DAIRY FARM MANAGEMENT

Taranaki Daily News, 24 September 1928, Page 12

DAIRY FARM MANAGEMENT

INFORMATION FOR FARMERS VALUE GF VARIOUS BREEDS. DEPARTMENT’S EXPERT SPEAKS. “.Some management factors on. New Zealand dairy farms” was liie subject taken by Mr, E. J. Fawcett, farm ecom omist under the Department of Agriculture, in a lecture delivered in New Plymouth yesterday under the auspices of the Taranaki Agrictuturel Society. Mr. H. U. Sampson presided over a large and representative gathering of farmers from most parts of Taranaki. There had been certain public statements made, said Air. Fawcett, about the decrease shown in primary production iu New Zealand, and the Minister of Agrictulture had become concerned about the matter. For the past 12 or 18 months investigations and experiments had been carried out and showed a steady increase during the years 1991-2 to 1926-27. A graph showed the steady upward trend that had taken place during a period of 27 years. -In 1901-2 the estimated production for all cows iu milk and dry was 1201 b of but-ter-fat per cow. In 1916-17 the butterfat had increased to 1641 b per cow, while in 1926-2:7 the pounds of butterfat per cow was over 198. Another graph showed the following increases:—

Total production of lamb, mutton, wool, butter-fat, beef and calf, increase 136.7 per cent.

Production of lamb, mutton, wool, butter-fat, beef and calf per acre of all grassland, increase 109.9 per cent. Total sheep units of stock, increase 69.7 per cent.XX.

Sheep units of stock carried per acre of all grassland, increase 51.8 per cent.

Production of lamb, mutton, wool, butter-fat, beef and calf per sheep unit of stock, increase 37.2 pel’ cent. Tota] grassland, increase 11.7 per cent.X. X —Sown, native and tussock grasses. XX —AH cattle converted to sheep Units on basis one cattle beast equal to six sheep.

The major increase 'had been in the dairying industry, said the lecturer, and the increased prosperity of the Dominion was due to a great extent to the men on the dairy farms. It seemed desirable that farmers should study farm management in order to get the most possible out of their holdings. He himself had been collecting data on the subject and had been devoting his time to the study of farm management. He hoped to be in Taranaki next season to collect information that would be applicable to local conditions. Data was taken from the analysis of 206 dairy farms in the Waikato and Taranaki districts, and the lecturer explained. the deductions he had arrived at. There were many instances in which farmers secured high production per acre but not per cow, he said, and on the other hand many farms had shown high production per cow but not per acre. Pasture management was at the root of production, and therefore farmers should aim at high pasture efficiency. The top-dressing feature was a big’ one, and there was a relationship between manuring and production. The labour unit was also touched upon, and the lecturer said that better production was shown where family labour was employed. “Breed your own stock,” advocated Mr. Fawcett, “for it has been proved that the man who does so is in the best position, and aim at improving production per acre as well as per cow. Au analysis of maintenance costs showed that* the expenses were in the vicinity of £5 per cow, and in making the analysis he had assumed that a man should get a labour reward according to the number of cows he milked. VISIONS OF THE FUTURE. “In the future dairy farms will be small farms,” Mr. Fawcett said, “and it will be high production, the utilisation of modern methods, and consequently the high returns that will make them so. Under these conditions there will be a maximum density of rural population, which should be the aim of the future, and which must lead to an economic betterment of the condition of the Dominion as a whole.” As an example of the position on small farms, the lecturer took a group of 50 farms having an average of 57 acres, and quoted the financial position as follows: Dr. n o To maintenance expenses .... 138.450 ~ labour at £7 per cow .... 178.<52 interest surplus 216,828 £534.033 Cr. _ £ . By butter Lit returns 477.375 pigs account 41.553 ..ear He 15.105 £534.033 Tile amount left as interest surplus (£-216.828) represents a total capital of £3097.5, of which £l5OO is _ mortgage money, the remainder ( £1597.5) representing personal capital on which 7 per cent, interest has been earned. The earning value of these farms is thereupon £3097.5, less value of plant and stock, which averages £60.5, leaving £2492.5 for land and improvements. This represents a per acre value of £43.14, or £97.6 per cow. The cows milked number 25.536 per farm of one cow to 2.23 acres, giving a yield of 125 pounds per acre. The total income of the family is thereupon: Wages, £178.752; interest on personal capital, £112.580; total, £291,332.

There is an average of two labour units employed on these farms, but it would appear that a considerable amount of this is represented by part.time labour by the family. The deduc-

tions t<> be drawn from this farm group are as follows:

1. If land of this production capacitycan be bought at £43 14s per acre the position is sound, provided £178.752 is considered a fair wage for a business of this size. 2. If a higher price is paid for the land, production must be increased if the labour income is to be maintained. 3. If production remains stationary, a lower rate of interest on personal capital results. If price maintenance and labour expenses remain the same, a small increase in production materially influences the interest surplus which may be considered as reward of management. THE BREED CONTROVERSY. “1 have no personal interest in the question of breeds other than from a purely analytical viewpoint,” Mr. Fawcett said. ’ “Alilk is the raw material and cheese Gio finished product. Milk value lias to be assessed. Butter-fat is accepted as the basis for this purpose, but is only an arbitrary method of arriving at tlie value of the milk for cheese-making purposes. Whether this is a fair method or not does not concern us at present. American and Canadian authorities believe that it is.

“The only satisfactory way to compare breeds, where milk is devoted to cheese making, is to discover the net return to the farmer per unit of capital outlay, after capital, production, manufacturings, distribution and marketing expenses have been deducted. Constant conditions over all breeds are necessary if such a test be made, and tests would have to be conducted under different sets of conditions to determine the breed most suitable under different environments. Al] costs must be related io cheese, and not to butter-fat.

“The question of what type of animal shall be used to economically convert grass into cheese must be studied from the viewpoint of production, manufacturing and marketing costs, maintenance of capital outlay being given due consideration. The breeds of cows com-i-cnly used in New Zealand for the conversion of grass into cheese arc (with the average tests of purebreds):—Jersey, 5.55 per ce t; Shorthorn, 4.02 per cent; Fresian, 3.52 per cent.; Aryshire, 4.09 per cent. These breeds produce milk of the typical high and low but ter-fat content type. “The standard table (American) for yield of cheese per lOOibs of milk al varying ’fat percentages is as follows: — 3 per cent, milk, 8,31 b of cheese per 1001 b milk; 3.5 per .scent, milk, 9.451 b; 4 per cent, milk, 19.61 b; 4.5 per cent., milk, 11.751 b; 5 per cent, milk, 12.91 b; 5.5 per cent, milk, 14.051 I>.

’’lf all breeds produced the same amount of milk per cow, the breed liavhig the highest test would be tiie best to use, provided food consumption were equal and the grade of cheese resulting is not detrimentally affected. But we know that all breds do not produce the same amount of milk per cow, and that the feed consumed by different breeds in the production or 1001 b of milk varies also. FOOD CONSI lII'TION. An American test was carried out in 1904 at St. Louis, but the exact renditions were not known and therefore too much weight cannot be given to it. Friesians consumed 17 per cent, more feed for the same amount of cheese than did Jerseys. It would appear that Friesians will produce 12.7 per cent, more cheese per animal than will the Jersey, but this increase is more than compensated for by the fact that the Friesian consumes 31.7 per cent, more food per head than does the Jer-. sey. This gives the Jersey a clear 14.5 per cent, better utilisation of food than the Friesian. “’Carrying capacity of a given area of equal quality:and equally well managed land is therefore in the ration of 6.5 Jerseys to 5 Friesians, or, 7325 to 63501 b of cheese, showing an advantage to the Jerseys of 9751 b from the same area, on the figures quoted. The ratio of bulk of milk is: Jersey to Friesian, 7.1 to 10.6, or, 59.3 per cent, more bulk of Friesian milk is required to be handled to produce the same amount of cheese.

••It would appear that our reputation lias been built up on service and quality. It does not seem practicable to make high-grade cheese from either very high or very low grade milk. For 55 cheese factories in Taranaki during the 1926-27 season the highest average test was 4.4 per cent, butter-fat. It is appreciated that this is an average list and does not indicate the monthly variations. It would appear, therefore, that no factory is wholly supplied with all high or all low testing milk, but that a mixture has been used. So long as a farmer lias the herd which suits him and suits his land, the mixture resulting from mixed herds would appear to be sound for cheese-making purposes under present conditions. Therefore a breed controversy is not warranted as the quality of our cheese is not affected detrimentally.

Mr. Marchant, who spoke on behalf of the Friesian Breeders’ Association, said he thought a misconception existed with regard to his association’s attitude. It welcomed scientific investigations and it was with that Object that it assisted in the Tokaora experiments. Mr. P. O. Veale’s investigations were the first of their kind carried out in New Zealand and he did not think they wore going to get anywhere until they were carried further. “It is quite evident there has been no investigation into the feeding question,” said Mr, Marchant, “and both sides are quoting different places—the' Jersey people St. Louis, and the FrieSians Wisconsin.” He thought it was necessary to know exactly the conditions of feeding at both places. Mr. Fawcett thought he had made it clear that lie was in no way criticising Mr. Veale’s report. He was trying to sound a note of warning that the subject had only been treated from the laboratory viewpoint. They did not know much about the American investigations. The only way

to elucidate the question was to study the net return to the farmer after the outlay, with all costs taken into consideration. It was not necessary that a breed controversy should take place for they were using a mixed milk a; the factories and it seemed to give a good quality cheese.

Mr. Marchant said his association did not want any breed controversy and its secretary had been instructed to reply to letters only.

Mr. E. Griffiths said he felt that the figures supplied must have taken a long time to prepare and it must have been tedious work. The farmers should feel grateful to the department for explaining the economic position to them. A great deal of rest would come after the unrest that had been caused by the Tokaora experiments. He had great sympathy for Mr. Kalaugher, for he was in an unpleasant position. Saying that the Friesian secretary's name had been mentioned freely, Mr. Marchant said that if it could be shown that Mr. Kalaugher was wrong he would publicly apologise. He moved a hearty vote of thanks to Mr. Fawcett for his instructive address.

Air. Fawcett hoped when lie returned to Taranaki he would receive the support and the information he required from farmer's. He urged upon them the necessity for keeping records, for, besides being of great value to themselves, they would facilitate the department's work to a great extent.