The enterprise. [volume] (Harlem, Mont.) 1899-1926, 1916-06-01
1lrJTE GOST OF BUTTER
FAT ON ALFALFA EAEAp

set OF figures secured by the
+ Try division OF the United State
! department Of Agriculture in an al
I fatIa district of Utah and given "
H.. r. H. Bothell before the Cali
/ t0"nia Creamery Operators conyen-
on recently, is Of value as thew no
! 4nly show many valuations that hole
( good in California, Nevada and Ari-
IONA. but also suggest a basis for
, computing costs OF butterfat on an
! ail;tifa fs III
This data was secured from thir-
| teen dairymen, who were in their
! second years work OF testing in their
local COW testing association, As q
J result Of their first years work they
had raised the average fat produc-
tion per COW in the 3 herds to 245.-
! - pounds per year. 1t is probable
| that this average is considerable
! higher than the average i'll the west
and that naturally makes the cos
per pound less in this data thar
most COWS allow. Still the above
average is within the reach of every
farmer who will Systematically Sc
lect and breed his cows in the most
approved manner.
Figuring alfalfa hay at $500 per
ton, the average value in their local
ity for loose hay on the farm, and
/ finding then for 1o12 months during
the year COWS al one-half ton month
ly, while pasture for the other month
and half cost at the rate of 5000
per month per COW, the cost Of feed
! per pound of fat was set at IL y.
| cents.
The going wage on these farms
was $500 for a ten hour day, the aV
erage time given to each COW being
30 minutes d day OF SO per cent per
pound of fat, When children aide
in he work they We're figured at til
rate OF two to one adult.
The building and equipment on
| these ranches was mostly OF con-
mon sort. no better and no worse
than the ordinary dairy in Califor-
MIA. An annual depreciation charGe
OF ! Q per cent plus 6 per cent inter
est Oh the investment amounted to
cent per pound Of fat.
The product was sold as whole
milk 10 a condensery, cents pes
pound Of fat being charged to deliV
cry. Taxes OH the cattle, barns ana
equipment amounted to ) cents per
BOUND OF fat. miscellaneous expense
5000 and bull services S.00S. Both
ell explained that this latter charge
should have been more as the far
mers were using inferior bulls. The
above figure was on about $1,000
valuation. Taking all Of the above
items into consideration the total
cost Of pound of fat was found to-
be $.26S. With the possible excep
| ton Of delivery charges these fig
ures seem to pretty accurately cor
respond with dairy figures in Cali
fornia With butterfat at it's pres
ent level there would not seem to be.
any great profit to even good COWS,
but as all forms of cost are enumer
ated. so also should the various
sources OF income be included.
In this case calves were cred
tied at 81 per cow Manure was val
ued at So ton as q fertilizer by
of it a year were credited to each
COW. While the skim milk was sold
with the fat, it was assumed to be
worth $.362 per hundred weight,
and fat al $,275 per pound. Cred
itine everything to the value OF but
terfat for comparison sake. with the
cost the total amount to $3.50 per
pound, or net profit per pound of
S.191, or net profit above all eX-
pense Of S46,So per cow per year.
1t is estimated by California agri
cultural experiment station investi
gators that the COW producing $50
| pounds of butterfat per year is on
the deadline that is, the cost of her
/ feed and keep just offset the value of
| the butterfat produced. It is also
estimated that the average butterfat
yield per COW for the state is 161
pounds. There ought to bea greater
difference than that between the av-
erage and the deadline. We have
many profitable herds, but there are
too many poor ones. Poor produc-
ing and tubercular COWS tend to keep
the industry at low stage. If uni
formily profitable herds are to be
maintained, there ought to be some
extensive wedding out somewhere.
One of the surest ways to low cost
and high profits is by wedding out
COWS of low production, constantly
pushing up the average production
of COWS in the herd, and producing
the greater part of the necessary
feed, all of it if possible, on the home
farm.
The better calves secured from
| high producing COWS are also fac
| tor to he considered