HOW COWS FALL OFF IN MILK.

Dominion, Volume 4, Issue 1097, 8 April 1911, Page 8

HOW COWS FALL OFF IN MILK.

WHAT-TEST ASSOCIATIONS SHOW

... Now .that the work and results oftho cow-testing association's aro not given to the press fori publication month by month, and only. brief particulars are furnished to tho farmers, tho informa-tion-given from time to'time in tho Agricultural Department's Journal is very _ welcome. In the March* issue of tho journal, Mr. AV. M. Singleton (assistant director- of tho Dairy Produce Division) bis an artielo from which tho following extracts are quoted:— • The fifth period of tho four cow-test-"ing associations being operated .by. tho Dairy Produce Division evidenced a falling-off in the production, of both milk and butter-fat in. each <if tho' four associations. These thirty-day periods do not close on the same date .for each "association; and, silica.the feed .is.getting less succulent, thoso' periods closing at the r later dates .-would naturally be expected to' show -tho lowest average production per cow. For periods' ending between January 28 and February 14, the yield of tho averago cow in - the respective associations has varied from 27.811b.' to 31.621b. butter-fat, whereas, during, tho previous period the variation was from'3l.o-llb'. to 36.071b.'

Groat Shrinkage in Ylsld. i From; the general .viewpoint, the most noticeable feature' about tho last test is the..gi;eat -shrinkage in--yield ■ of ""the various herds. During .the thirty days between tho,taking of this fifth test and its predecesso'r, tho shrinkage is two and a.-qiiarter times wliat it was during tho previous thirty days. Had all these cows proper feed and plenty of good, water, tho' variation should not snow this marked decrease. ■ Somo individual herds havo evidenced practically the same-rate of* falling-off m yield-'as during- tho previous period, and, other things, being equal, this is as 'it" should be. Whilo some herds havo maintained their yield in- this 'creditable manner,, others have lessened their yield very .'rapidly, 'and ; -tho decrease in'the production of some, herds is shown- to bo from- three "to i: fouV times as much as was the caso during the previous poriod. ; The special-purpose dairy , cow, with some succulent feed from a soiling 'crop in addition to ordinary pasture, will not show such'abnormal-decreases in yield as some of these-herds evidence. Dairyfarmers know well how nearly impossible' it. is-for dairy cows'to 'be "brought back" in their yield after it has once fallen.very considerably'..

Figures Worth Noting. TheCvariations in tho production of; the-; average'.cows in 'tho 'Various herds show'much, the same: difference as in : previous "tests.' .During the fifth -.periM' at'Daleficld. 27 cows' of the 'best'' herd gave the"same yield as' 37 of the worst;at Stratford .25 _ cows, of tho best .herd Rave., ffe same yield as 3" - of .tho .worst-.? at' 7 ,Cambridge. 2I; ; cows: of .the best herd< ga\fe ; ,tbo. sanle:yiie'ld,,as 37. of:the worst-;: and- at iEaupokonui '21 cows of the best herd gave the same yield as 38 of the worst..' The expense of keeping, feeding, and milking 37 or 38 dairy cows for the same.total.yield as.is, produced by herds niimbepng,;2l' to ' f 2X-:does not appeal favourably, to most, dairy-farmers, and Bfi.rpfinahy: dairyrfarm'ers are thrusting' on themselves expense, labour, and worry ,in this/connection, which the returns and'net proiitS"do not justify. lii the. instances given, although the total yield of the larger-herd .equals that of t Ho'smaller. herd,-"the ;tiet' profit of, the smaller herd will be much the greater.' •'.