The Kimball graphic. (Kimball, Brule County, Dakota [S.D.]) 1883-1905, 1901-03-30
Last week The GRAPHIC published :

Last week The GRAPHIC published 8
tabulated statement made by John Arm
strong OF DeSmet, president OF the stats
board OF q teulture, showing the profit
from is mich COWS. The statement
showed that the gross receipts from each
COW, increase and sale Of pigs added,
averaged from $50 to $40 per wear In
round numbers, and the net receipts
were from $72 to $sS. The statement
covered three years. In connection with
the statement, we called attention to the
fact that the figures did not iibe In some
respects, and that tho principal profit. or
more than half Of IT.. came from the In
crease and the sale Of pigs. MI. Arm
strong has since written The GRAPHIC
q letter. He says:
"While 1 only milk 16 cows, this par
ticular herd consists Of about 40 head,
including young things OF ell ages. To
begin with, ! invoice my herd each 5ear.
January /, 1893, cows, calves and pigs
invotced $1,000. 4 credit all stock sold
each year, and charge up all stock
bought. The balance is the result OF the
statement.
II use a pure bred Shorthorn bull and
the young things I sell bring at least
twice as much as scrub stock. l do not
keep a COW that will not give 40 pounds
Of milk a day when fresh. 1 feed o bal
anced ration. You will see by this
method, l did not start with just sixteen
COWS, but with forty head. Now each
year as I invoice stock, what l have over
the $1,000 I started with l give to them
credit. I keep an itemized account Of
every item received and paid out.
I'm reference to the milk. As l live
in town l sell something like $50 or $50
worth every year outside OF the cream
cry. This milk, Of course, brings a high
er price. This is why my receipts from
milk do not compare with the creamery
price. But I keep an account Of the
number Of pounds and figure It In. Any
way, l did not figure very accurately, as
l left out fractions.
MY object in making the statement
was to show what could be done with q
few good cows. fed a balanced ration and
properly cared for. My milk has aver
aged 4.30 test for three years. I had at
first a number of pure bred Jerseys, but
sold them all out and am now using
good, dual-purpose cows Only, bred to q
bull from a milking strain of Shorthorns.
I'VE keep a herd of so pure bred Short.
horns on our farm five miles out from
DeSmet, none Of which are MIXED.
These IL cows 1 keep in town, and l went
into the deal just to show what can be
done with good management"
lit appears from Mr.. Armstrong; let
ter that the statement he has made OF
the gross and net returns from 16 COWS
is really the returns from q herd of 40
head: the milk from 16 Of them and the
increase from the entire herd. To this is
also added the pork sold. The statement
IShOUo VAne tuO COWo 0Vclukcu AL 4OVU
6,483 pounds OF milk each and the aver
age price received for it was SO cents per
hundred. The cost of feed per hundred
Of milk 10 set down at So cents per hun
dred, leaving the amount received net SO
cents per hundred, or about 1874 per COW.
Now add the value of the calf and the
skinned milk and the actual returns
are to be had. Those who have expert
mented largely claim that SKINNED
milk is worth 20 cents per hundred for
hogs. This would bring the returns
from each cow to about SAG, without the
calf. We think this is a fair estimate Of
Mr.. Armstrong; 16 cows-and it's big
enough for ANYBODY. We would like to
see Mr.. Armstrong keep an accurate ac-
count Of the 16 cows by themselves for
one year, setting off the pigs and calves
by themselyes.-ED.]
l Cnvps s>It ~,pA - vuE-p. sc~...n-7