DEHORNING JUSTIFIED BY EXPERIENCE.

New Zealand Times, Volume LXIX, Issue 3648, 26 January 1899, Page 2

DEHORNING JUSTIFIED BY EXPERIENCE.

All evidence goes to show that dehorning subdues the animal, 1 removes all restless or turbulent disposition and replaces viciousness with docility. This is most pronounced in case of bulls. A marked difference is noticed in the entire herd. Instead of chasing;' goring, and butting the animals’walk along quietly along in a body, like a flock of sheep, and have no more desire to molest than they have to be- molested. This is of-especial value when passing through lanes' and; gates ■ where, with-horned cattle, much' injury is likely to bo done. At the watering trough, instead of one or two standing guard and preventing the approach of the ■ wetker cattle, all crowd in together and proceed at once ..to satisfy their- thirst. As many as 18 dehorned, cattle have been seen to drink from a trough 7ft in diameter. It would be dangerous for half a dozen to do so if they had horns. Such altered conditions are.advantageous alike :in dairying and in fattening stock, the < sense of -quiet and security enabling the animals to better assimilate their food and thus give a larger and richer yield . of-milk as .well as show more rapid improvement'in laying on flesh. - The dehorned and therefore more quiet animal sooner reaches a prime condition than one that is habitually wild and unsettled, either by its own possession of horns or the proximity of other horns. It is also more likely to be free from bruises at the time of sale, and would in consequence command greater favour with the butcher. This increase in value is. estimated from sdol to Bdol per head. Tanners also have stated in evidence that the damage caused to hides by hooking is from 20 to 25 per cent., and this is avoided by the removal of the horns. In feeding steers for export, the benefit is still greater, as dehorned cattle can bo fed loose in open sheds, they require less space, less food and less labour, while at the same time the manure -can bo more easily saved. All dairymen who have tried dehorning will not keep horned ■ cattle. From my own. experience I can say that all farmers for whom I have dehorned cows have been very much pleased with the effect upon the disposition of their herds: They .wonder how they got along so many years with the horns. I have aided in performing the operation ■ of dehorning about 100 cows and there was more show of resistance and pain in putting the leader-into the nose and a rope-about the neck than in tho operation. In a recent experiment with six cows the rise in temperature due to the operation was very slight. In three of them I did not detect any change more than that from , one day to another. There‘was only an average rise in temperature per cow of 68 hundredths of a degree. This ' shows that there can bo ' but very little pain. The pain, when the operation is skillfully performed, cannot bo greater than that inflicted by a dentist in extracting a tooth. Experiments also -show that there is very little shrinkage in milk and less in butter fat, and that only for two or three days. Even this slight shrinkage is probably more due to the excitement and the loss of blood than to pain. Tho following table from my experiment, showing the yield per milking of milk and butter fat before and after dehorning, indicates that the shrinkage was but slight.

CowMilk Bnttor Before—lbs. Milk Batter After—lbs. No 1 ... 4 210 .2032 3.858 .2964 No 2 ... 6 246 .3*25 S G45 .3785 No 3 ... 9.076 .4787 7.385 .4508 No 4 ... 6.687 .3(71 5 9*1 ,3316 No 5 ... 4.812 .2530 • 3.788 ,2148 No C ... 6 897 .4128 6.313 .4380 (H. D. Hememvay in “American Agriculturist.”)