Graham guardian., 1921-04-01

.phlet published at the beginning
of 1920, by the Maricopa County
Bankers Association: This pam
phlet is the outcome of four meet
ings held in Phoenix representing
cotton growing, grain and live
stock farmers, bankers, dairy
men, creamerymen and officials
of every civic and commercial
organization in Maricopa County.
The concensus of opinion of those
gatherings was that the prosper
GUS condition of Maricopa County
can only be continued by a sane
agricultural programe looking
over a period of years and that
.one-crop plan is suicidal
All agreed that with the pres
ent favorable outlook for cotton,
one-half of our total acreage
should be planted to cotton,
but not more. With the other
hale in alfalfa, grain and forage
crops and with 10 to II cows and
a bunch of hogs, the fertility Of
the soil would be maintained,
making farming profitible here
throughout future years. Let's
mot be soil miners-Let's not sell
our birthright. While all of US
did not commit suicide in a "one-
crop plan" for 1920, we did badly
wound ourselves, and now we are
Hooking about for a healing oint-
ment. A great many are looking
to the dairy COW.
Having noticed an article in
some of the papers of the State,
that lam launching a campaign"
for the purpose of organizing
"cow testing" and bull" asso-
cations, ! make the following
statements in order to correct any
false impression that may have
been made through the publication
of this article. | am not waging
a campaign. However, | am CO.
operating and assisting in every
way possible in the plans that
have been outlined by Professor
Cunningham of the State Uni
versity. Neither am ] organi-
Izing Farm Bureaus, but | am
using my influence with the dairy
men of the State to affiliate them
selves either individually or as an
association, with the Farm Bu-
reau, and | feel in doing so, a
great many of their problems
that are row before them will in
time be solved. There is great
need of COW testing associations
! in the State. A good dairyman
will not spend his time with cows
which do not make a profit. He
will know the capacity of each
COW, and keep none which is not
profitable. He will realize that
there is wonderful opportunity
to improve his herd and increase
profits in this way. A good en-
ample of what probably exists
throughout the entiSe State of
Arizona, which COW owners gen.
orally meet when they begin
keeping production records of
their COWS. is the following quo
tation from a report of the u. S.
Department of Agriculture: In
a Missouri cow testing associa-
tion there was a man who, when
he entered the association, did
not appear to have a very good
herd; but among his cows was
a crippled, ten-year-old Jersey
named Goldie. Old Go,die led
the whole association, with ain
annual production of approx
mately $500 pounds of milk and
SIG pounds of fat, and an income
over cost of feed amounting to
$267, in spite of the fact that
when the test started she had
already gone three months since
freshening. The amusing part
of Goldie's record is that her
owner tried to sell her just be-
fore she went on test, for SIS.
Six months later he refused $275
for her. The whole herd of which
Goldie was a part, averaged over
$50 pounds of fat for the year.
In contrast with this was another
herd of 81 COWS in the associa-
ton, which had been reputed to
be the best in that part of the
State. Yet IA Of these were sold
during the year as Improbable,
and it seemed likely that more of
them would be. =" Most dairy
men do not have time or will not
take time to keep records of pro-
duction of their cows, this being
the situation, the logical solution
is for them to form testing
associations in their districts, to
be a department Of the Farm
Bureau or Farm Bureau project,
so that the county agent will
have supervisor over the tester
and the affairs of the association.
The function of the association