The Lamar register., 1897-07-10
Cow rndiyidaairty.

voted nearly all OF my time to one sub
Ject. and that Is cost of production
| started out in this work in sort oi
general way. thinking perhaps We
could get some Information that would
show the farmer what II wonld cost TO
make pound of butter. Fortunately,
we had a very mixed herd at st. An
thony Park. 1t was composed of vari-
Gus breeds OF cattle and various types.
The work was carried on for one year.
Weighing every ration before 1t was
given to the COW. and then making a
record OF thst ration. When the COW
was milked. the milk was weighed and
tested for fat. which you see involved a
great deal of work After tkis work
had been carried on for one year, some
very curious facts began to make their
appearance. We compared the Hol-
stems with the Jerseys, the Short
horns with the GuernseyB and the ma
uves, and tried in that way TO get
some results as to what was the best
breed; and what was the resul:7 Sim
ply this: The figures show that certain
COWS of any one breed would produce
much better results than others of the
same breed under exactly the same
conditions: so nothing satisfactory re-
suited from this comparison. After the
years work was completed, and |
noted this peculiar variation between
the different cows. the question arose,
Why does this COW produce butter for
cents while that one charges US is
centsa Why does this Holstein pro-
duee butter for Q cents. while the other
H0lEfRtn Rt4Frraa r nrhr
does this Short-horn produce butter
Tor l2.2 cents. while another Short
horn charges Us Is,2 cents! Instead Of
pursuing this course further. we adopt
ed another plan. making two divisions
Of the herd. putting the cows that
charged the most for butter on one
side. and those that charged least for
butter on the other. on the one side
were Short-horns. Jerseys, Guernseys
Hnlstelns and natives; and ihe same
was the case on the other side We
found that the cows that had ten
dency to lay on nesh. gave on an
average 267 pounds of butter fat per
aunum at a cost OF las cents per
pound, while the spare cows in the
other group gave on an lyeraBs 337
pounds OF butter fat at cost OF il.s
cents per pound. / also observed that
some in the group OF spare cows did
no; do as well as others as to the
amount OF both butter yield and the
cost OF production Examining the
beefy group. / noticed similar veria-
tions. and, after carefully comparing
the record OF each animal In tho herd
with the annual yield and cost Of feed.
/ noticed that the greater the inelIna-
tion TO lay on flesh. the greater was the
cost OF butter production. To further
carry on Investigation in this line and
have It cover period when an exact
record could be kept OF all feed con
sumed by each COW. an accurate rec
ord Eas kept during the winter II the
amount and kind OF fcod consumed ~
each Cow and the amount OF milk and
butter fat produced. In summing up
he winters work. variations similar /
10 those observed In the yearly rec
1rd were noticed; this Is. that as GER
srai result. the COW with q besfy tea- 4
iency was shown 10 be less profitable I
han the spare COW. but there were I
In each group. and the next 4
ioint to be solved was why this ylria-
Ion. found that the dairy value Of
.ow was not In every instance meas.
rred by her tendency. or lack Of ten
lency, TO lay on flesh. but that there
we're other conditions bearing on The
,roblem. BY this time we had lost ali
interest In breeds and breed tests, Tor
20 began to see the question OF eco
.omical butter production involved
principles underlying and