The appointment of a commission by Governor Hartranft, in 1878, to
investigate and verify the theories of M. Guenon in judging and selecting
milch cows, has resulted in much good to the agricultural community. The
members of that commission, including Mr. George Blight, who acted upon
a similar committee in 1853, thoroughly imbued with the accuracy of the
system and the desire to extend its usefulness, have continued to explain
this mode of selecting cows whenever an opportunity offered. This has
been very frequent, and many hundred cows have been examined in public,
and the system explained in every section of the country.
It is fortunate that all other modes of judging cows do not militate
against M. Guenon’s views; they give the judge only a more certain mode,
and, if he has had much practice, a nearly infallible one. There are some
points which are in full unison with Guenon’s views, but do not appear in
his work, and may be spoken of as follows:
1st. All bovine animals have on the skin of the back a _quirl in the
hair_, which seems to be a sort of dividing line or point between the
hair on the front of the animal and that on the hinder portion. This
should be found in the center of the ridge of the animal, that is,
equi-distant from the head as from the root of the tail, and should be
well defined, but of short fine hair. Frequently it is to be seen on the
shoulder; when there, coarse hair is generally the accompaniment, and
with that, a thick or tough skin, and no great milking qualities, or if
much milk is given, it is not for a long time, nor is the milk of rich
quality. The heaviest milkers have this mark, usually on the middle of
the back, and the richest, with short fine hair. In short, the nearer the
middle of the back, and the smaller the quirl and the finer the hair,
the most generally will the cow be the better milker and of the richest
quality. This mark Mr. Blight and myself have been testing for a long
time, and we feel now that we can recommend it as a very good additional
point to judge from.
2d. The tail should be long and squarely placed on the animal at the
root, and of thin fine quality, with a good curly or corkscrew switch,
and the bone of the tail should extend fully down to the knee and as
much below it as possible. The horns should be small, waxy, and crumpled
inwards and downwards a little. If they are long, they should be thin and
sometimes rather flat.
3d. Bulls; the same remarks apply to these. Their hind legs should
resemble, as much as possible, those of the cow, with great length
between the hoof and the first joint; this indicates their aptitude to
beget heifer calves and good milkers.
4th. On raising calves, proper nourishment should be given; if stinted,
the inferior parts develop to the injury of the better; the head and
horns will be out of proportion to the rest of the body.
The Breeding and Value of well-selected Butter Cows.
We have frequently endeavored to show that one of the most important
advantages of Guenon’s system is, that it enables every owner of cows
to tell the good from the bad cows, and that by weeding out the poor
ones, and raising the tone of his herd, he will increase his profits,
and if every farmer in the State will do the same, the increased value
of all herds, and the increased results in profits, would amount to many
millions yearly.
Pertinent to this subject, Mr. J. H. Walker, of Worcester, Massachusetts,
the owner of a very choice herd of Jerseys, embracing members of the
Alphea, Victor, and Pansy families, has prepared an article on the
BREEDING AND VALUE OF BUTTER COWS, which proves, by tables showing the
net results of good and bad cows, the theory that good cows will pay
better than poor ones as an investment. We digest his remarks as follows:
In New England, a pound of butter can be made for less money than a pound
and a half of beef, taking the animals at birth or beginning with animals
two years old.
Taking any good herd of Jersey cows, old and young, from the time the
heifers first come in milk, and it will average to make two thirds as
many pounds of butter per annum as any person in New England can make in
pounds of beef, on any herd of any breed.
The beef is worth six to nine cents, and the butter from twenty to forty
cents.
Furthermore, every farmer should know what the difference is in the
actual value of the different cows he owns, rating their value upon the
money he gets for their product.
An ordinary cow will make about two hundred pounds of butter a year.
The tables are intended to show what the difference is in the value of
different cows for producing butter, taking as a basis the payment of
thirty dollars for a cow that will make two hundred pounds of butter per
annum, and for different amounts up to six hundred pounds per annum,
assuming that the cow will die at twelve years of age. The interest
upon the first cost of the cow, and on her product for each year, is
compounded at the rate of six per cent. per annum, up to the day it is
assumed the cow will die, taking no account of the value of the stock
bred from her.
As long as every business is done upon the basis of interest on
investments, we must treat the question of values as applied to cows on
that basis. This is the only way to accurately prove the difference in
value between one cow and another.
Table A.
If the cow cost thirty dollars, the keeping per annum twenty-five
dollars, and the butter sells for twenty-five cents a pound, the
_profits_ on the cows will be as follows, viz:
Paying $30 00 for a 200 pound cow, he will get in ten years, $170 00
” 189 97 ” 300 ” ” ” 235 03
” 348 86 ” 400 ” ” ” 299 89
” 504 39 ” 500 ” ” ” 363 11
” 671 61 ” 600 ” ” ” 428 39
Table B.
_Including interest_ on all items, a farmer will make on each cow as
follows, (made on a basis of twenty-five cents a pound for butter, and
twenty-five dollars a year for keeping,) viz:
Paying $30 00 for a 200 pound cow, he will get in ten years, $195 73
” 125 00 ” 300 ” ” ” 313 06
” 250 00 ” 400 ” ” ” 374 15
” 350 00 ” 500 ” ” ” 474 52
” 450 00 ” 600 ” ” ” 595 91
Table C.
Reckoning the annual cost of keeping at thirty-five dollars, and butter
at thirty cents a pound, _reckoning interest_ on her cost, and on all
receipts from her, a farmer will make on each cow as follows, viz:
Paying $30 00 for a 200 pound cow, he will get in ten years, $182 87
” 125 00 ” 300 ” ” ” 354 78
” 250 00 ” 400 ” ” ” 483 49
” 350 00 ” 500 ” ” ” 654 17
” 450 00 ” 600 ” ” ” 811 59
Table D.
On an annual cost of keeping of fifty dollars, and price of butter at
thirty-five cents:
Paying $30 00 for a 200 pound cow, he will get in ten years, $95 76
” 125 00 ” 300 ” ” ” 318 39
” 250 00 ” 400 ” ” ” 507 46
” 350 00 ” 500 ” ” ” 744 20
” 450 00 ” 600 ” ” ” 960 90
Assuming that each cow, costing at two years old the price named in
the tables, will die at twelve years old, the actual value of cows to
practical farmers, making annually the different amounts of butter named,
is shown.
They show what the cow will make in the ten years, and also what a farmer
can afford to pay for each cow making the different amounts of butter
named. They show the different amounts the farmer, who buys one of each
of the cows named, paying the prices named for each of the five, will
make on each, provided no interest is reckoned on the price paid for the
cow, or on the butter made from her, during ten years.
These figures are certainly startling to any one who has not taken the
trouble to examine this subject, much more so to the farmer who never
figures carefully, and does exactly as his father did before him, without
regard to the altered circumstances that surround him.
The farmer who shakes his head wisely at his more enterprising neighbor,
and insists that cows making as much butter as is mentioned in these five
tables do not live and never did, should know that the thorough-bred
Jersey cows, Jersey Belle of Scituate, of the Victor family, made 705
pounds of butter in twelve consecutive months; that Eurotas, of the
Alphia family, made 778 pounds of butter between November 12, 1879,
and October 15, 1880, and dropped a heifer calf on November 4, 1880;
that Pansy, sired by Living Storm, dam Dolly 2d, sired by Emperor 2d,
made in her four year old form 574 pounds of butter in one year; that
imported Flora made 511 pounds of butter in fifty weeks; that Countess
made 16 pounds of butter on grass only, when fourteen years old. These
well-established facts no intelligent, fair-minded man now disputes,
and it is confidently believed that many more Jerseys will make as much
butter as have any of those mentioned.
The question which at once suggests itself to farmers who are not
satisfied with their present animals, is that of capital. The answer is,
“admitting the above figures to be correct, I have no capital to pay
the high prices demanded for the best Jersey cows, and I must therefore
forego that improvement of my herd, which I know I ought to make.” Let us
see if this is so.
By any process of reasoning, the “bull is half the herd.” Each cow
contributes to one calf each year half its qualities. The bull
contributes to every calf produced in the herd half its qualities. Some
horse-breeders will talk only of the excellences of the stallion. Some
farmers will talk only of the excellences of the cows. Both are mistaken.
The sire and the dam, each contribute to their offspring, on the
average, exactly the same proportion of their excellences or defects.
Some bulls are so powerfully organized as to be able to stamp their
qualities, good or bad, on nearly every one of their progeny, as are some
cows; but these are the rare exceptions. Each contribute the same, as
a rule. No scientific investigator of the breeding problem, or careful
breeder, would any sooner select the offspring of a 600 pound butter cow,
got by a bull from a 200 pound butter family, than he would a heifer got
by a full brother to the 600 pound butter cow from a full sister to the
200 pound butter bull.
Using a bull from a 400 pound butter family, on heifers from a 200 pound
butter family, is just as likely to produce heifers that will make from
two hundred to four hundred pounds of butter annually, averaging a yield
of three hundred pounds; as the using of a bull from a 200 pound butter
family on cows of a 400 pound butter family, would be to reduce the yield
of some of the heifers to two hundred pounds, and the average to three
hundred pounds. The increasing the butter yield of the heifers from a
herd of cows one half by using a bull on them from a family or breed that
make twice as much, or the reverse, can be relied upon as certainly as
any expected result in the most uncertain of all business, namely: that
of breeding.
If these statements are correct, what had a farmer better pay for a bull
from a 400 pound butter family, to use on his herd of ten 200 pound
butter cows, rather than use a bull from a 200 pound butter family?
It may be said that the keeping would cost more, because the higher bred
product must be kept better. There is some truth in this, but the better
keeping would affect favorably the poorer animals as well, and whatever
the extra feed would cost, it would carry the value of the average yield
as much above the figures we are making, as the extra feed would cost.
The ten 200 pound butter cows, in ten years would pay a profit of $1,957
30. If the ten cows bred from them, by using the 400 pound butter bull,
would make half as much again butter at the same cost, the general
product would be increased by one half, and leave the sum to be deducted
for keeping the same, for if the two year old 200 pound butter heifer
could be raised for $30, so could the better bred one. The profit on
each of them, deducting $54 18, cost of cow, will be $484 64—on the ten,
$4,846 40, and on the 200 pound butter cows, the profits would be $1,957
30. The advantages reaped by the farmer who has the product for ten years
of heifers bred by using the better bull, will be $2,889 10 more than on
the 200 pound butter cows.
If he paid for his bull $1,500, and the bull and all his cows died at
twelve years old, the farmer would be as well off as he would have been
to have used the 200 pound butter bull.
But there is no necessity of paying $1,500 for a 400 pound butter
bull. One hundred dollars will buy a Jersey bull, six weeks old, from
a 400 pound butter family, and he will be old enough to use in twelve
months. The $100 paid for him, at six per cent. compound interest,
would amount to $191 61, in eleven years. The profit on ten butter cows
making three hundred pounds over the ten cows making two hundred pounds
in ten years, being $2,800, by deducting the $191 61 for the bull that
produced them, (counting nothing for the 200 pound butter bull, for he
is good-for-nothing,) the actual advantage reaped by the farmer with
intelligence and enterprise enough to secure the better bull, in the ten
years after his heifers come in, is over $2,500 on the butter alone. The
animals are counted of no value when twelve years old, as the price got
for those living beyond that age would average to pay only for the losses
caused by accident to animals before reaching that age. These figures
take no account of the skim-milk or buttermilk, for they are nearly
the same in either case, and will pay the taxes and for the care of the
animals; but there is one very important source of profit that is not
reckoned, and that is the extra value of the progeny, which is shown by
the following table, to be $17,424 48.
There must be no mistake made in procuring a Jersey bull calf.
Although, as a breed, they are twice to three times as valuable for
butter as common cows, yet any farmer who buys or uses a Jersey bull,
because he is a Jersey bull, will sorely repent his venture.
Buy a bull only from the very best families of Jerseys. They are cheaper
than the gift of an average good one.
The idea that it costs more to keep Jersey cows than common cows, or that
Jersey cows will not take on flesh, for beef, as readily as other breeds,
is true in one view, and very erroneous in another and more correct one.
What a Jersey eats, beyond a limited amount, increases the quantity and
richness of her milk, not her flesh, and the amount of flesh she carries
is proportionally less for any extra feed, because it does not make
flesh, but increases the butter globules in her milk. Again, any other
breed can be readily dried off at any time, and being dry, or giving but
little milk, and that of poor quality, they readily take on flesh, but a
good Jersey is “dried off” with great difficulty, and herein she greatly
excels all other breeds. Hundreds of Jerseys, milking twelve to sixteen
quarts at their flush, hold out so evenly, that they will give many more
quarts of milk, and of double the richness, in a year, than eighteen to
twenty-four quart cows, of other families, that are dry several months of
the year.
It is the experience of every breeder of Jerseys that, _being dry_, they
will take on flesh as fast, with a given quantity and quality of feed, as
other breeds, not exclusively beef producers.
They are not good for beef, simply because they are good for butter.
From Jersey cows, a farmer in New England can make a pound of butter
worth thirty-five cents, with a less quantity of food than they now use
to make a pound and one half of beef worth nine cents.
If farmers think there is some error in these statements, they will,
like sensible men whose prosperity depends upon the result, sit down and
figure out the results for themselves.
Those who talk loudest against them, will hold on to a cow in their herd
that has a little Jersey blood in her; and if they put a price on her, it
will be from half as much again, to double that of the finer formed cow
standing beside her, guiltless of having any Jersey blood in her veins.
If there is an animal to be had any better than the bull any one is now
using, it ought to be secured at once. So with cows, but by all means
change at once for a better, any bull, however good.
It is not claimed for any of the tables herewith presented, that they
show absolutely the value of any cow to any farmer, but only that they
are relatively correct. Every man who consults them, must make his own
adjustments as to cost and receipts on any cow he owns. It is clear, that
adding a very little to the cost of keeping, and deducting a very little
from the price of butter, will show that any 200 pound butter cow brings
her owner in debt, each year. Again, there are probably hundreds of cows
kept for the dairy, that will not make two hundred pounds of butter in
one year on the same feed Jersey Belle of Scituate, had when she made
seven hundred and five pounds of butter in one year. It may be said
that no allowance is made for any accidents to which a cow is liable—to
abort, to have a calf die at birth, to injury, &c., and the thought is
present that the loss on the poorer animal is not so much, in that case,
as on the better; but the better is no more liable to such a case, and
the loss is nearly the same proportionally. But it is still true, that
the nearer to absolute worthlessness animals are, the less the loss,
relatively and absolutely, their owner suffers in their injury. Better
remember, however, that “blessed be nothing” is not the ejaculation of
the healthful, the enterprising, and the successful, but of desperate
disease, incapacity, or idleness.
Table E.
Showing the value of the progeny of a herd of 32 cows, that each make
300 pounds of butter annually, at the expiration of ten years, together
with the value of the butter the progeny will have made during the ten
years. Also showing the same on a herd of 32 cows, each making 200 pounds
of butter annually. No account is taken of the bull calves, for they are
worth nothing. No one can afford to use a bull, however good, if one is
to be had that is any better.
================================================================
|| 200 POUND BUTTER HERD. |
-------+-----------+----------++----------+--------+-----------+
On |The | Coming ||Value of |Value of|Total value|
January|original | in milk ||butter |heifers |of the |
1st, |herd of | at 2, ||at the |at end |heifers |
of the |32 will | will make||end of ten|of ten |and their |
year— |drop— | butter— ||years. |years. |product. |
-------+-----------+----------++----------+--------+-----------+
1881 |16 heifers,| 8 years, ||$3,174 46 | $160 | $3,334 46 |
1882 |16 ” | 7 ” || 2,724 54 | 160 | 2,884 54 |
1883 |16 ” | 6 ” || 2,247 04 | 320 | 2,567 04 |
1884 |16 ” | 5 ” || 1,740 32 | 480 | 2,220 32 |
1885 |16 ” | 4 ” || 1,202 72 | 480 | 1,682 72 |
1886 |16 ” | 3 ” || 632 32 | 480 | 1,112 32 |
1887 |16 ” | 2 ” || 208 64 | 480 | 688 64 |
1888 |16 ” | 1 ” || | 480 | 480 00 |
1889 |16 ” | yearling,|| | 288 | 288 00 |
1890 |16 ” | calf, || | 96 | 96 00 |
----------------------------------------------------------------
Product of the Second Generation.
----------------------------------------------------------------
1883 | 8 heifers,| 6 years, ||$1,122 52 | 160 | $1,283 54 |
1884 | 8 ” | 5 ” || 870 16 | 240 | 1,110 16 |
1885 | 8 ” | 4 ” || 601 36 | 240 | 841 36 |
1886 | 8 ” | 3 ” || 316 16 | 240 | 556 16 |
1887 | 8 ” | 2 ” || 104 32 | 240 | 344 32 |
1888 | 8 ” | 1 ” || | 240 | 240 00 |
1889 | 8 ” | yearling,|| | 144 | 144 00 |
1890 | 8 ” | calf, || | 48 | 48 00 |
----------------------------------------------------------------
Product of the Third Generation.
----------------------------------------------------------------
1885 | 4 heifers,| 4 years, || $300 68 | 120 | $420 68 |
1886 | 4 ” | 3 ” || 158 08 | 120 | 278 08 |
1887 | 4 ” | 2 ” || 52 16 | 120 | 172 16 |
1888 | 4 ” | 1 ” || | 120 | 120 00 |
1889 | 4 ” | yearling,|| | 72 | 72 00 |
1890 | 4 ” | calf, || | 24 | 24 00 |
----------------------------------------------------------------
Product of the Fourth Generation.
----------------------------------------------------------------
1887 | 2 heifers,| 2 years, || $26 08 | 60 | $86 08 |
1888 | 2 ” | 1 ” || | 60 | 60 00 |
1889 | 2 ” | yearling,|| | 36 | 36 00 |
1890 | 2 ” | calf, || | 12 | 12 00 |
----------------------------------------------------------------
Product of the Fifth Generation.
----------------------------------------------------------------
1889 | 1 heifer, | yearling,|| | 18 | 18 00 |
1890 | 1 ” | calf, || | 6 | 6 00 |
================================================================
Total value of progeny from herd of 32 in 10 years, $21,226 58
Value of progeny, $663 33 on each 200 pound cow.
===============================================================
|| 300 POUND BUTTER HERD.
-------+-----------+----------++----------+--------+-----------
On |The | Coming ||Value of |Value of|Total value
January|original | in milk ||butter |heifers |of the
1st, |herd of | at 2, ||at the |at end |heifers
of the |32 will | will make||end of ten|of ten |and their
year— |drop— | butter— ||years. |years. |product.
-------+-----------+----------++----------+--------+-----------
1881 |16 heifers,| 8 years, ||$6,973 12 | $1,216 | $8,189 12
1882 |16 ” | 7 ” || 6,073 12 | 1,824 | 7,897 12
1883 |16 ” | 6 ” || 5,117 92 | 2,432 | 7,549 92
1884 |16 ” | 5 ” || 4,104 32 | 3,040 | 7,144 32
1885 |16 ” | 4 ” || 3,029 12 | 3,040 | 6,069 12
1886 |16 ” | 3 ” || 1,888 32 | 3,040 | 4,928 32
1887 |16 ” | 2 ” || 980 48 | 3,040 | 4,020 48
1888 |16 ” | 1 ” || 340 32 | 3,040 | 3,380 32
1889 |16 ” | yearling,|| | 2,000 | 2,000 00
1890 |16 ” | calf, || | 960 | 960 00
---------------------------------------------------------------
Product of the Second Generation.
---------------------------------------------------------------
1883 | 8 heifers,| 6 years, ||$2,558 96 | 1,216 | $3,774 96
1884 | 8 ” | 5 ” || 2,052 16 | 1,520 | 3,572 16
1885 | 8 ” | 4 ” || 1,514 56 | 1,520 | 3,034 56
1886 | 8 ” | 3 ” || 944 16 | 1,520 | 2,464 16
1887 | 8 ” | 2 ” || 490 24 | 1,520 | 2,010 24
1888 | 8 ” | 1 ” || 170 16 | 1,520 | 1,690 16
1889 | 8 ” | yearling,|| | 1,000 | 1,000 00
1890 | 8 ” | calf, || | 480 | 480 00
---------------------------------------------------------------
Product of the Third Generation.
---------------------------------------------------------------
1885 | 4 heifers,| 4 years, || $757 28 | 760 | $1,517 28
1886 | 4 ” | 3 ” || 472 08 | 760 | 1,232 08
1887 | 4 ” | 2 ” || 245 12 | 760 | 1,005 12
1888 | 4 ” | 1 ” || 85 08 | 760 | 845 08
1889 | 4 ” | yearling,|| | 500 | 500 00
1890 | 4 ” | calf, || | 240 | 240 00
---------------------------------------------------------------
Product of the Fourth Generation.
---------------------------------------------------------------
1887 | 2 heifers,| 2 years, || $122 56 | 380 | $502 56
1888 | 2 ” | 1 ” || 42 54 | 380 | 422 54
1889 | 2 ” | yearling,|| | 250 | 250 00
1890 | 2 ” | calf, || | 120 | 120 00
---------------------------------------------------------------
Product of the Fifth Generation.
---------------------------------------------------------------
1889 | 1 heifer, | yearling,|| | 125 | 125 00
1890 | 1 ” | calf, || | 60 | 60 00
===============================================================
Total value of progeny from herd of 32 in 10 years, $76,984 62
Value of progeny, $2,405 77 on each 300 pound cow.