The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1914-01-22
'SHAW" CONTRASTS
DUAL SHORT HORN

speakers of the Tri-State Grain Grow
ers' convention today. He spoke this
afternoon on the subject Of Dual Pur-
pose Shorthorns in England and
America. His talk was one OF the most
interesting on the Livestock day pro-
gramme. In part Professor Shaw
said:
Prof. Thomas Shaw, speaking on
Dual Purpose Cattle in England and
Rmerica, said: In England fully SO
per cent of the milk comes from dual
purpose cattle. In America but little
Of it comes from that source. In
England more han so per cent CT the
beef comes from that source. In
America the beef hat ono from
that source is infinitesmal. Why the
difference? Are the E~nglishmen
fools? Surely not. They have to de-
pend mainly on the returns from dual
purpose cattle to pay their heavy
rents. These rents are in some in
stances as high as SIS per acre. or,
are the American teachers wise men,
when they say those cattle that will
enable Englishmen to pay those large
rents are O myth and a deluSlon and
a snare? Who has the correct view
Of this matter, Ike Englishmen who
pay those high rents with the returns
from those cattle. or the Americans
who call them q q myth and a delu-
sion and a snare?
But what are dual purpose cattle?
In England they are cattle that viii
produce a large amount Of milk. Not
SO much as straight dairy cattle. but
q goodly mount. The average pro-
duc1ion Of those dual cows vii! pro-
dGce not less than $500 ponnds a year.
The male calves produced by those
COWS. will, when grown on skim milk
and adjuncts furnish as much good
baef at the age OF "a months as the
caves that nave been reared on their
dams. In America dual purpose cat
tie. according to the dairy traders, are
scrubs. They are Of no Particular
breeding. They will not produce more
than 1000 pounds q year. The aver
age in butter production IS not more
than 1872 pounds a ear. That is all
that the wise men of Minnesota have
accomplished as the result in twenty
five years of teaching. Those wise
men include the entire teaching dairy
staff at the University of Minnesota
and the lecturers on the farmers in
stitute platforms. During recent
years there may be some exceptions,
in act there are several of them. Fol
many years on the institute platform
IlO oAS Was dlIo"Su W duNOCdlC luS
claims Of the dual purpose cow. .EX-
periments were conducted to show
the improbable character of the
dual purpose cow. But the
unfortunate thing was that the men
who conducted those experiments
did not know what constituted
a dual purpose COW They thought
they knew when they did not know.
They fancied hat the scrub COW was
a dual purpose COW, and all the ex-
periments that they conducted were
based OF his assumption. The learn
ed innocents did not know. They did
not know that a dual cow was a cow
that would produce a large amount of
milk and would produce steers that
would give a large amount of good
beef. In their innocency they seemed
to think that the scrub cow Of no kind
of breeding or Of all kinds Of breed
ing was a dual purpose cow and they
based n experiments on this as
sumption.
What has been the outcome Of this
teaching? Why, simply this: The
farmer was discouraged from trying
to keep he dual cow. He has in
many instances become discouraged
from keeping n kind of cattle. The
production of cattle on the arabic
farm has gone down. The country is
crying out for more and cheaper beef.
Where is the increase to come from
II 1t Is not to come from dua cattle?
1t cannot come in any marked degree
from dairy cattle. 1t cannot come in
large measure from the beef breeds
as will De shown below. 1t must
come from the dual cattle grown on
the arabic farm. II it does not come
from this class of cattle where Is it to
49, FN@VnD TNh1 Sl~t-,x L.1-lz $500
furnish it. The beef breeds cannot
furnish it in sufficient quantity as
will sbe shown below. This increase
therefore. must come from the dual
purpose breeds.
THAT the increase in beef produc-
ton must come from dual purpose
cattle will now be shown. While it is
true that straight dairy cattle may
produce some beef. it is also true that
it is not high class beef. No advocate
Of dairy cattle will be so luny as to
claim that the lean loin Of a Jersey
will produce as much or as good beef
as the deep, juicy and marbled loin
of a high class Aberdeen Angus bull
ock. Their why not grow all this beef
wanted from straight beef bullocks?
Because it will not pay thus to grow
it 30 well from best bullocks as from
dual purpose bullocks. Why should
this be? The reasons are not far to
seek. The straight beef COW suckles
her own calf. That calf will not
weigh more than 800 pounds on the
average when 1 year old. At present
prices that calf will not be worth
more than $50 in the stock yards
when n year old, as he will not
pounds. That is all that the owner
| gets for the keep of the cow and her
calf for one year. 1t is clear thai the
margin of profit in such a case is very
narrow. Now suppose hat the calf
had been produced by a dual purpose
COW Of the right type COW When one
year old it would be worth at least
$40 in the stock yards. The cow that
produced that calf would produce
not less than 5000 pounds of milk.
That is the average for the dual pur-
pose cow. The dairy advocates of
Minnesota have put the average Of the
dual purpose cow at 1000 pounds.
But they were talking of scrub cows,
while in their %innocency they thought
they were talking of dual cows. The
difficulty was that they thought they
knew when they did not know. Now
the 5000 pounds of milk from that
dual COW will be worth easily 500,
when the value Of the skim milk is
considered over what the calf will
| consume. That makes the return
from the cow and calf $140, as against
| $50 in the other case. OF course the
greater cost Of labor should be con-
sidered in the case of the dual cow
"At the end of the second year, the
dual calf will be worth about as much
as the other calf. That will not be
true at the end Of the first year. But
during the second year, the hand