militated against its earlier popularity, but the idea, is gaining ground. Herd-testing is a groping after the; truth —after all, a blind groping, because it hag failed to grasp the! important fact that it is merely working J)n the available material without making any adequate arrangement for the provision of an improved standard from, which to select. This is the question which is now engaging the minds of the up-to-date agriculturalist, and the following scheme, which was outlined to a “Chronicle” representative by Mr W. J. McCullough, manager of the Central Development, Farm, and which has been submitted to- the Department of Agriculture for consideration, will be found of general interest. SCRUB! BULL MUST GO. “During the last few years,” said Mr McCullough, “I have been very interested in the progress of the butter-fat production of the dairy cows of this Dominion, and although we have beien doing wonderful work in creating interest in herd-testing among our dairy farmers, we agree that until the much talked of scrub bull is eliminated we! cannot hope to progress in production per cow, to anything approaching the extent possible, were the common herds, headed by p’ure-bred sires. I do not suggest for a. moment, that herd-testing is not of great, assistance to production, but I do suggest that breeding must go hand in .hand with testing, otherwise the true and lasting value of heirdtesting is not fully appreciated. “To do this we agree that the scrub bull must go, but one is. faced with the great problem—how is hei to be replaced? And so we continue to breed from our cows and fill the gaps in the dairy herd from time to time) with heifers from “freak,” good-testing, nondescript-bred cows, and by a scrub o,r nondescriptbred bull, with no guarantee that he will leave high producing qualities in his daughters. The result is that the heifers come into profit and eventually have to be culled as rigorouslyas were their dams, until alter much disappointment and elxpense in rearing, an odd “freak” high-testing heifer is retained to keep up the herd number, which has no secure foundation in breeding. THE FREAK HEIFER.

“I use the wor* freak,” continued Mr McCullough,” because I have heard some farmers -boast of -having crossbred nondescript cows in their herds which could beat all the purebreds for production, but unfortunately, while an odd crossbred cow in a herd may produce v ery well, these a ire so l'elw in number that such animals are only an accident of nature and therefore freaks. “I feel absolutely sure that the bulk of the dairymen are quite aware of thie) benefits of using a good bull, with known records -of production behind him; but in the great majority of cases, the ready cash is'"not available, nd, like other important matters on the farm, it has to- stand down indefinitely. I have often thought of how this great difficulty might be overcome—partnerships, hull clubs, Government assistance by providing bulls to- stand in certain districts, etc. but all seemed to bristle with difficulties. WHAT AUSTRALIA IS DOING. Whilst in Australia on holiday recently, however, I came into touch with Mr W. L. Summers, secretary to the Department of Industry for South Australia, and in discussing this subject found to my astonishment that South Australia had -already taken this matter up in earnest. I was so interested in the project that Mr Summers kindly sent mei a copy of the Act passed in that State (“An Act to provide for the licensing o-f bulls and for utilising the money derived from such licensing in encouraging the dairy industry of the State”). This was assented to on December 7( 1921.” “The main provisions of the Bill are as follows: —-

SECTION I. (Conditions governing sale of all purebred bulls). (1) Bulls shall be reigistered in Herd Books, or be eligible for Herd Book entry. .(2) Bulls must be well-grown and true to type. . (3) Bulls shall not he less than. ■ ten months nor more than two years of -age. (4) Owners of bulls two years and

over must produce evidence of f fruitfulness in the preceding year. < SECTION IL (Conditions governing sale of pureI bred bulls eligible for GovernI ment subsidy). (1) Bulls must comply with all conditions laid down, in Section I. (2) Bulls eligible for Government subsidy shall be the progeny of officially tested stock of satisfactory performance records agreeing with standards to be fixed. (3) Bulls for sale cannot qualify for subsidy unless having passed a Tuberculin test within six months prior to date of sale. (4) Subject to the following conditions the Government shall offer to approved purchasers of such bulls a bonus of 25 per cent, of the purchase price at the end of the first year, provided that such bonus does not exceed £25, and 12£ per cent, of the purchase price at the end of each of two subsequent years, provided that such payment does not exceed £l2 10s each year. (5) The application for bonus to be on forms supplied at the sale and endorsed by the auctioneer and Government representative. (6) Subsidised bulls shall be made available for use to others* at a fee not exceeding 10s per cow. In the case, of bulls under two years of age the owner’need not accept more than 15 outside cows during the first year, but no further subsidy will be paid, unless he can show evidence of having accepted not less than ten outside cows for the same period. For bulls of over two years the maximum number of cows that the owner must accept is raised to 25, whilst the minimum entitling him to further subsidy remains at ten. (7) The owner to supply the Department of Agriculture with a list of names of outside owners of cows and dates of services. (8) The bulls shall be kept under conditions satisfactory to the Department of Agriculture. Mr McCullough pointed: out that greater encouragement would be given to purchasers (clause 4) by paying the first 25 per cent, as soon as possible after the purchase of the bull is approved. Clause 6, he considers, would require, amending on the Bcore of the: number of outside cows accepted, and also that before any outside cows are accepted, they should be certified a,s. clean by an inspector. Further that the acceptance of outside cows, whilst useful as insuring that bulls will be put to- the fullest possible use, should be compulsory only where the owner has not sufficient cows of his own. LICENSING OF BULLS.

Thtei New South Wales. Act provides that every bull over the age of six months shall be licensed at a fee of 10s, and from this source, the Government will receive this year, a sum of £43505: which provides a fund to work on. Not the least important factor in this arrangement is the point that breeders of young pedigree bulls, by agreeing to “licensing” should be able to dispose of everything uip to standard that they can breed, for a very long time to come, instead of, as at present, having a lot of young bulls, two and three years old, running in the. paddock Waiting on the buyer prepared to offer a certain price, and who very often does not happen along. Thus quite a lot of bulls are lost to the country and may eventually be potted. The result is that a number of young pedigree bull calves are killed, only sufficient being reared to meet the demands of the few who can purchase them. Even of those reared, statistics show that the pedigree bulls of this Dominion are not being used for service as much as they should be. According to our statistics, on the 31st January, 1921, there is one pure-bred bull to every 1.8 purebred, cows, and unfortunately there is one scrub bull to every 31.2 crossbred cows. Of course, the purebred bulls must assuredly be serving more than purebred females, yet the fact remains that the great majority of purebred bulls are not in the hands of legitimate dairy farmers, but are title property of pedigree breeders, as ' can be seen by anyone visiting a stud farm and noting the proportion of bulls andi cows. PROPORTION OF PUREBREDS. The following table gives the numbers and proportions of purebred and scrub cattle of milking strains in 1921, and ther© is no reason to believe that the numbers have materially altered. The animals quoted are all of two years and upwards:—

Total 7,835 14,224 A proportion of 1.8 cows to every bull. CROSSBRED CATTLE (with <a predominating strain, same agei). Bulls. Cows.

Other dairy breeds unspecified ......... 163 12,531 Totals, bulls 33,470; cows 1,044,529. A proportion, of 1 to 31.21. If, as in South Australia and also Western Australia, and Tasmania, all dairy bulls in New Zealand were required to be registered at a fee of 10s, the revenue from this would! amount' to approximately £4OOO from purebred bulls and £16,000 from crossbreds, making the neat sum of £20,000 for the purposes of dairy hieird improvement. THE MOVEMENT IN OTHER PARTS. The fallowing clipping from .the “Auckland Weekly News” supplied by Mr McCullough, shows the support which the scheme is receiving abroad:

“In Western Australia,” writes Col. C. E. Merritt, in the course of an article on the subject in “Australian Farm and. Home,” “every bull over the age of six months must be-registered at a fee of 10s. with a penalty for noncompliance, of £2O. After 1925, registration may be refused if the bull does not comply with the standard adopted, and the bull must he destroyed, unless the Appeal Board provided directs the registration. In Tasmania, all bulls must be registered (.fee 10s), and after three years only purebred or grade bulls can be. used. A grade bull is one that has either ia purebred sire or dam entered in a registered herd hook. After a few years it is proposed to disallow grade bulls, and only permit the use of purebred bulls, and this will effectually raise the standard of the cows and consequent production of butterfat. It may be mentioned that Ireland is one of the latest countries to take teh matter up, and the dairy farmers of Omagh are calling upon the De'partment of that country to introduce legislation for the registration of all bulls, which must be from dams with certified milk records.” From this it will be seen that dairymeln in different parts of the world are keenly alive to the harm being done to the standard of dairy cattle by the scrub bulb and are attacking the problem in the. only way in which it is cnpablSe 1 of solution—by prohibiting the use of the scrub bull altogether. Further, according to the South Australian scheme, which appears to be the most up-to-date yet evolved, the dairy herd must be first brought up to a reasonably good standard, before the owner is eligible for assistance on the lines provided. This, in encouraging him to initiate the prodess of improvement in the • first place, provides a reasonable guarantee that the work will be continued'- after the Government has done its part.

Mr McCullough, as has been explained has brought this scheme 1 before the Department of Agriculture, and it will be hoped by all progressive dairymen that legislation along the lines suggested will be introduced in thia near future.

Bulls. Cows Jerseys ... 4,030 5,808 Guernseys •••• 5 16 Alderneys .... 1 2 Friesians ... 1,458 2,359 Ayrshire s 397 1,293 Red Polls ... • 34 41 Shorthorns ••• ... 1,910 4,705

Jersey and other * Channel Islands 9,972 303,476 Friesians 5,165 117,183 Ayrshires 1,119 30,770 Milking Shorthorns ... 16,985 579,873 Red Polls 52 496 Danish Red 15 200