Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1911-06-23

1t il quite evident from 9 perusal OF
this table why dairy husbandry has not
made greater progress. and why the sup
ply OF milk and butter in many sections
Of the south is not commensurate ~ltn
the needs OF the consuming population
II viii be observed that the ten best
cows produced on an average S.64z
pounds or milk. equivalent to 465 pounds
or butter fat at profit OF sSs.5s per in
dividuaL This is a very fine record
and wherever one owns cows or this
character dairying will be found prof
table enterprise. or course skilirui
feeding and management are necessary.
40 matter how good the class OF animals
may be.
The 20 best cows produced 1885
pounds OF milk. equivalent to 424 pounds
az butter Fat al q profit Of s57.s4 per
individual The difference in produc-
ton is noteworthy, amounting 10 1880
pounds OF milk per individual. and $4o.lo
Of profit uer COW In other words, Tie
average dairy COW is such mediocre
performer that she reduces the profit or
many OF the better animals TO so low a
figure as to deny the dairyman legit-
innate profit On the other hand. there
are many dairy cows IN every l.eoV
maintained on southern farms which are
kent at q loss. for ii should not be for
table represent LOCO animals which have
been fed and cared for under expert d.
rection-
The reader may Immediately wonder
why Improbable animals were permit
ted to remain in the herds They were
NOT permitted 70 remain as soon as their
character was. discovered. but In start
ing the work it was necessary first 70
teach the dafryman the importance or
- N-sz ~
order that figures just such as these
might be ascertained to prove to him
that bookkeeping with CO.'S IS an ~
portant part OF the dairy business; the
only way In fact 20 determine which are
the "robber'r cows. and. therefore. 10
Re disposed OF as rapidly as possible
As a matter OF fact, the 80 poorest cows
out OF the 1900 only produced 1,4zS
pounds OF butter fat. and q profit per
head Of So cents. There IS hardly dali
r. farm. and certainly none where rec
ords are not kept where animals OF this
class are not being maintained and fed
from one years end TO the other with
ont profit TO the owner. It would seem
trax the figures herewith presented
would Immediately result in the intro
auction Of q systematic plan or record
keeping on every dairy farm. and while
great progress is being made In this
direction, IL Is regretgaDle 70 nave 70 re-
port that many farmers are not wedding
out the unprofitable and robber cows
because Of their failure 10 keep books
concerning their business
It is interesting to note that the
ten poorest cows out Of the 1000 pro-
duced only sos pounds Of milk. euivai-
ent TO ~ pounds OF butter fat, and were
maintained at an average loss Of SASS
rer individual. Emphasis has been
laid on the fact that these cows were
led and cared for under expert direc-
ton. and as they were found In heros
uf dairy men. many OF whom are max
fng some money from the business,
they may be regarded as much above
the average as producers OF dairy prod
ucfs- What a thousand OF the dairy
cows ordinarily kept on the farm where
they are allowed TO rustic for their
living . good part Of the year and
are not fed or managed with skill might
40 i problematical. but il Is quite evil
dent that there would Re a much larger
percentage Of robber cows than Is
shown in this report No wonder the
dairy business has failed TO -dvance in
q manner Commensurate with our needs.
10 wonder that il is considered an un-