MILKING HERDS AND THE CREAMERY SYSTEM.

Press, Volume LVIII, Issue 11011, 8 July 1901, Page 6

MILKING HERDS AND THE CREAMERY SYSTEM.

"Mmi Dr." ix tot "FntLß. There is nothing like basing one's practice upon established facte, and in vie*- of the possibility of the further extension of tae payment for milk in accordance with ita quality, i.e., "with the solids it contains or /with ttie fat contents, as the case may be— and this may be brought about all. the sooner in consequence of the recommendation which has been made by the Departmental Committee on Milk -Standards—it is well to know precisely what occurs where the actual results achieved by owners of dairy herds are shown in targe numbers and side by side. . We are enabled to provide details with respect to three creameries, in which the contributing farmers are respectively thirty, thirty-six, and thirty-four; in other words* precisely 100 instances are given, and we have not only the quantity of milk produced and the pbucds of butter made per cow, with the price realised for the butter, but the cost of the food; per cow, so that we can ascertain—what is most essential to ascertain—the average price which a given quantity of milk realises, and tie average cost for food for each pound of butter obtained. It so happens that in the majority of instances the cows employed in these three creameries are Jereevs, but there are few instances in which their yield exceeds 600 gallons per cow; nevertheless, the Teturns are .largely out of proportion to the yield, in consequence of the quality of the milk, and that point affects thedairv farmer just as much as the creamery or milk factory, because the richer the iniSk the greater the return. Possibly the past has shown {how farmers strive for quantity of milk, inasmuch as tihere beuig no .standard of quality it did not pay _to produce it, tout the future will aEter ttas matter, and quality will be as much sought after as quantity has been. In the case of the first creamery the highest yield of milk was 554 gallons per cow, the yield of butter beinu 2861b; there were no other figures near these h> far as milk is concerned, but there were some which were close in the case of butter, the milk being richer. What is the result* In five cases out of tbjrty the* value of the butter was more than double the cost of the food, so that we may regard these cases as highly satisfactory; then there is a failing off until we get to the lowest instance, a case in which every chilling spent in food realised only ninepence. We may take It that in the majority of cases, and this applies to all ttoe creameries the profit was very small, a/nd in some instances could scarcely have .paid for the labour. In the second case thre were three out of the thirty-eix farmers' H-ho supplied milk 'for cows averaging more than 500 gallons a> head, but in the majority of cases t&e yield of butter per cow was more than 20Kb, the-highest yield being 2881b, whereas the lowest was only 911b, and again in this instance the cost of the food was about 2d per cow per poundl of butter more than the return. On the other hand the greatest profit was made by the -owner of the deepest milking herd; this profit may be estimated from the fact that the butter realise|._2s 4d for every shilling spent in food. The iherde of cows varied considerably, but none were-large, many consisting of less than ten animals, and it should be that every animal in a small herd received more attention than those in a large iherd, although this was not tbe case. The third creamery was supplied 'by thirty-four farmers, and here the largest yield of milk was from a nerd of cows consisting of part Jerseys and part Dutch. The average was 680 gallons of milk and 2651b of butter. Nevertheless, the butter realised only Iβ 9d per shilling spent in food, or a good deal less than was the case on several other farms, a Jersey herd doing the best work and returning 2s $d per shilling spent, the yield of butter being 2641j>. There is a fact in the caee of tbis creamery to which we call special attention ; the highest yieild of butter was obtained from a herd" of Jerseys, which averaged 35010 per head from 630 gallons of milk. The cost of feeding was so high that only Is 9d was returned per shilling spent in food. It is curious that in another case the cost of feeding was precisely the same within a fraction, and yet the sum returned in butter was only 9d for a shilling ppent in food.' This suggests to us how essential it is nbl merely to make a study of producing quantity and quality of milk, but of producing, economical rations. Tβ the case of the largest return of .profit the cost of the food bought was only £4 psr head, wbareas in the case of tlxe lowest profit yielded by the herd producing the largest -quantity of butter the cows cost £7 4s for/food.i Thus it would appear that while the heavierjetding was the means of obtaining more butter, it was fallowed by a smaller profit per head. It is true that something would have to be added for the increased value of tiSje manure, bub that is not precisely what the farmer wants. These, figures are so instructive, extracted as they are from so large a number of statistics, that It is to be hoped they will attract the attention which they deserve.