Imperial Valley press., 1931-06-27

i've counties. Other agencies were
interested. Dairy departments Of
various county farm bureaus were
organized.
Great emphasis was placed at the
beginning of the campaign on the
introduction of purebred dairy
bulls. and on increasing the num-
Der Of cows in the COW testing asSo-
Citations. A number of highly Or
ganized campaigns were carried OIL
in the various counties to promote
these two practices. Work has been
done on COW testing continuously
to better standardiZe the methods
and records with q view toward con-
stantly making this work of greater
value TO dairymen. AS soon as the
breeding and testing programs were
well under way, considerably more
emphasis was placed on feeding.
When the price OF beef improved.
special emphasis was placed on
culling. although the culling OF
boarder COWS had been stressed
throughout the campaign. I'M
proved management practices were
also stressed throughout the CAM
paign. Improved buildings designed
to give better protection 10 dairy
herds. and also to tighten labor and
improve quality, were developed as
demonstrations. Disease control
work was carried on throughout the
campaign, but il was not until in
the latter par of the campaign that
it was possible to definitely organ
ize a program designed TO adequate
ly cover this phase.
This program then. as adopted
late in 1921, has been in constant
use since that time. 1t has not
been varied. Emphasis has been
changed somewhat on different
phases of the program as seemed
advisable, but the program as a
whole has been carried on through
out the years since it was adopted.
BY about 1926 production appeared
to be around DDS pounds per COW.
Cows under test were increasing
year by year. with about $4,000 un-
der test in 1926, $4,000 in 1928, and
almost 100000 by 1880. The number
of cows discarded as being unpro-
fitable from COW testing herds also
climbed rather rapidly from 5000
TO $1,000. Almost 5000 purebred
bulls were introduced through the
direct efforts of the Agricultural Ex-
tension Service. This work con-
stantly was carried along, looking
forward to the time when the 1880
census figures would be available to
determine what progress had been
made. These date has just become
available. The following table
shows the results secured:
Butterfat Production in California
No. of Total Lbs. Avg.
Cows Butterfat B. F.
1920 5O2,4l5 91,533, ,839 1921
1925 557,268 lbs, ,043 036 224.3
1890 571 ,959 ISL ,939 $50 1856
While it is possible to say that
the achievement of the actual fig
ures set was perhaps somewhat due
to chance. still the improvement
brought about was not due to
chance. This improvement was due
to the adoption of a goal with
definite program for achieving that
goal, followed by keeping at the job
throughout the entire period.
1t is interesting to note the re-
turns to California dairy farmers
due to this increase in average pro-
duction. In 1890 there were 57l ,959
COWS in the state that gave 83.5
pounds of butterfat more than the
average productio min 1920. This is
an increase OF 47,758,576 pounds OF
butterfat more than the same COWS
would have given had their produc-
ton remained at the average of
ten years earlier. The average age