THE DAIRY.

Waikato Times, Volume XLII, Issue 3424, 9 June 1894, Page 2

THE DAIRY.

The Influence of the Food on the ; PsODUCE OF THE Cow,/

(By Professor Long). ■ ;Sojie elaborate experiments bavo been completed at the Pennsylvania State College of Agriculture, which throw considerable light on the subject of high importance to owners of dairy cattle. .1 am •' indebted .to Professor Caldwell, whom I

;had the advantage of meeting,,when'ho was in charge of the Guernsey cattle at

Chicago, for the elaborate statement-from which the following figures are deduced:

Ten cows of the Guernsey,' Jersey, Shorthorn, and Ayrshire breeds wero placed under test. These cows had given an average of 468; gallons of. milk apiece, and included some very srood and some secondrate cattle. Their average butter .yield was 2401b, varying from 108 in.one case, to 314 in another; while the quality of the milk varied from 3 4 to o'Z per cent of fat. • Tho foods used iu the tesls eon stated of hay made from timothy grass and meal composed of maize about four parts, bran two parts, and linseed one part. The quantity of foodwas gradually increased, 'until at the end oi 1 04 days it "was found that no cow could consume more . with . advantage. Indeed, long before this, some of the cows had reached their limit, while others went on until they were consuming: 191b of tnoal and 271b of hay, The food was then i educed in quantity until it reached its original weight at the end of 101 days. For convenience, the food consumed per cow

is divided into fivo periods:—(l) 24 days,

10'7!b of meal and M-olb of Lay ; (2) 3L days, 131b of meal and lo*9ib of hay; (3) 32 days, lo llb of meal and 1511b of bay; (4) Hdays, 12'21b of meal and 14'91i3 of bay ;(5) 10 days, 8 olb of meil and 12'8lb of hay. In tbo firab period every cow consumed all her meal, Tn the second period, -averaging 131b of meal* some cows eat as much us 14 4 lb of meal, others less One cow consumed 20 61b of hay, while another consumed 0n1y,9 71b; but wo have given the average, and 88 on through each period. The tests were based upon fcho co>t of the food and the value of the produce. The.hay was Valued at 505., the linseed meal at £5 ss, and the butter at Is 61 p;:r lb. In the first period Jhe average cost of the food per day was lOd, while,the net profit per day was nearly sd, ouo oow yielding a return of IH-1 per day; anothor, and this ■was the bad foeder, : gave only Ifd. In a word,.only four of tho ten gave over od • per day. In the next period, as we have shown, the food was increased, so that it cost over lid per day. The result was .that the profit; was incicased |d per day per cow, so that the result was justifiable. The best cow increased her daily returns to Is Gd, Tho worst cow remained stationery; three other covvh decreased r their returns, while only four out of the ten increased their returns sufficiently to leave a profit after puyiiig for the extra food. This was not satisfactory, still the feeding was increased up to tho (bird ; period, when it cost 12kl a day; but the value of the batter produced fell by a penny ad:iy, so that I he actual uetptofit was considerably less than it had hitherto been. The profit on every cow fell, In one ca.*e it was reduced to a lo>s on (he whole .transaction, aud in three or four : other .case- 1 the;reduction was enormous, Jri the fourth po!io % d tho cost of the food

was reduced to lOd a day, ov less than in the second period, with the result that the profit went up at once to a day, this profit being principally made by five cowe; one of the Guernseys having been pro-eminent throughout the whole of the te«ts. In the last period, when the food was reduced to a day in value, the whole of the animals fell off considerably, so much so that there would appear to have been some other cause. From this and from other experiments which have been made from time to time, it is clear that no rules can be laid down for the feeding of cattle. The temperament of every animal demands special attention, and the ration which one cow can consume to advantage may be a source of loss if given to another cow. There are some animals which . are great producers and at the same time enormous consumers of food. Oihers produce a large quantity of butter from a comparatively small quantity of food. . These have, in a word, an individual character and economy of their own; their powers of digestion vary, and they are abl« to utilise their food to greater advantage. It is such animals that are required; for after all, it is not alone the quantity of produce but cheap production which tho farmer demands. On the records of the college," one cow is shown to have produced 8,5121b of milk, and 2961b of butter, Another cow produced 5,4591b of milk and 2791b of butter, so that ifc is apparently the inferior of the two animals. When we come to figures, however, the first animal is shown to have made a profit of six- guineas, and the other of <£l2 6s, so that the smaller producer was a better cow. Upon such a basis, one animal was worth double as much as the other.