Deseret evening news. [volume] (Great Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1867-1920, 1899-03-06
srrcIAL runrosr nnrrDs.
Jersey. Ayrshire. short.iiarn and itoistcin
iIteeds Tested aud Compared.

"Ovof mud hcyond'the general contcn-
tion. with which readers " dairy liter
ature are familiar. about general and
special purpose cows. there II general.
~ understood o. be further Hpcclaii-
zatlon among the dairy breeds with re-
npsct 10 the purpose for which the
milk n 10 be used. The HoiHtcin-
Fflesian. for example. aud the Jersey.
are both dairy cows, but they reach
their results by different routes. the
former giving q large quantity of com.
paratlvcly poor milk. and the latter a
smaller quantity Of comparatively rich
milk The New York State Expert
mcnt station, NJ GENEVA. has devoted
considerable attention 60 ascertain the
relative value ~ the milk and IT, con-
tents for various purposes. the Inquiry
being directed to the relative profitable
ness " different breeds H. milk men and
butter ana cheese makers. respective
~" says Iowa Homestead.
The process adopted was a. cstnb-
liHh. M fairly M II could be- done. the
pficcn Tor milk per hundred weight. Tor
milk solids for cheese making Dor
pound. and for butter fat per pound
these figures were placed at fi.sg per
hundred weight Tor milk. oi-1 cents per
pound for milk solids and 20 Ia cents
for butter fat on this basis Ayrahir.
milk WIS worth NJ such. during the
year. fs3si per COW! IL solids for
cheese making were worth tsiif. aud
itn butter fat for butter making was
worth but fGiis, The Ayrshire nc-
cordlng 10 this showing would be-
worth more a. the miikmnn than 10 the
cheese maker and urlre to the cheese
maker than to the butter maker. The
milk ~ III" Guernsey was worth So %.
the milk solids wefc valued al tss.Ot Tor
cheese making aud tis.is for butter
making, Here tho Guernsey II shown
to BE- more valuable 20 either the but
ter or cheese maker than 10 the mix
man. The milk ~ tho IioiHtcin proved
90 be- worth ti0i 90 when sold AZ milk,
fS1N In the hands OF tho cheoao maker
and fiOl0i IN the hands Of the butter
maker. The ffolatoln II. therefore. q
better milkmnn'H COW than q cheese
makers and n better cheese maker'H
COW thnn she IN butter mnkcr'n COW,
The milk ~ the Jersey nt the price as
sumcd was worth go y. the solids were
10 the cheese maker So y. and It's but
ter fat was valued nj t7iao. The Jer-
10Y y, therefore. Just tho reverse ~ the
Holntein-Fricalan. Hhe ~ at her best
~ the hands ~ the butter maker. aud
the next most profitable use Tor her
inilk II cheese maltlng II n least profit
able Co the milkman. The ghorthorn
gave milk worth f52.so. Tho solids In
the hands ~ the cheese maker were
worth po.sa, the tat IN the hands n
the hutior maker was worth so 40 The
figures prove the milk OF the ghorthorn
the most profitable FOR manufacture In.
tn cheese. tho sale OF tho milk standing
second In point u profit and the hut.
ter value coming '-n
while the experiments upon which
the tnf"goinE statement was based Ia.
GUIDED number NJ cows from each Of
the breeds, Il must nevertheless bn re-.
meinncfrd that over ana beyond tho
question ~ breed comes that Of indi.
vldnnlltywhlch largely controls In milk
production. The value Of the ngtirrs
WIN DEPEND very LARGELY upon Whether
The several animals We're fairly typlcni
OF lhelr breeds. aud whether there was
dlVidunlity."