AMERICAN GRADE OF NATIVE CATTLE.--THE PRINCIPLES OF BREEDING.
We have dwelt thus far mainly upon the prominent breeds of cattle known
among us, and especially those adapted to the dairy. But a large
proportion--by far the largest proportion, indeed--cannot be included
under any of the races alluded to.
The term breed, properly understood, applies only to animals of the same
species, possessing, besides the general characteristics of that
species, other characteristics peculiar to themselves, which they owe to
the influence of soil, climate, nourishment, and habits of life to which
they are subjected, and which they transmit with certainty to their
progeny. The characteristics of certain breeds or families are so well
marked, that if an individual supposed to belong to any one of them were
to produce an offspring not possessing them, or possessing them only in
part, with others not belonging to the breed, it would be just ground
for suspecting a want of purity of blood.
If this definition of the term breed be correct, no grade animals, and
no animals not possessing fixed peculiarities or characteristics which
they share with all other animals of the class of which they are a type,
and which they are capable of transmitting with certainty to their
descendants, can be recognized by breeders as belonging to any one
distinct race, breed, or family.
The term “native,” or “scrub,” is applied to a vast majority of our
American cattle, which, though born on the soil, and thus in one sense
natives, do not constitute a breed, race, or family, as properly
understood by breeders. They do not possess characteristics peculiar to
them all, which they transmit with any certainty to their offspring,
either of form, size, color, milking or working properties. But, though
an animal may be made up of a mixture of blood almost to infinity, it
does not follow that for specific purposes, it may not, as an individual
animal, be one of the best of the species. And for particular purposes
individual animals might be selected from among those commonly called
natives in New England, and scrubs at the West and South, equal, and
perhaps superior, to any among the races produced by the most skilful
breeding. There can be no impropriety in the use of the term “native,”
therefore, when it is understood as descriptive of no known breed, but
only as applied to the common stock of the country, which does not
constitute a breed. But perhaps the whole class of animals commonly
called “natives” would be better described as grades, since they are
well known to have sprung from a great variety of cattle procured in
different places and at different times on the continent of Europe, in
England, and in the Spanish West Indies, brought together without any
regard to fixed principles of breeding, but only from individual
convenience, and by accident.
The first importations to this country were doubtless those taken to
Virginia previous to 1609, though the exact date of their arrival is not
known. Several cows were carried there from the West Indies in 1610, and
the next year no less than one hundred arrived there from abroad.
The earliest cattle imported into the Plymouth colony, and undoubtedly
the earliest introduced into New England, arrived in 1624. At the
division of cattle which took place in 1627, three years after, one or
two are distinctly described as black, or black and white, others as
brindle, showing that there was no uniformity of color. Soon after this,
a large number of cattle were brought over from England for the settlers
at Salem. These importations formed the original stock of Massachusetts.
In 1625 the first importation was made into New York from Holland, by
the Dutch West India Company, and the foundation was then laid for an
exceedingly valuable race of animals, which subsequent importations from
the same country, as well as from England, have greatly improved.
Dairy farming in some parts of Holland, it may be remarked in passing,
became a highly important branch of industry at a very early date, and a
large and valuable race of dairy cattle existed there long before the
efforts of modern breeders began in England. The attention of farmers
there is at the present time devoted especially to the dairy, and the
manufacture of butter and cheese. They support themselves, to a
considerable extent, upon this branch of farming; and hence it is held
in the highest respect, and carried to a greater degree of exactness and
perfection, perhaps, than in any other part of the world. They are
especially particular in the breeding, keeping, and care of milch cows,
as on them very much of their success depends. The principles on which
they practise, in selecting a cow to breed from, are as follows: She
should have, they say, considerable size--not less than four and a half
or five feet girth, with a length of body corresponding; legs
proportionally short; a finely-formed head, with a forehead or face
somewhat concave; clear, large, mild, and sparkling eyes, yet with no
expression of wildness; tolerably large and stout ears, standing out
from the head; fine, well-curved horns; a rather short than long, thick,
broad neck, well set against the chest and withers; the front part of
the breast and the shoulders must be broad and fleshy; the low-hanging
dewlap must be soft to the touch; the back and loins must be properly
projected, somewhat broad, the bones not too sharp, but well covered
with flesh; the animal should have long, curved ribs, which form a broad
breast-bone; the body must be round and deep, but not sunken into a
hanging belly; the rump must not be uneven, the hip-bones should not
stand out too broad and spreading, but all the parts should be level and
well filled up; a fine tail, set moderately high up and tolerably long,
but slender, with a thick, bushy tuft of hair at the end, hanging down
below the hocks; the legs must be short and low, but strong in the bony
structure; the knees broad, with flexible joints; the muscles and sinews
must be firm and sound, the hoofs broad and flat, and the position of
the legs natural, not too close and crowded; the hide, covered with fine
glossy hair, must be soft and mellow to the touch, and set loose upon
the body. A large, rather long, white and loose udder, extending well
back, with four long teats, serves also as a characteristic mark of a
good milch cow. Large and prominent milk-veins must extend from the
navel back to the udder; the belly of a good milch cow should not be too
deep and hanging. The color of the North Dutch cattle is mostly
variegated. Cows with only one color are no favorites. Red or black
variegated, gray and blue variegated, roan, spotted and white variegated
cows, are especially liked.
The annexed cut gives a correct idea of the cow most esteemed in
Holland; the type of the race so noted for the production of milk, and
of the excellent round Dutch cheeses.
[Illustration: Fig. 13. Dutch Dairy Cow.]
In 1627, cattle were brought from Sweden to the settlements on the
Delaware by the Swedish West India Company. In 1631, 1632, and 1633,
several importations were made into New Hampshire by Capt. John Mason,
who, with Gorges, procured the patent of large tracts of land in the
vicinity of Piscataqua River, and immediately formed settlements there.
The object of Mason was to carry on the manufacture of potash. For this
purpose he employed the Danes; and it was in his voyages to and from
Denmark that he procured many Danish cattle and horses, which were
subsequently diffused over that whole region, and large numbers of which
were driven to the vicinity of Boston and sold. These facts are
authenticated by original documents and depositions now on file in the
office of the Secretary of State of New Hampshire. The Danish cattle are
there described as large and coarse, of a yellow color; and it is
supposed that they were procured by Mason as being best capable of
enduring the severity of the climate and the hardships to which they
were to be subjected. However this may have been, they very soon spread
among the colonists of the Massachusetts Bay, and have undoubtedly left
their marks on the stock of New England and the Middle States, which
exist to some extent even to the present day, mixed in with an infinite
multitude of crosses with the Devons, the Dutch cattle already alluded
to, the black cattle of Spain and Wales, and the long-horn and the
short-horn, most of which crosses were accidental, or due to local
circumstances or individual convenience. Many of these cattle, the
descendants of such crosses, are of a very high order of merit, but to
what particular cross it is due it is impossible to say. They make
generally hardy, strong, and docile oxen, easily broken to the yoke and
quick to work, with a fair tendency to fatten when well fed; while the
cows, though often ill-shaped, are sometimes remarkably good milkers,
especially as regards the quantity they give.
I have very often heard the best judges of stock say that if they
desired to select a dairy of cows for milk for sale, they would go
around and select cows commonly called native, rather than resort to
pure-bred animals of any of the established breeds, and that they
believed they should find such a dairy the most profitable.
In color, the natives, made up as already indicated, are exceedingly
various. The old Denmarks, which to a considerable extent laid the
foundation of the stock of Maine and New Hampshire, were light yellow.
The Dutch of New York and the Middle States were black and white; the
Spanish and Welsh were generally black; the Devons, which are supposed
to have laid the foundation of the stock of some of the states, were
red. Crosses of the Denmark with the Spanish and Welsh naturally made a
dark brindle. Crosses of the Denmark and Devon often made a lighter or
yellowish brindle, while the more recent importations of Jerseys and
short-horns have generally produced a beautiful spotted progeny. The
deep red has long been a favorite color in New England; but the
prejudice in its favor is fast giving way to more variegated colors.
But, though we have already an exceedingly valuable foundation for
improvement, no one will pretend to deny that our cattle, as a whole,
are susceptible of it in many respects. They possess neither the size,
the symmetry, nor the early maturity, of the short-horns; they do not,
as a general thing, possess the fineness of bone, the beauty of form and
color, nor the activity, of the Devons or the Herefords; they do not
possess that uniform richness of milk, united with generous quantity, of
the Ayrshires, nor the surpassing richness of milk of the Jerseys; but,
above all, they do not possess the power of transmitting the many good
qualities which they often have to their offspring, which is a
characteristic of all well-established breeds.
Equally certain is it, in the opinion of many good judges, that the
dairy stock of New England has not been improved in its intrinsic good
qualities during the last thirty or forty years. Cows of the very
highest order as milkers were as frequently met with, they say, in 1825,
as at the present time. Any increased product of our dairies they
ascribe to improved care and feeding, rather than to improvement in the
dairy qualities of the stock.
This may not be true of some other sections of the country, where the
dairy has been a more special object of pursuit, and where the custom of
raising the best male calves of the neighborhood, or those that came
from the best dairy cows, and then of using only the best-formed bulls,
has long prevailed. In this way some progress has, doubtless, been made.
There is an old adage among the dairy farmers of Ayrshire, that “The cow
gives her milk by the mou’,” which was slightly varied from an old
German proverb, that “_The cow milks only through the throat_.” It is
fortunate, indeed, that wiser and more humane ideas prevail with regard
to the care of stock of all kinds; for it is well known that the
treatment the stock of the country received for the first two centuries
after its settlement was often barbarous and cruel in the extreme, and
that thousands perished, in the early history of the colonies, from
exposure and starvation. Even within my own distinct recollection, it
was thought, for miles around my native place, that cows and young stock
should remain out of doors exposed to the cold winter days, to
“toughen;” and that, too, by men who styled themselves “practical”
farmers.
Mr. Henry Colman truly asserted, in 1841, that the general treatment of
cows in New England would not be an inapt subject of presentment by a
grand jury. There were, at that time, it is true, many honorable
exceptions; but the assertion was strictly correct so far as it applied
to the section of which I then had a personal knowledge. Judging from
the anxiety manifested by those who enter superior milch cows for the
premiums offered by agricultural societies to show that they have had
nothing, or next to nothing, to eat, it is evident that the false ideas
with regard to the feeding and treatment of this animal have not yet
wholly disappeared. But, if little improvement has been made in our
dairy stock except that produced by more liberal feeding, it simply
shows that our efforts have not been made in the right direction.
The raising of cattle has now become a source of profit in many
sections to a greater extent, at least, than formerly, and it becomes a
matter of great practical importance to our farmers to take the proper
steps to improve them. Indeed, the questions, what is the best breed,
and what are the best crosses, and how shall I improve my stock, are now
almost daily asked; and their practical solution would add many thousand
dollars to the aggregate wealth of the farmers of the country, if they
would all study their own interests. The time is gradually passing away
when the intelligent practical farmer will be willing to put his cows to
any mere “runt” of a bull, simply because his service may be had for
twenty-five cents; for, even if the progeny is to go to the butcher, the
calf sired by a pure-bred bull, particularly of a race distinguished for
fineness of bone, symmetry of form, and early maturity, will bring a
much higher price at the same age than the calf sired by a scrub. Blood
has a money value, which will, sooner or later, be generally
appreciated. The first and most important object of the farmer is to get
the greatest money-return for his labor and his produce; and it is for
his interest to obtain an animal--a calf, for instance--that will yield
the largest profit on the outlay. If a calf, for which the original
outlay was five dollars, will bring at the same age, and on the same
keep, more real net profit than another, the original outlay for which
was but twenty-five cents, it is certainly for the farmer’s interest to
pay the larger original outlay, and have the superior animal. Setting
all fancy aside, it is merely a question of dollars and cents; but one
thing is certain, and that is, that the farmer cannot afford to keep
poor stock. It eats as much, and requires nearly the same amount of care
and attention, as stock of the best quality; while it is equally certain
that stock of ever so good a quality, whether grade, “native,” or
thorough-bred, will be sure to deteriorate and sink to the level of poor
stock, by neglect and want of proper attention.
How, then, are we to improve our stock? Not, surely, by that
indiscriminate crossing, with a total disregard to all well-established
principles, which has thus far marked our efforts generally with foreign
stock, and which is one prominent reason why so little improvement has
been made in our dairies; nor by leaving all the results to chance,
when, by a careful and judicious selection, they may be within our own
control. Two modes of improvement seem to suggest themselves to the mind
of the breeder, either of which, apparently, promises good results. The
first is, to select from among our native cattle the most perfect
animals not known or suspected to be related to any of the
well-established breeds, and to use them as breeders. This is a mode of
improvement simple enough, if adopted and carried on with animals of any
known breed; and, indeed, it is the only mode of improvement which
preserves the purity of blood; but, to do it successfully, requires
great experience, a good and sure eye for stock, a mind free from
prejudice, and indefatigable patience and perseverance. It is absolutely
necessary, also, to pay special attention to the calves thus produced;
to furnish them at all times, summer and winter, with an abundant supply
of nutritious food, and to regulate it according to their growth. Few
men are to be found willing to undertake the herculean task of building
up a new breed in this way from grade stock. An objection meets us at
the very outset, which is that it would require a long series of years
to arrive at any satisfactory results, from the fact that no two
animals, made up, as our “native” cattle are, of such a variety of
elements and crosses, could be found sufficiently alike to produce their
kind. The principle that like produces like may be perfectly true, and
in the well-known breeds it is not difficult to find two animals that
will be sure to transmit their own characteristics to their offspring;
but, with two animals which cannot be classed with any breed, the
defects of an ill-bred ancestry will be liable to appear through several
generations, and thus thwart and disappoint the expectations of the
breeder. The objection of time, and expense, and disappointment,
attending this method, should have no weight, if there were no more
speedy method of accomplishing equally desirable results.
The second mode is somewhat more feasible; and that is, to select
animals from races already improved and well-nigh perfected, to cross
with our cattle, using none but good specimens of pure-bred males, and
selecting, if our object is to improve stock for the dairy, only such as
belong to a race distinguished for dairy qualities; or, if resort is had
to other breeds less remarkable for such qualities, such only as are
descended from large and generous milkers. And here it may be remarked
that these qualities do not belong to any one breed exclusively, though,
as they depend mainly on structure and temperament, which are hereditary
to a considerable extent, they are themselves transmissible. In almost
every breed we can find individual good milkers which greatly surpass
the average of the cows of the same race or family, and from such many
suppose that good crosses may be expected. How often do we see farmers
raising the calves of their best milking-cows simply because they are
the best cows, without regard to the qualities of the bull, or to the
progenitors of either parent; and how often are they disappointed, at
the end of three or four years of labor and expense! Now, though a cow
of a bad milking family, or of a breed not at all distinguished for
dairy qualities, may turn out to be an excellent milker, and all else
that may be desirable in a cow, yet these qualities in her are
accidental. They are not supposed to be transmissible with anything like
the certainty which exists where they are the fixed and constant
characteristics of the family. She is an exception to the rule of her
race. A good calf from her, though not, of course, an impossibility,
would be very much the result of chance. The resort to any but a
distinguished breed of milkers cannot, therefore, be recommended, nor
can we expect to improve our dairies by it. A disregard of this
important matter has led to endless disappointment, and has done much to
raise up unjust prejudices against the use of all improved stock on our
native cows. As if we could expect nature to go out of her regular
course to give us a good animal, when we have violated her laws!
The offspring of these crosses will be grades; but grades are often
better for the practical purposes of the farmer than pure-bred animals.
The skill of the breeder is especially manifest in the selection of
animals to breed from, since both parents undoubtedly have a great
influence in transmitting the milking qualities of the race. But this
method of improvement requires less exact and critical knowledge than
the first, from the fact that it is easier to appreciate the good points
of an animal already perfected, or greatly improved, than to discover
them in animals which it is our desire to improve, and which are
inferior in form, possessing only the elements of a better stock. It has
also an immense advantage, since results may be far more rapidly
attained, and improvements effected which, by the first method,--that of
creating or building up a race from the so-called natives, by judicious
selections,--would be looked for in vain in the ordinary life of man.
All grades are produced by this second method; but all grades are not
equally good, nor equally well adapted to meet the farmer’s wants. It is
desirable to know, then, what, on the whole, are the best and most
profitable to the practical farmer.
We want cattle for distinct purposes, as for milk, beef, or labor. In a
large majority of cases,--especially in the dairy districts, comprising
the Middle and Eastern States, at least,--the farmer cares more for the
milking qualities of his cows, especially for the quantity they give,
than for their fitness for grazing, or aptness to fatten. These latter
points become more important in the Western and some of the Southern
States, where far greater attention is paid to breeding and to feeding,
and where comparatively little attention is given to the productions of
the dairy. A stock of cattle that might suit one farmer might be wholly
unsuited to another; and in each particular case the breeder should have
some special object in view, and select his animals with reference to
it. But there are some general principles that apply to breeding
everywhere, and which, in many cases, are not well understood.
It would not be desirable, even if it were possible, by crossing, to
breed out all the general characteristics of many of our native cattle.
They have many valuable qualities adapted to our climate and soil, and
to the geological structure of the country; and these should be
preserved, while we improve the points in which many of them are
deficient, such as a want of precocity and aptitude to fatten, where it
is an object to attain this quality, coarseness of bone, and lack of
symmetry, which is often apparent, especially when the form of the
animal does not indicate a near relation to some of the established
breeds.
It’s a well-known fact that, in crossing, the produce most frequently
takes after the male parent, especially, it is thought, in exterior
form, in its organs of locomotion, such as the bones, the muscles, &c.
Particularly is this the case when the male belongs to an old and
well-established breed, and the female belongs to no known breed, and
has no strongly-marked and fixed points. Put a Galloway bull, for
instance, to a native cow, and the calf will, as a general rule, be
hornless. Put a ram without horns to ewes with horns, and most of the
lambs will be destitute of horns; that is, they take the characteristics
of the father rather than the dam; and this rule holds good generally in
breeding, though, like all other rules, it has, of course, its
exceptions. Hence, if this position be correct, the first principle
which the good sense of the farmer would dictate would be to select a
bull from a breed most noted for the qualities he wishes to obtain in
their greatest perfection, and especially if the cow is deficient in
those qualities. A bull, for instance, of fine bone, and other good
points in perfection, will make up for the deficiency of some of these
points in the cow.
On the other hand, say the advocates of this doctrine, in the physiology
of breeding the internal structure of the offspring, the organs of
secretion, the mucous membranes, the respiratory organs, &c., are
imparted chiefly by the dam. Hence it has sometimes been found that by
taking a cow remarkable for milking properties, though deficient in many
other points, as in the coarseness of bone and in early maturity, and
putting to her a bull remarkable for symmetry of form and fineness of
bone, the offspring has been superior to the cow in beauty of form and
proportions, and has still retained the milking qualities of the dam.
This principle, as already intimated, is questioned by some, who say
that the milking qualities, as well as the external form, &c., are
transmitted through the male offspring.
Mr. James Dickson, an experienced breeder and drover, who views the
subject from his own standpoint, says: “A great part of the art of
breeding lies in the principle of _judicious crossing_; for it is only
by attending properly to this that success is to be attained, and
animals produced that shall yield the greatest amount of profit for the
food they consume. All eminent breeders know full well that ill-bred
animals are unprofitable both to the breeder and feeder. To carry out
the system of crossing judiciously, certain breeds of cattle, sheep,
pigs, &c., must be kept pure of their kind--males especially; indeed, as
a general rule, no animal possessing spurious blood, or admixture with
other breeds, should be used. The produce in almost all cases
assimilates to the male parent; and I should say that in crossing the
use of any males not pure-bred is _injudicious_, and ought to be
avoided.”
If, therefore, a cross is effected with satisfactory results, it should
be continued by resorting to pure-bred bulls, and not by the use of any
grade bulls thus obtained; for, though a grade bull may be a very fine
animal, it has been found that he does not transmit his good qualities
with anything like the certainty of a pure-bred one. The more desirable
qualities are united in the bull, the better; but the special reason for
the use of a pure-bred male in crossing is not so much that the
particular individual selected has these qualities most perfectly
developed in himself; as that they are _hereditary in the breed_ to
which he belongs. The moment the line is crossed, and the pedigree
broken, uncertainty commences. Although the form of the grade bull may,
in individual cases, be even superior to that of his pure-bred sire, yet
there is less likelihood of his transmitting the qualities for which
his breed is most noted; and when it is considered that during his life
he may scatter his progeny over a considerable section of country, and
thus affect the cattle of his whole neighborhood, attention to this
becomes a matter of no small public importance.
This principle, so far as its application to breeding for the shambles
is concerned, seems to me to be sound, and fully established by long
experience and practice. Perhaps it is equally so, also, in breeding for
the dairy. But it may be well to consider whether there are not other
rational modes of judgment in the selection of animals for breeding with
this specific object in view.
There is a difference of opinion with regard to the practical value of
the system of classification and judgment of milch cows discovered and
developed by Guénon: some being inclined to ridicule it, as absurd;
others to adopt it implicitly, and follow it out in all its details; and
others still--and among this class I generally find a very large number
of the most sensible practical judges of stock--to admit that in the
main it is correct, though they discredit the practicability of carrying
it so far, and so minutely into detail, as its author did.
It may be remarked, at the outset, that the fact that the best of the
signs of a great and good milker adopted by Guénon are generally found
united with the best forms and marks almost universally admitted and
practised upon by good judges, gives, at least, some plausibility to the
system, while the importance of it, if it be correct, is sufficient to
demand a careful examination. Every good judge of a milch cow, for
instance, wants to see in her a small, fine head, with short and
yellowish horns; a soft, delicate, and close coat of hair; a skin soft
and flexible over the rump; broad, well-spread ribs, covered with a
loose skin of medium thickness; a broad chest; a long, slender tail;
straight hind legs; a large, regularly-formed udder, covered with short,
close, silky hair; four teats of equal size and length, set wide apart;
large, projecting lacteal veins, which run along under the belly from
the udder towards the fore legs, forming a fork at the end, and finally
losing themselves in a round cavity; and when these points, or any
considerable number of them, are found united in a cow, she would be
pronounced a good milker. An animal in which these signs are found would
rarely fail of having a good “milk-mirror,” or _escutcheon_; on which
Guénon, after many years of careful observation and experiment, came to
lay particular stress; and on the basis of which he built up a system or
theory so complicated as to be of little practical value compared with
what it might have been had he seen fit to simplify it so as to bring it
within the easy comprehension of the farmer. As one means of forming a
judgment of the milking qualities, however, it must be regarded as very
important, since it is unquestionably sustained by facts in a very large
majority of cases.
The milk-mirror, or escutcheon, is formed by the hair above the udder,
extending upwards between the thighs, growing in an opposite direction
from that of other parts of the body. In well-formed mirrors, found only
in cows which have the arteries which supply the milky glands large and
fully developed, it ordinarily begins between the four teats in the
middle, and ascends to the vulva, and sometimes even higher, the hair
growing upwards. The direction of the hair is subordinate to that of the
arteries; for the relation existing between the direction of the hair
above the udder and the activity of the milky glands is apparent on a
careful examination of all the cases. When the lower part of the mirror
is large and broad, with the hair growing from below upwards, and
extending well out on the thighs, it indicates that the arteries which
supply the milky glands, and which are situated just behind it, are
large and capable of conveying much blood, and of giving great activity
to the functions of secretion.
Now, in the bull, the arteries which correspond to the mammary or
lacteal arteries of the cow are not so fully developed; and the
escutcheons are smaller, shorter, and narrower. Guénon applied the same
name, milk-mirror, to these marks in the bull; and the natural inference
was, that there should exist a correspondence or similarity in the
mirror of the bull and the cow which are coupled for the purpose of
producing an offspring fit for the dairy,--that the mirror in the bull
should be of the same class, or of a better class than that of the cow.
It is confidently asserted by the advocates of Guénon’s method, and with
much show of reason, that the very large proportion of cows of bad or
indifferent milking qualities, compared with the good, is owing to the
mistakes in selecting bulls without reference to the proper marks or
points. As to the transmission of the milk-mirror, it has been found in
many cases that bulls sprung from cows with good mirrors had smaller and
more heart-shaped mirrors, spreading out pretty broad upon the thighs.
Pabst, a successful German breeder, says that he has used such bulls for
three years, and that the milk-mirrors were transmitted in the majority
of the male progeny, and in nearly every case very large and beautiful
mirrors were given to the heifer-calves. A son of the bull with which he
began was serving at the time of which he speaks, having a mirror more
highly developed than his sire, and the first calves of his get had
also very large milk-mirrors. The female offspring of the first bull of
good milk-mirror promised first rate, though they had not then come in.
His inference is, that in breeding from cows noted as milkers regard
should be had to the form of the mirror on the bull, and the chance of
his transmitting it. If any credit is due to this ingenious method, it
may be laid down, as a principle in the selection of a bull to get dairy
stock, that the one possessing the largest and best-developed
milk-mirror is the best for the purpose, and will be most likely to get
milkers of large quantity and continued flow. This method will be more
fully developed in the chapter on the Selection of Milch Cows.
But, however careful we may be to select good milkers, and to breed from
them with the hope of improvement, it is by no means easy to select such
as are capable of transmitting their qualities to their offspring. This
is rendered still more difficult by the fact that there is no known mark
to indicate it, and we are left to use our own judgment; for, in the
case of bulls, we are often obliged to give them up before their progeny
have arrived at an age to show their qualities by actual trial. We are
thrown back, therefore, upon their external marks. But, as M. Magne, a
very sensible French writer, justly observes in his admirable little
work (_Choix des Vaches Latières_, p. 86, Paris, 1857), the fixed
characteristics which have existed in races for several generations will
be transmitted with most certainty. Hence the importance, he says, of
selecting milch cows from good breeds and good families, and especially,
in breeding stock, of selecting carefully both male and female. The male
designed to get dairy stock ought to possess the structure which, in the
cow, indicates the greatest activity of the mammary glands, as fineness
of form, mellowness of skin, large hind quarters, large and
well-developed veins and escutcheon.
A cow of a race or family not noted as milkers may chance to be an
excellent milker, and this is enough, if we do not desire to breed from
her; but she would not transmit her exceptional qualities like a cow of
which these qualities were the fixed characteristics, constant and
transmissible in the breed. These considerations apply also, as already
said, in the choice of a bull. The attention of practical men has been
so much directed to the best points of good cows, of late years, that it
becomes necessary to study to propagate these, if the breeder desires to
find buyers for his stock. The buyer judges more from external signs
than from the intrinsic qualities of the cow, with which he may not be
acquainted.
To explain the variations in the transmission of milking qualities, we
should bear in mind that these qualities are not found in wild cows, and
that they are developed only when man can, by a particular course of
treatment, as by the act of milking, the separation of the sexes, etc.,
cause certain natural powers to act with greater strength than others;
that they incline to disappear as soon as these powers, the nature of
the soil, the peculiarities of climate, the properties of plants, and
the temperament of the cows, are permitted to act according to the
original plan of creation; so that the variations which we consider as
sports of nature are incontestible proofs of the uniformity of her
works.
It is only by observing animals carefully, by noting accurately their
good qualities and their faults, by watching the circumstances in which
individuals are produced, raised, and kept, that we can account for what
seems to us a sport or caprice of nature. We can then tell, first, how
the same bull and cow have produced three calves with different
properties; and, secondly, trace out the rules which we are to follow,
to be almost uniformly successful in obtaining stock of the best
quality.
Experience shows that the qualities which are transmitted with most
certainty depend on the most important organs of life; and so, in the
forms of the viscera and the skeleton, variations are rare, not only in
breeds of the same species, but in different species of the same genera.
Moreover, in cases where the transmission of properties is so uncertain
as to seem the result of caprice in nature, these properties are formed
by superficial organs,--by the skin, the horns, the state of the hair,
etc.
But it is in qualities which are, in a measure, artificial, qualities
produced by domestication, and often more injurious than useful to the
health of animals, that variations most commonly occur. These change not
only with the breed of one species, but with the different individuals
of the same breed, of the same half-breed, and often of the same family.
Bearing these elementary principles of natural history and physiology in
mind, we shall comprehend how cows and bulls well marked in regard to
escutcheons have produced stock which did not resemble them. M. Lefebvre
Sainte Marie asserts that the influence of the escutcheons is very
feeble in the act of reproduction.
In this view, the escutcheon is almost nothing in itself. It depends on
the state of the hair, on one of the most fleeting of peculiarities, on
that which is least hereditary in animals. It has no value as a mark of
good getters of stock, unless it is supported by marks superior to it
from their stability,--a larger skeleton, double loins, a wide rump,
highly-developed blood-vessels,--unless it is united with a spacious
chest, round ribs, large lungs, and a strong constitution.
The more complete the correspondence between these marks, the more the
milking quality is connected with the general condition of the animal,
the greater the chances of transmission; and when, with a view to
breeding, we shall choose only animals having the two-fold character of
general vigor of constitution and activity of the mammary system, and
place the progeny under favorable circumstances, the qualities will
rarely prove defective. Thus far the conclusions of Magne.
Another well-known fact in natural history is, that the size of animals
depends very much upon the fertility of the region they inhabit. Where
food is abundant and nutritious, they increase in size in proportion to
the quantity and quality; and this size, under the same circumstances,
will run through generations, unless interrupted by artificial means.
So, if the food is more difficult to obtain, and the pastures are short,
the pliancy of the animal organization is such that it naturally becomes
adapted to it, and the animal is of smaller size; and hence Mr. Cline
observes that “the general mistake in crossing has arisen from an
attempt to increase the size of a native race of animals, being a
fruitless effort to counteract the laws of nature.” Mr. Cline also says,
in his treatise “On the Form of Animals:” “Experience has proved that
crossing has only succeeded in an eminent degree in those instances in
which the females were larger than the usual proportion of females to
males; and that it has generally failed when the males were
disproportionally large. When the male is much larger than the female,
the offspring is generally of an imperfect form; if the female be
proportionally larger than the male, the offspring is generally of an
improved form. For instance, if a well-formed large ram be put to ewes
proportionally smaller, the lambs will not be so well shaped as their
parents; but, if a small ram be put to larger ewes, the lambs will be of
an improved form.” “The improvement depends on the principle that the
power of the female to supply her offspring with nourishment is in
proportion to her size, and to the power of nourishing herself from the
excellence of her constitution; as larger animals eat more, the larger
female may afford most nourishment to her young.”
This should, I am inclined to think, be regarded as another principle of
breeding,--that, when improvement in form is desired, the size of the
female selected should be proportionally larger than the male; though
Lord Spencer, a successful breeder, strongly contested it, and Mr.
Dickson, an excellent judge of stock, advised the attempt to build up a
new breed by selecting some Zetland cows, a very diminutive breed of
Scotch cattle, of good symmetry, points, and handling, and a high-bred
West Highland bull to put to them. “The produce would probably be,” says
he, “a neat, handsome little animal, of a medium size, between the two
breeds. The shaggy hide, long horns, symmetry, and fine points, of the
West Highlanders, would be imparted to this cross, which would not only
be a good feeder and very hardy, but the beef of superior quality. The
great point would, of course, be the proper selection of breeding
animals. The next step towards improving this would be the crossing of
these crosses with a pure Hereford bull, which would improve the size,
and impart still finer points, more substance, with greater aptitude to
fatten. By combining those favorite breeds, the produce would, in all
probability, be very superior, not only attaining to good weights, but
feeding well, and arriving at maturity at an early age. The breeder must
not be satisfied and rest here, but go a point further, and cross the
heifers of the third cross with a short-horn bull.” These successive
steps imply the use of a bull of larger breed, though not necessarily,
perhaps, proportionally larger than the cow, in any individual case.
This, it will be perceived, is a case of breeding with less reference to
the milking or dairy qualities than the grazing. Great milkers are found
of all shapes, and the chief object of improving their form is to
improve their feeding qualities, or, in other words, to unite, as far as
possible, the somewhat incompatible properties of grazing and milking.
Graceful, well-rounded, and compact forms, which constitute beauty in
the eyes of the grazier, as well as in the estimation of those not
accustomed to consider the intrinsic qualities of an animal, or not
capable of appreciating them in a milch cow, will very rarely be found
united, to any considerable extent, with active mammary glands or milk
vessels. The best milkers often look coarse and flabby; for, even if
their bony structure is good and symmetrical, they will appear,
especially when in milk, to have large, raw bones and sharp points,
particularly if they are largely developed in the hind quarters, which
is most frequently the case, as is strikingly seen in the form of the
Oakes cow, a native animal, the most celebrated of her time, in
Massachusetts, and winner of the first premium at the State Fair of
1816.
She yielded in that year no less than four hundred and sixty-seven and a
quarter pounds of butter from May 15th to December 20th, at which time
she was giving over eight quarts of milk, beer measure, a day. The
weight of her milk in the height of the season, in June, was but
forty-four and a half pounds; not so great as that of some cows of the
present day, on far less feed in proportion to their size. Many cows
can be named in New England, at the present time, whose yield, under
the most favorable circumstances, exceeds fifty pounds a day, and some,
whose yield will be fifty-five pounds, on less feed than the Oakes cow
had.
[Illustration: Fig. 14. Oakes Cow.]
The flesh on the hindquarters of most large milkers bears little
proportion to the bone; the hips protrude, the pelvis is broad, the legs
far apart, giving great space for the receptacle of large milk-vessels;
whilst great flow of blood to the milky glands, incident to this
peculiar structure, keeps them in more constant and greater activity
than any other organs, so that the muscles develop less than they
otherwise would, remain slender, and leave the buttocks and thighs small
and narrow. Such animals will seldom acquire the reputation of being
beautiful in form, and if they are not decidedly ugly, the owner may
console himself with the adage that “handsome is that handsome does.”
But, though it is to the influence of the male that we are chiefly to
look for improvements in the form, size, muscular development, and
general appearance, of our stock, and for transmitting their milking
qualities, to a considerable extent, the influence of the female is no
less important; and undoubtedly the safest course to pursue, to obtain
improved animals, is to select the best-formed animals, on both sides,
from the greatest milking families.
With regard to the particular breeds to select for crossing with our
natives, opinions will naturally differ widely. Those who are favored
with luxuriant pastures and abundance of winter feed will have no
objection to large-sized animals, and will naturally wish to obtain or
possess grade short-horns. There is no breed in the world to which it is
more desirable to resort, under such circumstances, particularly where
improvement in form, early maturity, and general symmetry, are sought,
in union with other qualities. It is well known that some families of
short-horns have been bred for the pail, while most others have been
bred chiefly for beef. If resort is had to this breed, therefore, great
care and caution should be observed to select bulls from the milking
families only; and, unless this is done we shall run the risk of losing
the milking qualities of our stock, for which the improvement in form
and early maturity can be little compensation, when breeding for the
dairy.
It is a remarkable and significant fact that the large dairies of London
are nearly filled with the short-horns, or short-horn and Yorkshire
grades; and the fact that this breed is selected in such circumstances
for the production of milk to supply the milk-market speaks volumes in
favor of this cross. It is found that grade short-horns, after yielding
extraordinary quantities of milk, during which they very naturally
present the most ungainly appearance, will, when dried off and fed,
take on flesh very rapidly, and yield large weights of beef. This is one
prominent reason for keeping them; and another is, that they occupy less
space than would be required to produce the same quantity of milk from
smaller animals, which might give even more milk per cow in proportion
to size and food consumed.
The cross of the well-bred short-horn and the native or Dutch cows of
the dairy districts of New York is very highly esteemed; and six hundred
pounds of cheese a year is no uncommon yield for such grades in Herkimer
and adjacent counties.
The Ayrshires have been tried in the London dairies, but it was found
that they were too difficult to obtain in sufficient numbers, and at
sufficiently low prices; and that where quantity was the chief object,
as in a milk-dairy, and space a matter of great importance, they could
not compete with the short-horn and the Yorkshire cows, and crosses
between these races.
It often happens, particularly in milk-dairies, that the farmer is so
situated as not to desire to raise his calves, but disposes of them at
the highest price to the butcher. He will obtain the greatest weight and
the highest quality of veal from the use of a pure-bred short-horn or
Hereford bull. But, on poorer pastures, where there is too little feed
to bring young stock to their most perfect development, the pure-bred
short-horns and high grades of the short-horn are thought, by some, to
be too large, and consequently unprofitable. How far this objection to
them might be obviated by stall feeding or soiling, and the use of
roots, is for each one to consider who has these facilities at command.
For most parts of New England they are unquestionably too large to be
well maintained.
As to the Herefords, they cannot be recommended for the dairy, either as
pure bloods or grades; but in grazing districts, devoted to raising
beef or working cattle, they are highly and justly prized.
The same may be said of the North Devons. The pure-bred Devon bull, put
to a good, young native cow, produces a beautiful and valuable cross,
either for the yoke or the shambles; and if the cow is a remarkably good
milker to begin with, and the bull from a milking family, there would be
no fear of materially lessening the quantity in the offspring, while its
form, and other qualities, would probably be greatly improved.
Grade Devons are very much sought for working oxen, and high prices are
readily obtained for them, while as beef cattle they are by some highly
esteemed. But, unfortunately, very few herds are to be found where
attention has been paid to breeding for milk; and great milkers are the
exception, and very rarely met with among the pure breeds. In their
native country they are bred almost exclusively for beef. The estimation
in which they are held as dairy stock, even by Devon breeders
themselves, both in England and in this country, has been shown in the
low value placed upon the development of the udder in the establishment
of the scale of points spoken of on a preceding page; from which it is
evident that, in judging of them, it was not contemplated that their
milking qualities should be taken into consideration. As cows for the
dairy, therefore, they possess no advantages over our common stock, and
we should hardly look for improvement from them in this respect.
The Jerseys, as already seen, are justly celebrated for the richness of
their milk and the butter made from it. In this respect no pure breed
can excel them. They are, therefore, as a dairy breed, worthy of
attention. On farms where the making of butter is an object of pursuit
and profit, an infusion of Jersey blood will be likely to secure
richness of milk, and high-flavored, delicious butter. Many good judges
of stock recommend this cross for dairy purposes; and the chief
objection that can be urged against them is that they are, as a breed,
very deficient in quantity, which in a milk-dairy would be fatal to
them, while, at the same time, they have little to recommend them, as
the Devons have, on the score of beautiful forms and symmetrical
proportions. Put upon a large and roomy native cow, remarkable as a
milker, the produce would be likely to be a very superior animal.
The Ayrshires, as already seen, have been bred with reference both to
quality and quantity of milk, and the grades are usually of a very high
order. The best milkers I have ever known, in proportion to their size
and food, have been grade Ayrshires; and this is also the experience of
many who keep dairies for the manufacture of butter and cheese, as well
as for the sale of milk. A cross obtained from an Ayrshire bull of good
size and a pure-bred short-horn cow will produce a stock which it will
be hard to beat at the pail, especially if the cow belong to any of the
families of short-horns which have been bred with reference to their
milking qualities, as some of them have. I have taken great pains to
inquire of dairymen as to the breed or grade of their best cows, and
what they consider the best cows for milk for their purposes; and the
answer has almost invariably been the Ayrshire and the native. The
Ayrshires have by no means been a failure in this country, although I do
not think that, as a general thing, we have been so fortunate hitherto
as to import the best specimens of them. If any improvement has been
made in our dairy stock apart from that effected by a higher and more
liberal course of feeding, it has come, in a great measure, from the
Ayrshires; and, had the facilities been offered to cross our common
stock with them to greater extent, there can be little doubt that the
improvement would have been greater and more perceptible.
It should, however, be said, that in sections where the feed is
naturally luxuriant, and adapted to grazing large animals, some families
of the short-horns crossed with our natives have produced an equally
good stock for cheese and milk dairies.
Before closing this part of the subject, it is proper to observe that
among the earlier importations were several varieties of hornless
cattle, and that they have been kept distinct in some sections, or where
they have been crossed with the common stock there has been a tendency
to produce hornless grades. These are not unfrequently known under the
name of buffalo cattle. They were, in many cases, supposed to have
belonged to the Galloway breed; or, which is more likely, to the Suffolk
dun, a variety of the Galloway, and a far better milking-stock than the
Galloways, from which it sprung. The polled, or hornless cattle, vary in
color and qualities, but they are usually very good milkers when well
kept, and many of them fatten well, and attain good weights.
The Hungarian cattle have also been imported, to some extent, into
different parts of the country, and have been crossed upon the natives
with some success. Many other strains of blood from different breeds
have contributed to build up the common stock of the country of the
present day; and there can be no question that its appearance and value
have been largely improved during the last quarter of a century, nor
that improvements are still in progress which will lead to satisfactory
results in future.