The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1901-12-17
THE LIVE STOCK INDUSTRY IN THE
SOUTH.
III
The Dairy Herd.

herd ia the first step coward success
in dairying. When we know that
the average yield of milk for each
cow in North Carolina is but 2,079
pounds per year, we see the force of
this statement. But is goes still
further. We have many COWS that
yield over 2,O79 pounds this means,
therefore, that we have an equal
nunber yielding less than this
amount, consequently they are very
poor indeed. Dairying will surely
not a under those conditions.
FIRST OF ALL, THE MILK RECORD
should receive our attention. By
this | mean we ehould employ some
system to record the daily, weekly,
monthly and yearly yields of each
COW in our herd. Reader, If you
will try this this year you will be
surprised at the results. To illus
trate how important this is In a
herd of COWS, which l vas privileged
to control last year, one COW gave
1920 pounds of milk this was the
best COW in the herd. The poorest
COW gave us a return of but $3.50
pounds Without the milk rec I'd
we would never have known which
cow was paying Us and which n
was not. AS soon as we obtained
this record we sold the Improbable
one and filed her place in the herd
by another. How easy it ia where a
record of the milk ia kept to find out
what COWS are profitable and what
ones are not.
SEPARATE THE PAYING FROM THE NON
PAYING
The owner can in this way discard
the poor ones and keep the good ones
and in a few years have d valuable
herd-al profitable animals. A small
pair of scales cost but little and the
milk from each cow can be weighed
easily and quickly. If you think it
is positively too much trouble TO
weigh each milking, do is once a
~ eek anyway you can then esti
mate the relative standing of your
COWS.
Then when you know the relative
values o. your co VS. and IL buyereomes
along, don't sell the best one because
he will pay ten or twenty dollars
more for her.
Let us simply look into this point.
You have two COWS; n will give
5000 pounds of milk and is a good
COW, the second one gives but 1000
pounds. For the first you are offered
$50, and for the second $40. Twenty
dollars looks like a big difference be
tween two COWS. And on the u
face perhaps it is. But we must
look down deep for the facts. The
5000 pound cow at prevailing prices
in many parts of this State would
realize in sale of milk $3.50 per year
the 1000 pound COW but $50. Where
is the $50 difference now? Swelled
TO 1920. No, reader, you can't afford
TO sell your best stock if you mean
TO build up your herd 1t is business
suicide to do so. Make it a rule TO
SELL ONLY YOUR POOR STOCK. KEEP
THE BEST.
Nc farmer who produces milk and
butter can afford to keep the poorer
stock. He can't afford to sell the
best. Make use Of the milk record
then so as TO know positively what
COWS are profitable and what are not.
Sell Oft che poor ones then and feed
the remaining COWS better with that
which would have gone to the IN
profitable ones. The first years ex-
perienoe will demonstrate the truth
of this suggestion.
1 believe if one half of the COWS of
the State (the poor half were sold
for beef or struck by lightning this
coming week, and the remaining
half were TO receive the food and at
tention that would have gone to the
whole number, the profit during the
coming year would be greater than
that which viii result from the total
mum oer, with the Improbable COWS
included
The datryman who produces milk
for butter should g. u step farther
and besides keeping Il milk record 80
detarnine the total quantity of milk
a COW annually produces, should also
test it with
THE BABCOCK TESTER
so determine it's quality.
It will require nearly four gallons
e n.a