Daily globe. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1878-1884, 1883-02-17


very unfortunate and to be comnliserated-
| there Is no poorer property than lot OF poor
| cows that do not payfor their keep. 1t pays no
mal to run dairy OF poor mixers, even on
| cheap land, as there Is too much care and e.
pense connected with dairying to make any but
| the very best cows desirable.
| What is good COW? Judgments may differ
very much on this point. l call it good COW
| that gives 5000 pounds of milk year, provided
the milk is of average richness for either butter
or cheese. 1t is better COW that gives more.
There are very few COWS in the state of New
| York, giving not more than 5000 pounds of
milk year, that it is profitable to keep-unless
| the milk is very rich in butter, as that of the
| best JERSEYS. | estimate an average of about
| 5000 pounds of milk per COW for my state; but
| it is estimated by some of our best judges that
one-third of the COWS of the state are kept at a
| loss, that another third gives profit and that
all the profit, lessened by the amount of loss
| from the poorest COWS, comes from the other
| third. l do not think this wild estimate.
Probably smaller yield would make pay
ing COW in the West, where land is so cheap.
But do not believe that COW giving less than
5000 lbs. of good milk year viii prove pay
ing COW in southern Minnesota. You VIII be
our own judges as to this, remembering that it
does not pay to run dairy for the fun of the
thing. and that numbers do not necessarily add
There may be more profit in one good COW than
IL fifty poor ones. Indeed there may be heavy
loss in the fifty, while there must be some profit
in the egood COW.
The question always comes up, what breed of
COWS is best? Some one has said thai ''the best
breed of hogs is the swill-pan breed-neaniag,
suppose, that the best hog is the that gives
the best results from q given amount of feed. l
might say, the best breed of cows is the milk
pail breed. But this is saying nothing that is
not already known. There is a wide difference
in breeds and wide difference in the individ-
uals of the same breed There is 10 one breed
that can boast of all good COWS. There are
poor COWS and there are good COWS II all breeds.
You must Judge and select with care the indI-
vidual, from whatever breed you may choose.
/ DO not wish to be understood as implying
that there is no value in blooded stock, or in a
good pedigree. Blood tells in the comparative
uniformity of the progeny. MongreIism tells in
the lack of uniformity, producing mixed results
and d wider range between the good and the bad.
1t also produces a smaller proportion OF good
animals. 1t is best, therefore, to select a male
from some of the established breeds, always
using pure bred male and continuing to select
your males from the same breed, thus breeding
uniformly IN the same direction. Crossing or
mixing breeds, in any way, should be done
with great care and Judgment.
1t is dangerous experiment
and is what has made our sO-called native cattle
so widely different and uncertain. It tends to
degeneracy, and not only changes but lowers the
type, as whole. Now and then good results
VIII appear, and here and there we viii find ami
mails that can not be excelled as individuals; but
their offspring is liable to be very much inferior
to themselves. The mixture of blood renders it
| uncertain in what direction they viii breed
The only safety lies in using a pure-bred sire
with good milking pedigree-that is, male
descended through long line of good mixers
and having himself all the marks and indica-
| tons of milk-producing animal Such one
Will improve the herd, whatever the
foundation stock; but 'native'' or grade bull
is almost certain to injure it-for the bad quail
and be correspondingly developed and intensi-
fed in the offspring. SO, I repeat it, not only
your success but your salvation as dairymen de-
ponds on the use of well-selected, pure-bred
males, always of the same breed.
| am quite sure there is a great loss in a mixed
dairy herd, for butter making purposes. There
is also great loss in mixing the milk of the herds
of neighborhOod at the butter factory. The
loss occurs in this way: The butter IN milk is
contained in small drops or globules, too
small to be seen by the naked eye.
The large globules rise quickly and
churn easily. The smaller the globules, the
more slowly they rise and the harder they
churn. The cream globules vary in size in the
milk of the same COW, at all times. They aver
age the largest just after calving, and grow
smaller and smaller the longer the COW is in milk,
and this is why the churning grows harder and
harder. Instances have been known where cows
have gone so long in milk and the cream glob-
ules have become so small that no cream could
! be raised nor butter chugned from their milk.
Yet the butter was in the milk, and the chemist
could getit out by aualyZing it. The feed aud
condition of the COW vary the size of the cream
glObule. Good feed makes the largest globule,
and the COW in good condition will give milk
having larger cream globules than the same COW
! IN poor condition.
| Again, the size Of the cream globules vary in
the milk of the different breeds. They are the
most uniformly large in the milk of the Jersey.
and must uniformly small in the milk of the
! Eriesian, often misnamed HolsteiD. The milk
| Of the Devon contains cream globules of an in
termediate size, and quite as uniform. The size
Of the cream globule varies the most widely in
| the milk of the Ayrshire. It is little more
uniform in the milk of the Shorthorn. AS a
rule, think uniformity in size of the cream
globule indicates purity Of breeding, or descent
without mixture Of blood from a long line OF
ancestors.
! Now, bearing in mind the fact that the largest
cream globules churn the easiest, and the smaller
chum the harder, until the very smallest will
not churn at all, we can see how mixing milk OF
all kinds Il LIST result in waste.
A case in point will illustrate: was credibly
informed of a case where the cream of an old
COW and a heifer raised from that cow were
churned together. The yield was unsatisfactory,
and only about what it should be from the old
cows milk. 1t was suggested that the
buttermilk be churned. This resulted in a
batch of butter equal to the first. Then
the milk of the two COWS was set separ-
| ately, skinned separately, and churned sepa-
rately. 1t was found that it took twice as long
to churn the old cows cream that it did to churn
| the heifer's. Before the experiment, the old
| cows butter had been all thrown away. So it
will be seen how, in the mixing of milk from
| different cows and from different herds, there
| may be great loss of butter.
There is no certain test of the butter making
| qualities of COW but the churn. 1t is not the
| amount of cream raised, nor the amount of fat
| that the chemist can find in the milk, but the
amount Of butter that can be got out of it, that
determines the value of the cow. Each must
be tested separately and under the same condi-
tons, to determine the relative value of the COWS
| of herd.
Let US consider some of the peculiarities of
the different breeds and their adaptation to
| the climate and conditions of southern Mime
sofa.
The Jersey is butter COW, and nothing else.
1t will not pay to make her milk into cheese,