GROUP HERD TESTING

Taranaki Daily News, 18 July 1930, Page 3

GROUP HERD TESTING

THE MARKING OF CALVES PRODUCTION INCREASE NEEDED. ADDRESS BY MR. C. M. HUME. “Three hundred pounds of butter-fat per cow is the slogan of the Dominion Group Herd Testing Federation,” said Mr. C. M. Hume, the federation supervisor of herd testing, to the annual meeting of the Tikorangi district group yesterday. Mr. J. Paulger presided over the meeting and called up Mr. G. H. Bell, who outlined the activities of the past year and. introduced Mr. Hume. Mr.* Hume said it was a pleasure for him to visit Tikorangi and see for himself the very fine land in tho district. He was pleased to see that Dr. 11. E. Annett had been in the district recently for he was a scientific and yet thoroughly practical farmer. Dr. Annett was one of the strongest supporters of group herd testing in the country and it was good to realise that they had his support. Massey College, which had hitherto couducted*its ow'n testing, had thrown in its lot . with the Manawatu Herd Testing Association and, in addition, there were many breeders throughout the country who now supported the movement. ' “Some people think we are aiming altogether too high,” continued Mr. Hume, “but we are more and more satisfied as time goes on for every year sees a closer approach to the ideal we have set.” To illustrate this point the speaker said that two years ago the average yield of butter-fat per cow, in milk or dry, was 1981 b, whereas for the last year it had been 2251 b. The big increase showed that the country was beginning to reap the benefit of the herd testing that had been. carried. on over the last few years. With better breeding and butter-fat backing behind two year old stock the returns were far and away better than tho-returns of cows put in a few years ago. TREMENDOUS INCREASE. Although the 271 b increase did not on first sight seem a great deal, when it was realised that it meant an increase in the return of every cow in the Dominion it could be seen what a huge amount it was. Had the production of the first season remained on the same average as two seasons ago the dairying industry of the Dominion would have received £2,700,000 less than it actually did receive during the past season. ■ “When the 3001 b of fat per cow objective has been reached,” said Mr. Hume, “it will represent, at Is 3d per lb, an increased income of £7,500,000 without the necessity of increasing the number of cows in milk at the present time. All this it is hoped to achieve by herd testing, systematic culling and the marking of calves." It was possible for a farmer to increase butter-fat production without increasing Ins expenditure. 1 here were hundreds of cases where farmers by the adoption of herd testing over a period of six l years had increased their production per cow by at least 1001 b of butterfat. This at even Is 3d per lb represented £6 and on a herd of, say, 60 cows an increased income, with practically the same working expenses, of £360 —in many cases just the difference between a satisfactory profit and a loss. Mr. Hume quoted a case where a farmer’s herd average had increased from 1301 b fat per cow for a herd, of 80 cows to 3001 b per cow over a period of six years. The feeding condition had, ol course, improved, good butter-fat pedigree bulls had been used, and each year the 12 lowest producers had been culled out and replaced, by two-year-olds from what had been proved by testing, to have been the best cows in the herd. Mr. Hume in illustrating what result could be obtained and what it would mean <*ave the following figures as an example: Three 100 acre farms each carried 60 cows with butter-fat at Is 3d ner lb. The first farm had a herd average of 2001 b per cow, which a°£7sO income. The second had a 3001 b ner cow herd average with £1125 as the income and the third, with a 4001 b. herd average per cow, made an income or £l5OO. MORE PRODUCTION; LESS COST. The speaker pointed out that the working expenses of the three farms would be practically the same, yet the difference in income was very considerable—in one case double. The figures showed that by increasing the production per cow a farmer was automatically reducing his cost of production and was therefore in a position, if necessary, to sell his produce at a lower figure and still make a larger net profit. If pedigree herds were tested and culled as “rigorously as were the grade herds, then the production would increase as much as that of the grade herds and they would certainly find that the highest producing herds in the Dominion were the pedigree herds. “The Dominion is becoming moi e and more dependent upon dairying, COII

tinned Mr. Hume, “and. it might happen that, to hold our own in the world markets, we have to sell at lower rates. That would mean greater production at a lower cost to gain the. same income. Why not, by aid of herd testing and similar means, produce at a lower cost and gain a greater income?” He said that in 1921-22 there were 45,000 cows under test, and at the end of the year just finished the number had risen to 300,000. It was anticipated that by the end of next season there would be at least 350,000. The 300,000 under test at the end of the season represented about 22 per cent, of the Dominion’s dairy cows. If New Zealand was to get the full benefit of herd testing there should be at least 40 per cent, under test each year. THE EXAMPLE OF DENMARK. Denmark, the speaker continued, had 34 per cent, of its cows under test and an average of 2401 b of fat per cow. New Zealand regarded Denmark as the greatest dairying country in the world and, while it was wonderful what the Danes had done, New Zealand had to oust them and take the premier place. To visitors who recently paid a visit to Denmark it seemed it was almost at its maximum of production. When New Zealand reached that figure, with a greater production and a lower cost, it would be able to sell, if necessary, at a lower figure than Denmark. Calf marking had assisted the development of herd testing in the Waikato more than anything else. The farmers seemed to gain greater confidence in the work and recognised more readily the advantages of having their . eligible calves marked. Some idea of the growth of tho movement could be gathered from the figures for the five years calf marking had been in vogue. In the first year 631 calves had been marked, in the second 1341, in the third 3300, in the fourth 5000 and last season 7000. The greatest criticism had been levelled at the possibility of “sharp" farmers switching the calf of one cow to that of a cow with a greater butter-fat production, but that was not an easy .thing to do for there was the safeguard of the regular, visit .of the testing officer. He knew what cows were in milk one month and what cows were expected to calve, and so he had a good idea of the calving dates which, of course, put a check on any underhand work, “In future the sire of a marked calf," continued Mr. Hume, “must be a registered pedigree and must have butterfat backing. The new rule reads that all pedigree bulls born on or after July 1, 1931, must be from dams which have reached a standard of production coinciding with, two-year-olds’ 2501 b of fat in 305 days, plus one-tenth pound butterfat for each day of age after two years. This represented 2871 b of fat as a three-year-old, 3231 b as a four-year-old and 3601 b as a five-year-old. APPLICATION TO PEDIGREES. “These standards apply only to pedigree cows tested under group herd testing, official herd testing (O.H.T.)_, and certificate of record (C.0.R.) 305 day test. The standards for pedigree cows under C.O.R. 365 day test are 251 b higher than those recorded above.” Mr. Hume stressed the point that this rule did not affect the pedigree bulls being used today. It affected only those born-on or after July 1, 1931. It was recognise'd, Mr. Hume went on, that the improvements had to come from purebred stock. The records of pedigree cows made it clear that it would bo foolishness to recognise grade bulls. The dividing line had to be drawn there. At the last annual meeting of the federation two rules' had been passed which it was felt would have the effect of stopping tho stock culled from one herd passing through the hands of dealers to other herds.. There was no possibility of bringing in a real cull mark, but it was proposed that all cows under the herd testing organisations be visibly marked in a certain specific manner. It would then be possible for a prospective purchaser to see the mark and hunt up the production certificates. These production cards would be issued only by the testing association on the condition that the cow was tattooed in accordance I with the-general plan. No two cows in the Dominion would bear the same tattooing. If this were universally adopted by dairy farmers it would result in all dairy cows carrying the marks, and the buyer by looking into the production record could see at once whether the cow was merely a cull. When a cow change,, hands under the present method the former production figures had been wined out but under the new method they would still be kept in existence which was only fair. The plan was, of course, optional and farmers, were not compelled to follow suit, but it was felt the federation had done good work, it there was no production card it would mean the cow was recognised by the seller as a cull. “VALUABLE AND NECESSARY." - “Hence you will see by the things I have enumerated that herd testing and affiliation with a herd testing group is a valuable and necessary thing. I know, - he continued, “that many farmers, especially at this time of the year, are •'lancing down their expense cards and seekin" wavs and means of cutting down expenditure*. They come to the £lO, o>

whatever it is, for. herd testing and. hesitate. They ask themselves if it is worth it. Well, I can assure them that it is. ’ Even apart from other considerations the very visit of the testing officer .every month gives a greater interest to the monotonous job of milking. If the farmer decides to cut down .on herd, testing and do without he certainly ia saving £lO at the moment, but it is quite likely that he will lose £l5 out of the other pocket for tho waning of the interest inculcated in him by the monthly visit of the group testing representative. Then, 'of course, he will lose in other ways." ■ .Most of the successful dairy farmers were now testing their herds year by year and they would not carry on unless they felt they were getting equivalent returns. Many who had withdrawn from the groups in th© Waikato had later come back.

Grassland management as advocated, by Dr. Annett and now largely practised, in the Waikato would give a longer milking season per year, which would, of course, mean a higher return than previously. “In the Waikato,” said Mr. Hume, “we have definitely lengthened, our season from 227 days to' 260 days, and in the next three years we.hope and expect to lengthen it a further 17 days. Thus, although the produce is commending a lower rate than previously, w® are making up for it slightly, for better production is brought about by. the better cows and the longer milking season--and there is no reason why you in Taranaki should not <lo this.”

“We in the Waikato,” said the speaker, “have a lot to thank you Taranaki people for. The origin of most of our . best herds can be traced to your province. And you should follow this ip from a Waikato man—have your calves marked. When Waikato buyers coma down here seeking fresh blood ..they will naturally chpose the marked stock, of i which they can find the history—and they will pay good prices for cows they know have a sound butter-fat backing."

That concluded Mr. Hume’s address but he answered several questions. and a general discussion on culling and testing ensued. . The following Tikorangi district group committee was then elected: Messrs. J. Paulger, J. H. Allan, C. P. Makey, R. Rolfe and L. Lye. -