GROUP HERD-TESTING.

Taranaki Daily News, 1 August 1931, Page 11

GROUP HERD-TESTING.

(To the Editor.) Sir, —In your issue of even date is a report of the meeting of the groups of the Taranaki Herd-testing Association. Therein the chairman reports a reduction in the fees for the ‘coming season. Very good, so far, but is there any justification for the “smallest” farmer with approximately 20 per cent, of the income of the “largest” having to pay 70 per cent, more, per cow, for the privilege of having the same job done on his farm as is done on the other, though larger, farm? On examination of the figures, it transpires that the farmer with 20 cows pays 6s per cow, the one with 40 pays 4s 9d, the one with 50 pays 4s 6d whilst the one with 100 lias to pay only _3s 6d per cow. Surely it would be. fairer to average the charge on a more equitable basis, and so help the “small-holder” to carry on testing or join the association. That “testing pays” there is no doubt, but £6 per season is a big hurdle for a 20-cow farmer to find in these days of reduced returns, even allowing him the average of 2911 b of fat in 266 days, which, after all, is not actual factory returns. Besides, it is not so much the farmer with the above average who needs to be encouraged to test as the one with the 1501 b per co w average, and who, in consequence, has a much lesser income from which to find the testing fees. I should very much like to see the'“largest” of us doing a bit to help the “smallest” of us, and hope the Herd-testing Association will be able to see its. way to revise the schedule of charges in the way 1 suggest, and so help to bring in the man who is keeping the country's “average” production per cow lower than it should be.— I am, etc., TESTING FARMER. July 29, 1931.