HERD IMPROVEMENT

Nelson Evening Mail, Volume LXXIII, 28 August 1939, Page 4

HERD IMPROVEMENT

LIABILITY OF CULLS COST OF WINTERING IDEAL REPL A GEM ENTS "The quicker a cull is removed the less it will cost her owner,” said a prominent dairy company director in discussng with a "Daily News” representative the prospects for the new dairy season, now well 1 started in Taranaki. Culls,lie pointed out, should have been detected during the previous season and rigorously weeded out as soon as they were dried off. Then these inferior pro* ducers would not have been present to eat J their quota of winter fodder to say noth- | ing of the new spring feed. Culling operations should include the removal of sick or diseased animals it for no other reason than that, while they still had to b.- fed, they were still possible sources of infection to the remainder of the herd. Culling should he the major undertaking on every dairy farm, during the late autumn when the animals to he disposed of were still in good condition and had a salvage value a good deal higher than was t!v*. case as winter advanced. There was, he continued, little or no dif ference in the cost of rearing a wellbred and a poorly-bred tail', but the former, iT sired by a strong production bred bull out of a high testing dairy type cow. developed into a kind of heifer that improved n herd, while the latter was nothing but a liability from the day it was born. In advocating the rearing of one’s own heifer.* he said the farmer who planned to maintain his milking herd through the purchase of cows would find the system unduly expensive. Unless he was prepared to cull closely and pay top prices for replacements he would find it difficult to maintain a satisfactory average production. lie believed that many herds that had maintained their numbers by purchase weie no mote profitable to the farmer to-day than they were live or ten years * ago On the other hand, good replacements could usually be obtained cheaper j by selective breeding, even allowing for the Tact that from birth until two years o‘' age they showed no returns. That system also tended to act as a safeguard against the introduction of disease. As a final obseivatiou, the speaker remarked that it should always he remebered that the programme of successful calf rearing began with the pregnant cow Sln» should be allowed at least si-; weeks from calving date as a dry cow, during which period the feed ration should be sufficient to pciniit her to acquire condition. If should be regarded as a period of rest and recuperation attended by a minimum of excitement so that not only would her calf be strong and healthy hut she herself would lie cap. a bit; of greater milk production throughout the season.