The independent-reporter., 1922-04-06
SOME FACTS LEARNED FROM OUR
COW TEST ASSOCIATIONS
Address of County Agent LOveioy
During FarmerS' Week at L. of VI.

In making careful study of the
first eight months records on 30
herds. in Oxford County, it has been
pretty clearly brought to M mind
that the cost of producing milk and
butterfat, even in herds well beyond
the average in the scale of production
is in excess of the price being received
II should be borne in mind that feed
cost represents only about 54 percent
of the total cost of milk or butterfat
production, the other Al percent be
ing chargeable to labor, depreciation
and general overhead expenses.
From 800 COWS in the vafioas herds
| have taken for my, comparison:
Group /, containing eight cows, pro-
ducing less than 2500 pounds of milk:
group 2, ten cows, 25O0 to 5000 pounds.
group g. eleven cows, 5000 to $500;
group 4. seven cowp $500 to 1000;
group Il, three eews, 1000 to 1000;
6, three COWS, 5000 to $4,000 In
these six groups the following rom
parisons are brought out.
BY groups beginning with the first
the average production In pounds of
milk per COW was 1890 3736. 3274,
377S, 5086 and 12,155 respectively. The
total coft of feed per COW be groups
in the same order was .$39. 26, $4444,
$44.6l, $40.65. $60.04, and $S3.19 res
pectively. 1t will be noted. that as
the production increased the cost of
feed increased quite uniformly until
the fourth group, where the sudden
drop was due to the inclusion of three
cows fed only on pasture without
grain or other supplementary feed
The cost of feed per 100 pounds Of
milk was 81 rs. $1.63, S1.36, $1.07, Sis
and $O.6S, res pectively. 1t is appar-
emit therefore that as the production
increased. even though the cost of
feed per COW increased also, the cost
OF production milk decreased II is
interesting 10 see the variation from
the first group to the last, where
with an average production of prac-
tically six times the first, we have
duced to one-third of the cost where
the production was only 2e3O.
Possibly better basis of compari-
son is the butterfat. The cost of
butterfat production per pound RED
koned in cents varied with the diff
ferent groups as follows: beginning
with the first: 31,4. 29.4, 242, PIG,
244, 22.2. OF course We get from
these figures the fact that in groups
j and 6. where the production Of
milk was 5000 pounds or more, the
coft of butterfat was practically the
same as with groups and 4, produc-
ing less than 1000 pounds of milk The
last two groups represent liolstein
COWS.
Briefly summarized, my study of
these association records have indi-
Gated The average herd of cows
was kept at loss last year. The
increased cost of feed per COW as
compared with the increased produc-
ton, as shown in the various groups,
IL. small when compared with the va
lue of the increase in production.
As the production per COW increas-
es the cost of feed per hundred weight
of r"hiS decreases.
Within the same breed, as the milk
production increases the cost per
pound of fat decreases.
We might conclude that through
this COW test association work we
should look for increased production
per animal .hy wedding out the low
prvl1t{cer. III AT the same time the cost
of2Mllls. .aAd .butterfat production will
bes9V4efeA proportionately. as indie
atelfsBg the figures shown for the
varaa639 sroupr.