PNIVEBSITY OF CALIFORNIA PUBLICATIOH8 COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA COW-TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA BY EDWIN C. VOORHIES BULLETIN No. 314 October, 1919 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRESS BERKELEY 1919 EXPERIMENT STATION STAFF Heads of Divisions Thomas Forsyth Hunt, Dean. Edward J. Wickson, Horticulture (Emeritus). Walter Mulford, Forestry, Director of Resident Instruction. Herbert J. Webber, Director Agricultural Experiment Station. B. H. Crocheron, Director of Agricultural Extension. Hubert E. Van Norman, Vice-Director; Dairy Management. James T. Barrett, Acting Director of Citrus Experiment Station; Plant Pathology. William A. Setchell, Botany. Myer E. Jaffa, Nutrition. Charles W. Woodworth, Entomology. Ralph E. Smith, Plant Pathology. J. Eliot Coit, Citriculture. John W. Gilmore, Agronomy. Charles F. Shaw, Soil Technology. John W. Gregg, Landscape Gardening and Floriculture. Frederic T. Bioletti, Viticulture and Enology. Warren T. Clarke, Agricultural Extension. John S. Burd, Agricultural Chemistry. Charles B. Lipman, Soil Chemistry and Bacteriology. Clarence M. Haring, Veterinary Science and Bacteriology. Ernest B. Babcock, Genetics. Gordon H. True, Animal Husbandry. Fritz W. Woll, Animal Nutrition. W. P. Kelley, Agricultural Chemistry. H. J. Quayle, Entomology. Elwood Mead, Rural Institutions. H. S. Reed, Plant Physiology. J. C. Whitten, Pomology. fFRANK Adams, Irrigation Investigations. C. L. Roadhouse, Dairy Industry. F. L. Griffin, Agricultural Education. John E. Dougherty, Poultry Husbandry. S. S. R,ogers, Olericulture. L. J. Fletcher, Agricultural Engineering. Edwin C. Voorhies, Assistant to the Dean. Division of Animal Husbandry Gordon H. True F. W. Woll J. I. Thompson IEdwin C. Voorhies J. F. Wilson C. V. Castle Paul I. Dougherty G. H. Wilson f In co-operation with office of Public Roads and Rural Engineering, U. S. Department of Agriculture. X Resigned July 1, 1910, to become Assistant to the Dean. COW-TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA By EDWIN C. VOORHIES OBJECT The farmers of California at the present time are milking about 600,000 cows. The average butterfat production per cow in this state is probably not over 160 pounds and there are many cows producing over 300 and 400 pounds of fat per year, hence there must be many producing less than 160 pounds. If the average price of butterfat for the past three years had been 50 cents per pound, the average annual income per cow for butterfat alone would have been $80.00. In many portions of the state one would be scarcely able to feed a cow for this amount of return. The above figures suggest that there is and probably always will be a field for improvement in the production of our cows. Increases in the average yearly butterfat or milk production can be brought about by ridding the herds of the poor producers, by using better sires, and by better feed and management. There is no means of determining accurately the production of a cow without weighing and testing the milk at regular intervals. It is true that by means of conformation we can often select the high and the low producer with a fair degree of certainty. But conformation does not give one the exact information as to production that the dairy- men should have. A great many dairymen could test and keep their own records, but the most satisfactory and, in the long run, the least expensive method of having this work done is by joining a cow-testing association. The cow-testing association is simply an organization of farmers who unite for the purpose of employing a trained man to weigh and test the milk of every cow in the herds of the association at monthly intervals. Thus a record of every cow in the herd is obtained at the end of the year without any trouble on the part of the individual dairy- man. HISTORY Cow-testing associations have passed the experimental stage. The first one was organized in Denmark in 1895 and the idea of the associa- tion rapidly spread to the surrounding countries of Europe. Mr. Helmar Rabild, now in charge of Dairy Farming Investigations, Bureau 158 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION of Animal Industry, Washington, D.C., founded the first association in the United States at Fremont, Michigan, in 1905. The Ferndale Association in Humboldt County, was the first to be established in this state in 1909. VFtlRY CRTTLE IN CRLIFO'RNIR. (jDEl NORTH | • ^ \5 ( S K I Y O U •A. MODOC »• 1 - I N m0o ! * ysy 5TA i n~ .j Ea.ch.doT - ZOOO Cows Ea.cn doT should, cl/so ■p represoif The loccCTio-yj o~^ a.~in clcT/vc cow- <2.SSOC I CL.I i o "7-7 '? 1.-/ — >,< vz. \g l e At ! • ^ Vd» eTTa K«SB A?«7, /77 7 X f^fnna"' \% «Offi&;« \ \. •••°*\ K CRN "*y. . o 12! CD — o — 00 to o o OS CO co hhmmOOWCjiOOWW^o co |_1 ►_! co h- to •— to to o i— 1 i— ' i—* tO co CO to I tO tO to co h-'i-'lOi-'H'tOtOH'tOHOWH'S^OvHOO^Si-'tO^OiOOOOcOCnOJ^ I— 1 i— 1 t— ' CO I— i CO CO co HHOOCOHCOHOWHOOHHOOH'W^HtnifkO&JMMCOMOiOOMi-' CO I rf^. : : H- (-- tO MtOH Ol tO CO rf*. H- H- CO OS I : HKMtOWlOMOWOOOlWMOM^jH'M^OOtH-tOWNltOOcOO^HCOCOOO'sjH'OM Oi o H to to i— (-> h- co ^ >-» co o i- 1 1- 1 o o to *>• o co o> co ^ a ^ O o d f o ► o Cn CO MMtOM I— i CO to 00 t— » CO £t rf»- ►-» CO MMtXWOMCOtOtsiMWOOWMQOC^i^cO^^^M^tOOJvlOOOOO^W^i-'OiO^IWOTOi^ 162 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION number of their cows. This is a mistake, for unless one intends to cull the unprofitable cows from his herd, it is useless to join a cow- testing association. As a rule, men who join merely on account of community spirit do more harm than they do good. The only man wanted in a cow-testing association should be the man who has the betterment of his herd in mind. Table 2. — The Number of Herds and Cows Under Test July 1, 1917, in Co- operative Cow-Testing Associations* Average per Association Number Number Number ■ State Ass'ns Herds Cows Herds Cows Arizona 2 50 1130 25 565 California 15 581 18805 38.7 1253.6 Colorado 3 78 1701 29 567 Connecticut 3 118 2026 39.3 675.3 Delaware 3 76 1120 25.3 373.3 Idaho 1 25 560 25 560 Illinois 17 449 9038 26.4 531.6 Indiana '. 9 161 2176 17.8 241.7 Iowa 30 738 9412 24.6 313.7 Kansas 4 77 1370 19.2 342.5 Maine 5 149 1355 29.8 271 Maryland 8 130 2810 16.2 351.2 Massachusetts 4 135 2175 33.8 543.7 Michigan 15 408 5642 27.2 376.1 Minnesota 26 697 10544 26.8 405.5 Missouri 5 91 1905 18.2 381 _ Montana 2 43 790 21.5 395 Nebraska 4 51 800 12.7 200 New Hampshire 12 317 4790 26.4 399 New Jersey 8 146 3671 18.2 458.8 New York 43 1022 21153 23.7 491.9 New Mexico 1 17 275 17 275 Nevada 1 30 623 30 623 Ohio 30 750 10229 25 340.9 Oregon 17 444 8232 26.1 484.2 Pennsylvania 24 668 10077 27.8 419.8 South Dakota 3 74 1038 24.6 346 Tennessee 8 154 3025 19.2 378.1 Vermont 47 1000 22575 21.2 480.3 Virginia 4 73 1770 18.2 442.5 Washington 18 526 11051 29.2 613.9 West Virginia 1 25 324 25 324 Wisconsin 81 2387 39334 29.4 485.6 Wyoming 1 30 440 30 440 Total 455 11720 211966 25.7 465.7 Number of milk cows in the U. S. July 1, 1917 23,372,200 Number of cows in Cow-Testing Associations less than one per cent. (0.91%) ♦From reports U.S.D.A. Bulletin 314 cow testing associations in California 163 o ►— • orq p, 02 e-t- p p CO O H o c s CO I—' to o ST crq OcOCOCOcOcOCOOcDOCOOcOtOCD •— » h- ' o 2 ocococoooooovis^jai^csMco CO PL to C5 H M M H ^ to ^ CO CO 00 Crc &owoai(OMC5WOH^oiooto CO Oi CO O o H- 4 I— 1 I— ' H-k tO tO On ~qOicOC005000iOcOOOt— » O O 2 o OH-MCnOOOOOOOOiOCOOO w ' 1 4 to ^S 3 V; ^^£j 1 S .11 J /* « ^ -jajjnq apnnoj '][I!m epnnoj ,o»gsa "5 I u ?l 3 3 £ 8 flfl 0$ -28. 3"£ of it ajnjmd jo isoj) •spanoj ^ -Bpnnoj *X»q trpanoj illj •)«fK>17ng Boiy -i»linq aponod pTjoj, *pouad anliso^ zfntjnp •)»1 e8waAv ■at«po) jpnn apniuxl j»jox 'poued Sar)f*n Sounp ^n m sponoj 'Xjrap ^pni Bptmoj c ^° T"P" X«p»aTi»x s* S* Q <* s> J2 V> cs^ «% <^ ^ t^ ** ^ «^ ^ ^X t<^ *^= TS fc .O " *3" V> >* *0 S V> ^ ** - y> ,^» y> .*> y> \o o ^ ^ S S «» "2? — " — O C — 5 — K G~ r*» *g « t^ y> y, .2 r^ <> V9 JS *> r*^ r<> r^, r<. w sx> ^> tv- o r>^ a — « a*. *>*** V» ^ ^ ^ t« «i iS V> \c, \^ lc> *> 'O tv. w i — ob — f^- ^ i< >. ^2 ^ «^ *> ^h W o "S? ^^ ^5~«5 R> 5 ^ 0^ ;n ^ -s^ V a Vj i- 3 ^ »v. **% 6% "*>* ^ V> \^ y> C*> ^t> W "^T -^ 03 a CO BULLETIN 314 C0W TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 165 THE TESTER The most important factor making for the success of a cow-testing association is the tester, the man who weighs and samples the milk, makes the tests, and keeps the records. The tester is the employee of the association. Graduates of the College of Agriculture and of the University Farm School are often available for this work for a few years after graduation and have given splendid satisfaction. The tester is usually guided by the secretary of the association, who is the real executive. The testers should be men of some practical dairy experience, who are thoroughly familiar with the Babcock test. The wages paid to testers in this state vary from $75 to $125 per month in addition to board and lodging. In many associations the tester is required to furnish his own conveyance (usually a Ford). A very satisfactory plan has been for the tester to furnish both his conveyance and testing supplies, at a flat rate per cow, and receive all or nearly all the money collected for the testing. The tester visits the dairy once each month. He remains on the farm until he completes his testing; this ordinarily will take one day only, but in the case of large dairies it may take 4 or 5 days. The milk of the evening and following morning is weighed and a combined sample from these two milkings is obtained and tested. The amount of milk and butterfat produced in 24 hours multiplied by the number of days in the month is taken as the cow's monthly production. The tester makes his calculations before leaving the dairy and writes the results in the herd book kept by the dairyman and furnished to him by the Bureau of Animal Industry (fig. 3). The tester also keeps a record of the tests (fig. 4). Each cow is given a separate page in the herd book and at the close of the year's work, the amounts of milk and fat are totaled. The testing outfit usually consists of a 24-bottle hand Babcock tester with the necessary glassware, some bottles, spring balance, a milk pail for weighing the milk, and a heating apparatus (fig. 5). The main dairy supply houses in this state are now equipped to handle all the demands made on them for testing materials. COST The charge per cow for testing in the associations of this state varies from $1 to $2 per year. In some associations a certain sum is charged for each test for a cow, viz., 12 or 15 cents. The danger in doing this is that in some months a dairyman may decide not to have all of his herd tested. Testing does not help a farmer greatly unless every cow in his herd is put on test. Where a flat rate is charged per year, the 166 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION amount due is payable in advance. The most satisfactory method for collecting has been to arrange with creameries, pooling associations, etc., to deduct the cost of testing from the check of the dairyman at stated intervals. Where the association was organized and is operated under the direction of the Farm Bureau, settlement for testing done is made by the secretary of the Bureau, or of the committee in charge of the cow-testing association. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. BUREAU OF ANIMAL INDUSTRY. DAIRY DIVISION. Ou»i>«r, Date, NUMBERS OF COWS BRED Stfftf LAST TESTING, DAY 5w t'lM^^/z, 'if ». D. 21fi 11-11-10— 2.5C& Fig. 4. — Page from barn book kept by tester. Dairyman is given duplicate copy of this record. Bulletin 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 167 RESULTS OF COW TESTING ASSOCIATION WORK In order to show what progress has been made data have been tabu- lated from many of the cow-testing associations operating in the state. The tabulations have been made from associations in widely separated portions of the state. Many dairymen have had an idea that their section is peculiar and that although improvement may be possible by means of testing in other sections, the same results would not show up Fig. 5. — Cow-tester at work. in their own region. The data presented in the following will, we be- lieve show that this is not correct and that cow-testing associations may bs depended upon to cause an improvement in dairy herds of all as- sociations, without regard to the section where they are located. FERNDALE COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION The Ferndale Association is located in Humboldt County in one of the most highly specialized dairy sections of the state. Through the courtesy of the officers and members of the Ferndale Association, the writer has had access to many of the records made. In 1912, Professor Leroy Anderson of the University of California, published the results of three years' work of this association.* Eight *Bulletin 233, California Experiment Station. 168 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION members were in the association for three consecutive years from the beginning. These herds comprised approximately 600 cows, or about one half the total number under test each year. Most of the cows in this section are dry during the early part of the rainy season and come in generally during February to April. The records summarized in this Bulletin contain lactation periods of over six months (unless otherwise stated). All records of cows tested for periods of less than six months are excluded. Table 4. — Summary of Average Production for Each Year . (Eight Herds — Three Years) Number Average Average Gain Year Cows lbs. Milk lbs. Fat lbs. Fat 1909 : 581 5,900 251 ... 1910...., 601 6,483 277 26.0 1911 609 6,890 291.5 14.5 The above table shows a gain of approximately 40 pounds of fat per cow in two years. At 50 cents per pound, this is an average gain of $20 per cow. If the average cost of testing is $1.50 per cow, a net gain of $17 per cow is shown. If this gain of $17 was possible with very few cows in the Ferndale region, it might also be possible with the other herds of the state. In this case it would mean an additional annual return of over $5,000,000. The records of three herds in this association are available for nine consecutive years and are given in Table 5. Table 5. — Records of Three Herds in Ferndale Cow-Testing Association, 1909-1917 1909 Number Total Average Total Average Herd number cows lbs. milk lbs. milk lbs. fat lbs. fat Herd No. 1 68 382,584 5626 13,953.8, 205.2 Herd No. 2 .... 123 724,349 5889 27,975.1, 227.4 Herd No. 3 30 196,326 6544 10,022.3 334.1 221 1,303,259 5897 - 51,951.2 235.1 1910 Herd No. 1 69 435,324 6309 16,888.8 244.5 Herd No. 2 121 858,031 7091 33,845.9 279.7 Herd No. 3 34 232,899 6850 11,896.1 349.9 224 1,526,254 6796 62,630.8 279.6 1911 Herd No. 1 67 454,532 6784 17,402.2 259.7 Herd No. 2 123 932,684 7583 37,094.8 301.6 Herd No. 3 33 243,691 7384 12,284.0 372.2 223 1,730,907 7762 66,781.0 299.5 Bulletin 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 169 Table 5 — {Continued) 1912 Number Total Average Herd number cows lbs milk lbs. milk Herd No. 1 105 691,109 6582 Herd No. 2 113 855,646 7572 Herd No. 3 36 256,473 7124 . -i 254 1,803,228 7099 1913 Herd No. 1 108 696,152 6446 Herd No. 2* 130 817,440 6288 Herd No. 3 35 252,662 7219 273 1,766,254 6469 *Floods on this Farm during winter. 1914 Herd No. 1 71 472,303 6652 Herd No. 2 132 1,016,344 6942 Herd No. 3 33 227,259 6887 236 1,715,906 7271 1915 Herd No. 1 71 444,854 6265 Herd No. 2 117 742,610 6347 Herd No. 3 29 198,913 6169 217 1,386,377 6389 1916 Herd No. 1 69 426,331 6179 Herd No. 2* Herd No. 3 35 274,755 7850 1917 Herd No. 1 77 486,332 6316 Herd No. 2 114 862,304 7564 Herd No. 3 35 303,058 8619 226 ' 1,651,694 7308 *Records not available. Total lbs. fat Average lbs. fat 27,860.4 35,380.2 265.3 313.1 13,139.9 365.0 76,380 . 5 300.7 28,163.9 35,763.0 12,374.2 260.7 275.1 353.9 76,301.1 19,546.7 40,774 . 8 11,235.2 279.5 275.3 308.9 340.5 71,556.7 303.2 19,736.3 277.9 32,795.1 280.3 9,993.7 344.6 62,525.1 288.1 19,563.2 283.5 15,382.5 439.5 22,522 . 5 292.5 39,484.4 344.6 17,006.5 485.9 79,013.4 349.6 It will be noted that there is a large increase in the production in the three herds included in Table 5 from an average of 235.1 pounds of butterfat in 1909 to 349.6 pounds of fat in 1917, an increase of 114.5 pounds of butterfat. Consider for a moment what such an increase would mean in your own herd. Table 5 and the following tables illustrate the necessity for continued testing year after year. Oftentimes the average production of a herd may go down in the third and fourth year of the association, due to the number of heifers being included in the herd. Again, rainfall and 170 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION climate in many sections has an extremely important influence on pro- duction. If one expects, however, to make progress, continued culling year after year must be resorted to. The higher the production goes the more difficulty one has of maintaining the high average production. Hence, there is even a greater necessity of culling out the low producers. The following three tables show the improvement that has been made by these herds in the consecutive years of testing since they entered the Ferndale Cow-Testing Association. Table 6. — Record of Herd Number 1 in Ferndale (Arranged by Years) Number Total Total Year cows lbs. milk lbs. fat 1st Year 68 382,584 13,953.8 2ndYear 69 435,324 16,888.8 3rd Year 66 454,532 17,402.2 4th Year 105 691,109 27,860.4 5th Year 108 696,152 28,163.9 6th Year 71 472,203 19,546.7 7th Year 71 444,854 19,763.3 8th Year 69 426,331 19,563.2 9th Year 77 486,332 22,522.5 Year 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th Number producing — More than 200 lbs. fat 37 56 55 71 89 Less than 200 lbs. fat 32 10 11 34 19 Highest individual production 306.4 369.8 415.3 385.17 411.68 Lowest individual production 99.4 93.3 124.1 79.94 122.62 Average lbs. milk Average lbs. fat per cow per cow 5626 205.2 6309 244.5 6784 259.7 6582 265.3 6446 260.7 6652 275.3 6266 277.9 6179 283.5 6316 292.5 6th 7th i 8th 9th 57 14 59 12 64 5 71 6 383 . 66 478. 22 447.91 493.78 106.49 117. 12 171.47 98.70 Table 7. — Herd Number 2 (Arranged by Years) Number Total Year cows lbs. milk 1st Year 123 724,349 2nd Year 121 858,031 3rd Year 123 932,684 4th Year 113 855,646 5th Year 130 817,440 6th Year 132 1,016,344 7th Year 117 742,610 8th Year 9th Year 114 862,304 10th Year 125 980,588 Year 1st 2nd 3rd Number producing — More than 200 lbs. fat. 83 103 111 Less than 200 lbs. fat... 40 18 12 Highest individual produc- tion 378.0 487.9 481.0 Lowest individual produc- tion 114.3 125.1 109.1 4th 96 17 Total lbs. fat 27,975.1 33,845.9 37,094.8 35,380.2 35,763.0 40,774.8 32,795.0 39,289.0 45,545.7 5th 98 32 6th 110 22 Average lbs. milk per cow 5889 7091 7583 7572 6288 6942 6347 7564 7844 7th 96 21 Average lbs. fat per cow 227.4 279.7 301.6 313.1 275.1 308.9 280.3 344.6 364.5 8th 9th 108 6 449.08 419.16 461.05 458.18 117.51 93.06 121.67 121.19 10th 124 1 539.1 579.7 155.91 136.9 BULLETIN 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 171 Table 8. — Herd Number 3, Ferndale Association (Arranged by Years) Average Number Total Total lbs. milk Year cows lbs. milk lbs. fat per cow 1st Year 30 196,326 10,022.3 6544.0 2ndYear 34 232,899 11,896.4 6849.9 3rd Year 33 243,691 12,284.7 7384.4 4th Year 36 256,473 13,139.9 7124.2 5th Year 35 252,662 12,374.2 7218.9 6th Year 33 227,259 11,235.2 6886.6 7th Year 29 198,913 9,993.7 6169.4 8th Year 35 274,755 15,381.8 7850.0 9th Year 35 303,058 17,008.6. 8658.8 Year 1st 2nd 3rd 4th 5th 6th Number in this herd producing — More than 200 lbs. fat 27 33 33 33 35 31 Less than 200 lbs. fat 3 10 3 2 Highest individual production fat, lbs. 553.4 548.5 609.7 677.3 514.8 483.6 Lowest individual production fat, lbs. 191.1 184.2 212.3 108.1 235.7 165.1 Average lbs. fat per cow 334.1 349.9 372 . 2 365.0 353.5 340.5 344.6 439.5 485.9 7th 8th 9th 29 35 35 576 .9 693 . 8 710.4 218.2 252.3 208.2 Although the records already given show improvement, Table 9 gives the records of a herd showing even better results for the first three years of testing. Table 9. — Improvement in Production During Three Years of Cow-Testing Association Work Number Total Total Year cows lbs. milk lbs. fat 1st Year 77 547,901 23,746.3 2ndYear 52 393,301 18,315.3 3rd Year 53 447,589 22,284.7 Average lbs. milk per cow 7115.6 7563 . 5 8445.0 Average lbs. fat per cow 308.4 352.2 420.5 While it can hardly be expected that the average herd in this state can hope to make such a decided improvement in three years' time, the records of the above herd illustrate what can be done by means of rigid culling. The total fat for the third year approaches the amount of the first year with 24 less cows. This means one less string to milk and feed, one less man to hire, all of which goes to increase the net returns. Table 10 gives a summary of seven years' work of the Ferndale Association from 1912 to 1918. Complete records are not available for the first three years of work. The list includes all cows in the as- sociation tested for over six months. The improvement in herds after testing in even old established dairy localities is plainly shown by the number of cows producing less than 200 pounds of butterfat. 172 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION Table 10. — Summary of Seven Years' Work, Ferndale Cow-Testing Association Year 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 No. of Cows 1091 1339 2100 2950 3014 2213 3193 600-700 lbs. fat 1 3 .... .... 4 4 12 500-600 lbs. fat 9 11 6 5 13 18 74 400-500 lbs. fat 72 64 63 91 118 158 345 300-400 lbs. fat 314 404 569 696 752 771 860 200-300 lbs. fat 477 505 963 1324 1437 957 1360 Under 200 lbs. fat.... 218 288 499 834 639 306 437 The future of a dairy herd must depend on the calves that are to be raised. Few people can expect to increase the production of their herds by buying cows from other herds (on the outside). By testing year after year one has an invaluable guide for selecting calves for the future herd. In Table 11, the record for production of the cows and heifers in a certain herd from 1909 to 1917 are included. Note from this table the records of the heifers coming fresh for the first time in 1916 and 1917. It is no small wonder that such a herd as this can show improvement. Cow 1 Age 6 3 n 3 5 6 6 6 9 4 4 4 5 5 4 6 2 6 8 6 4 3 3 4 6 3 7 6 2 1909 Lbs. fat 339.9 175.5 267.8 425.6 261.8 484.9 244.3 370.3 399.9 325.6 355 , 1 383.8 396.2 314.4 343.2 376.5 282.9 391.0 237.7 281.2 435 . 6 339.3 220.6 198.8 553.0 394.6 348.0 329.2 325.8 1910 Lbs. fat 375.8 340 6 247.0 495.0 1911 Lbs. fat 394 . 89 383.80 Table 1912 Lbs. fat 371 . 23 441.67 11. 1913 Lbs. fat 300.29 360 . 44 1914 Lbs. fat 258 . 93 363 . 24 1915 Lbs. fat 224 . 63 351.57 1916 Lbs. fat 1917 Lbs . fat 2 3 489 . 92 370.23 4 5 6 7 483.5 240.8 391.8 380.2 88.2 316.9 427.3 386.8 359.5 334.5 327.8 384.7 427.7 609.7 222.48 395.89 440.8 418.9 619.0 329.30 273.94 470.09 429 . 77 464 . 54 299.88 483.56 576.86 693.82 525.63 8 9 303 . 73 317.5 296.33 409.90 10 11 400.36 528.14 543.04 12 498 . 80 459.20 352.04 316.43 471.47 318.86 280.1 432.33 359 . 1 1 362.28 397.53 411.92 13 14 15 383 . 99 374.22 511.88 443.15 596.95 393.66 16 326.9 473 . 20 445.2 300.93 460.32 449.94 17 353 . 67 331.60 18 395.12 19 20 21 434.0 548.5 305.0 352.5 331.6 453 . 1 379 3 360.56 376.6 388.74 406.03 361.24 280.27 22 23 24 459 . 70 542.72 445 . 70 212.3 251.8 249 . 88 369.63 483.33 332.95 25 544.82 376.98 366.58 378.22 398.15 26 27 442.06 428.19 540.46 28 29 354.3 362.26 348.81 284.13 344.47 BULLETIN 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 173 Cow 30 Age 6 5 3 3 2 H 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 n 2 3 6 3 3 11 2 2 2 3 2 H 2 n 2 2 2\ 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1909 Lbs. fat 269.0 197.5 1910 Lbs. fat Table 11 — 1911 1912 Lbs. fat Lbs. fat {Continued) 1913 Lbs. fat 1914 Lbs. fat 1915 Lbs. fat 1916 Lbs. fat 1917 Lbs. fat 31 301.0 375.1 294 . 40 421.1 427.44 343.23 441 . 62 361 . 58 403 . 06 355.09 284 . 24 448.4 406.77 • 32 457.05 646.54 710 43 33 303.3 34 272.9 35 36 264.4 254.9 243.1 330.9 309.9 274.3 352.2 184.2 459.1 258.51 348.80 305.90 246.17 300 . 7 418.1 414.76 366.87 433.23 418.95 503.41 585 21 37 38 381.43 376.22 290.17 355.49 260.54 281.03 301.05 296.92 422.08 465.75 453 80 39 498.22 40 41 367.81 375.83 42 377^35 256.46 381.58 512 12 43 44 45 295.6 271.3 218.7 296.90 46 47 346.09 402 . 32 677.26 263.7 249 . 26 108.10 161.52 143.94 48 456.83 458.76 332.76 310.8 447 . 52 587.87 335.83 323.38 439.20 337.29 386.76 361.43 486.95 611.90 483.27 475.25 595.99 49 632 . 99 50 510.88 51 488.41 52 53 235 . 69 283.51 288 . 02 338.18 360.24 303.61 310.93 263.94 240 . 74 54 55 259.11 366.56 190.65 282.33 331.99 56 424.97 571.89 57 58 59 240.03 270.64 352 . 83 303.91 415.13 416.12 563 . 72 60 61 62 376.95 367.32 520.50 63 64 319.13 294.75 432.14 405 . 10 550 . 20 65 66 67 263 . 59 165.07 383 . 72 218.21 288 . 33 295.07 294 . 56 229.40 508.85 361.91 383.72 408.24 479 . 76 398.07 366.88 369.66. 340.73 318.62 252.33 528 . 35 68 69 586 . 34 70 394 . 61 71 617.76 72 472.08 73 464.11 74 516.17 75 336.27 76 628.12 77 424 . 53 78 482.30 79 " ; 208.25 80 616.77 81 248.86 82 314.67 83 301.79 174 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION SACRAMENTO-YOLO COW TESTING ASSOCIATION The Sacramento- Yolo Cow-Testing Association comprises herds located chiefly in Sacramento and Yolo Counties along the Sacramento River. Table 12 shows the results of three years' work of this associa- tion. The seven herds listed are those which have been in the associa- tion continuously during three consecutive years. There is an increase in the average production per cow of 389 pounds of milk and 12.7 pounds of butterfat. For the 640 cows in these seven herds it means Fig. 6. — Compare the conformation of this Holstein with the one in Fig. 7. an increase of 28,949 gallons of milk and 8,128 pounds of butterfat. If the herds listed had been selling market milk at 27 cents per gallon this would have been an increase of $7,816.00; or, if they had been selling butterfat at 50 cents per pound, it would have amounted to an additional return of $4,512.00. The testing for the entire three years did not cost over $2,900.00. We cannot always consider that the cow- testing work alone is responsible for increases in the average production of herds, because better feeding and management, conbined with the use of better bulls, usually follows in the wake of every cow-testing as- sociation, but the impulse to improvement at any rate came from the association. Bulletin 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 175 In order to stimulate an increased interest in better breeding, better feeding and to induce more careful culling the Sacramento- Yolo As- sociation has started a dairy cow competition for the benefit of its members, which has been remarkably successful. It closely follows the lines of the recent state-wide competition.* Judging from the results thus far obtained, the average production of the herds in the association will be greatly increased this year. The importance of publicity in this work cannot be overestimated. A great stimulus in any cow-testing association is the publicity which Fig. 7. — The Holstein above produced 7,837 lbs. milk containing 305 lbs. fat in one year. The cow in Fig. 6 produced 6,059 lbs. milk containing 214 lbs. fat in one year. Regular testing showed this difference. is given to the work through the publication of high records of pro- duction and other results in the various dairy papers. In many of the associations dairymen have been rather slow about weeding out the unprofitable cows (boarder cows). Competitions for members of the cow-testing associations lends additional interest to the work. Concrete evidence of this interest is given in the fact that there is already a waiting list of dairymen who are anxious to join this association. *See California Experiment Station Bulletin 301. 176 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION o H < o CO CO «i £ i— i Eh CO H O O o o 6 H is « U C OO HIM t— i oo ooTt< CO CO OS b- : : CO : iO CM : : i-i CO CO CN 00 CN rH OS TH CO CM CM rH c3 Sh OS CO tO t> rH rH CM CM ^ CM CM rH cq -r>:2 00 M H © CO O (N OO OS CN CO tO tO CN OO lO 00 CN OS CO tH CM CM OS (M CO CO iO >0 ^ (M CO CO CM CO OS tO Oi CM Tfri OS t> rH CO tJH "^ rH ^ on 1 P rH CN CO 00 CN tO CO rH tO CM CM "^ '■ r-i : CM rH a, > OOOiCCNO^OO oo Th CO CO Os tH t— 1 rH O 00 rH CM iM rH CO N cS+jo H050N»OCON fees. O^NNhhO >*S NCMHHNCNM o CM 00 O IO i> i— I tJH i— 1 OCOiONHTf co os »o CO to -h"c3 CD CD CO O CO OS CD <§<-< -HH 00 CO CD OS 00 OS Ooi OOSCMcOOtOto H£ i>"o"o"co"i>-"cn"o" tH CM rH rH CM rH rH IN o to b- tH b- CM ^ 00 CO CO Oi 00 rH CO CO CO CM 1>- CO to 00 ^ tO l> tH tH to to 00 rH CO CO rH OO IO t^ N^COCDOCOOi to T^oco^to cm co^ oo" ©" i>T o" t*" ^ co" tJH y-t 00 ^ OS tJH OS CM CO CM tH CO CO CM to o (M -HH l—i CD >H ■ (J 00 G CO o CO o to CD t/2 1—^ to ^ CM CM OS Tt* to OS t^ OS to to t^ CO 00 CO -^ rH rH CO rH CO CO rH CO t- tq^ O^ CN C© l^ Os_ t^ CO" !>■" O to" O" CN" Os" T* CN rH rH CN rH tO CM b- OS t^ CO •<* CO N Tt< Tji CO O © CO OS CO OS tH CO b- to CO tH -Hh to CO b- CM rH CO CM ^ CO CM CM OS tO OS O rH !>. ooj>^os^os^o to i>." oo" co" o" cm" o" o" t^ O 00 t*h CO to 00 rH 00 CM T^ to CO CN Tt< rH I> O 00 CO CO CO O CM CO rH O CM rH O OS O r-t iO o to CO ONiOioNCO-* o ^-1 t^ rH CM tH O OS CM TjH CM rH _ CM rH rH 00 to OONOOOiONiO NHH00 00CMCM NO^«TjlOJH tO 00 to to to to t^ o CO tO O OS O CO CO rH 00 tO CM CM OS 1> rH 00 O b- CM OS CM O OS CO CO to O tH CO tH CM t^ CO ^ tO CM CO CO CM OS CO CM 00 to CM CM CN to CO^ tO o CO CO I> cn" oo pa co" «. Z ° rtn tjh O ^ CO OS to CN OS CO CO OS 00 CO CO *^ CO 00 CO OS CN tO CO OS O rH CO 00 OS IO CO CO CN y-> CO CN rH CO CO CN tO OS OS rfH OS r-i OS CO t^ OS -* tH CN '. \- rH CN CO Tfl IO CO 1> 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 ^ ^O "Tj "O ^ 'O T2 « S_ U t-l rl f-< rH CO O CD CO CI) CD ^^ r T^ ^^ ^T^ M^ "T^ ^^ WHrHHhHHrH CO 'as O H rH CM CO T^ tO CO 1> 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 •73 T3 r O T3 ^ ^ 'O ^ tH rH »H rH S-l >H CD CD CD CD CD rT^ ^^ ^T* ^T^ "^^* ^T" ^^ HrWHWrHHMi a? H-3 O Eh rH CM CO r^ to CO t^ 0606660 £££££££ *"0 'O '"O 'C "TJ ^ "^ f_ ^h tn rH rH t-l t-l CD CD CD CD CD CD CD rT^ rT^ W^ f^' r ™T^ M^ ^^ j-H Hh HH rH hH HH rH CO CO "a! O Eh BULLETIN 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 177 Fig. 8.— A year's testing showed great variation in the production of the Jersey above and the one in Fig. 9. Fig. 9. — The Jersey above produced 6,471 lbs. milk containing 381 lbs. fat. The cow in Fig. 8 produced 5,259 lbs. milk containing 269 lbs. fat. Testing shows cows in their true light. 178 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION BODEGA COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION The Bodega Cow-Testing Association is located in Marin and Sonoma Counties. Hill pasture is the main reliance in feeding the dairy herds in this section and although it is probable that the high average produc- tion obtained in the other more favored sections in the state will never be realized, the dairymen in this region are capable of greatly improving their herds. Table 13 gives a summary of three years 'work of the association. In this summary are included only the cows that have lactation periods of over eight months. That there has been a constant and steady increase in production is shown by the fact that 47.1 per cent, of the cows in the association produced over 200 pounds of fat during the third year of the association work, while during the first year only 40.5 produced over 200 pounds. The need for continued and constant testing is very apparent from these figures. Table 13. — Three Years' Work of Bodega Cow-Testing Association 1915-16 1916-17 1917-18 Less than 100 lbs. fat 34 9 3 100-125 lbs. fat 49 47 14 125-150 lbs. fat 81 97 41 150-175 lbs. fat 125 131 65 175-200 lbs. fat 120 122 53 200-250 lbs. fat 184 189 94 250-300 lbs. fat 78 86 46 300-400 lbs. fat 15 27 17 400-500 lbs. fat 1 500-600 lbs. fat 1 687 709 333 1st year percentage of cows below 150 lbs. fat 23.9% 2nd year percentage of cows below 150 lbs. fat 21.5% 3rd year percentage of cows below 150 lbs. fat 17.3% 1st year percentage of cows over 200 lbs. fat 40.5% 2nd year percentage of cows over 200 lbs. fat 42.5% 3rd year percentage of cows over 200 lbs. fat 47. 1% NAPA-SONOMA COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION Tables 14, 15 and 16 give the summaries of the Napa-Sonoma, Napa-Petaluma and Sonoma-Marin Associations. As these associations covered practically the same territory, they are listed together. How- ever, the composition of the membership during these consecutive years was largely different. Comparisons should not be made between the various years' work of the association. The need for more testing, Bulletin 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 179 however, is definitely shown by studying each of these tables. It will be noticed that during the first year's work of this association, four complete herds were sold out, due to the fact that the owners realized that they were losing money. This fact could scarcely be determined in any other way than by actually testing the animals in these herds. Table 14. — Yearly Reports of Napa-Sonoma Cow-Testing Association Sept. 15 ; 1915 to Sept. 15, 1916 During lactation periods of 10-12 8-10 6-8 4-6 months months months months Totals No. of cows producing 400 lbs. fat or over 1 .... .... .... 1 300-400 lbs. fat 20 11 .... .... 31 200-300 lbs. fat 74 91 20 .... 185 150-200 lbs. fat 29 123 70 .... 222 Under 150 lbs. fat 4 70 180 .... 254 No. of cows on test at start of Association 985 No. of complete herds sold during the year 4 Oct. 1, 1916 to Sept. 30, 1917 No. of cows producing 400 lbs. fat or over 5 .... .... 5 300-400 lbs fat 9 29 4 .... 42 200-300 lbs fat 49 197 117 13 376 Under 200 lbs. fat 10 505 303 213 1031 Nov. 1, 1917 to Oct. 31, 1918 No. of cows producing 400 lbs. fat or over 11 2 .... .... 13 300-400 lbs. fat 59 39 .... .... 98 200-300 lbs. fat 67 204 88 6 365 Under 200 lbs. fat 21 361 264 107 753 In addition to the foregoing reports, the Petaluma Co-operative Creamery, (a dairymen's association, including many farmers in the Napa-Sonoma Association) compiled the following report from actual sales of butterfat marketed through the creamery. No additional com- ment is necessary on the work that should be done in this locality : " REPORT OF PETALUMA CO-OPERATIVE CREAMERY "Production Records for 1918 "This report is made that you may compare your factory (cows) and your ability as a manager, with others who are operating under the same or similar conditions. "Out of 156 herds we have carefully checked up the production of 98 herds and the results are given below. "The average price paid for churning fat during 1918 by this company was a fraction less than 56 cents per pound. We have used this figure in computing returns for the different groups. 180 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION " 3 herds containing 24 cows averaged 321.2 lbs. or $179.87 per cow. " 9 herds containing 112 cows averaged 279.6 lbs. or $156.57 per cow. "17 herds containing 499 cows averaged 216.3 lbs. or $121.13 per cow. "35 herds containing 1572 cows averaged 172.0 lbs. or $96.32 per cow. "34 herds containing 1952 cows averaged 124.4 lbs. or $69.66 per cow. "The average production for the 9S herds is 159 lbs. per cow and can be taken as a fair indication of the average for Sonoma and Marin Counties. "There is evidently a big opportunity to increase the production per cow in most of the herds in this section. "If this report points out to our dairymen the need of better bred cows, better fed cows, and the necessity of watching production records, then we have accomplish- ed the object intended." SAN JOAQUIN COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION The following report of the San Joaquin Cow-Testing Association shows summary results for the year's work 1915-16. This report, which is to be found in Table 15, is made up from herds belonging to dairymen who have remained in the association for another year's test, during the last year and a half of the association's existence. Herd number 200 Herd No. 1 25 Herd No. 2 14 Herd No. 3 39 Herd No. 4 7 Herd No. 5 10 Herd No. 6 1 Herd No. 7 7 Herd No. 8 4 Herd No. 9 1 Herd No. 10 28 Herd No. 11 52 Herd No. 12 26 Total.:. 214 Table 15 00 to 250 250 to 300 300 to 350 350 to 400 400 to 500 to Over 500 600 600 Total 10 27 10 7 .3 1 83 9 8 3 34 25 25 15 6 1 111 6 3 3 1 20 17 16 4 1 48 11 6 1 4 1 24 12 16 18 13 3 69 15 6 5 30 8 4 2 15 10 18 7 63 16 11 1 80 8 14 4 5 3 60 147 154 71 38 12 1 636 One cow in the association produced over 600 pounds of butterfat during the period of 12 months; she proved to be in a class by herself, as no other cow came within 175 pounds of her mark. Of the 636 cows tested, 422, or 66.3 per cent, of them, paid a profit over the cost of their feed and care and 214, or 33.7 per cent, failed to pay for their keep. In working out the cost of keeping a cow, 200 pounds of fat at an average price of 30 cents (1915), or $60, is taken as the cost of feeding a cow for a year. The value of her calf and manure is taken to cover the cost of her care and milking. Interest on the investment and de- BULLETIN 314 C0 W TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 181 preciation is not included in the $60, which even at that time was a very low figure for the cost of feed for the year. A great many " boarders " were sold after a six months' testing, which was sufficient in most cases to detect them. However, a few were held over for a second trial as they were taken sick during their period of test and did not have a fair chance or else they were heifers with their first lactation period and were tried again. This is often a very wise plan to pursue, as oftentimes it will pay to await the completion of a second lactation period before passing judgment on the value of a cow for dairy production. The work of this association was a great success,- but unfortunately it was used only by the dairymen who needed it the least. This has been found true in practically every • -association.-- If 33 per cent, of the cows in the best dairies in San Joaquin County proved to be "boarders," there is no wonder that there is often the cry among dairymen that there is no money in the dairy business. There should be 214 cows above the 300 mark, instead of below the 200 pound mark. The 300- pound cow would have paid a profit above the cost of her feed, while the 200-pound cow was kept at a loss. ■ KERN COUNTY COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION A summary of the 23 herds in the Kern County Cow-Testing As- sociation for the year 1916-1917 follows in Table 16. Herds 15 and 18 contain 18 cows each. The production of the cows in 15 was 139,557 pounds of milk containing- 5482.7 pounds of butterfat, while the 18 cows in" herd number 18 produced 83,484 pounds of milk and 2994.2 pounds of butterfat. With milk at 27 cents a gallon this would mean an increase of $1,760 in the income of herd 15 over herd 18. With fat at 50 cents per pound, the increase would be over $100 per month. The cows in number 18 barely paid for the cost of feed, re- turning little if anything for the labor. This state of affairs has been brought out not only in the results obtained in this association, but in every other association in the state. There are still herds which should not exist and the . cow-testing associations have been, most helpful in finding these unprofitable herds. Table 16.— Kern County Cow-Testing Association Herd No 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 -21 22 23 Totals Under 100 lbs. fat 000 00000000004003010000 8 Between 100-200 lbs. fat....: 4 4 5 1 2 3 2 10 13 10 17 4 13 2 90 Between 200-300 lbs. fat 13 3 15.5 5 49 1 4 5 3 15 12 16 8 7 5 1114 15 4 9 3 2 224 Between 300-400 lbs. fat 1 1 7 1 6 9 1 1 "1 7 4 7 4 11 6 4 1 1 73 Between 400-500 lbs. fat _0 ^ ^ J> _0 _0 J) jO JO JO _0 _1 _0 _0 "_0 0- [0 JO -0 ^ JJ J) _l _j* Tota]s 14 8 28 11 12 60 2 5 6 10 22 22 30 25 18 15 3118 35 8 12 3 4 397 182 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA — EXPERIMENT STATION KERN COUNTY ASSOCIATION PRODUCTION OF COWS IN HERDS-fBy PERCENT) L B5. FRT O-ioo ioo-aoo 200-300 300-1400 400-500 ORLAND COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION The Orland Cow-Testing Association (Glenn County), comprises a large number of small herds, chiefly located on the Orland Irrigation Project. The summary listed in Table 17 :t a compilation of the results from 105 herds. Even in the small herds in this association the owners were evidently not familiar with what their cows were doing before testing began in earnest, as is evidenced by the fact that close to 37 per cent, of the cows under test made less than 200 pounds of butterfat during the year. Bulletin 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 183 Table 17. — Orland Cow-Testing Association Production per year Under 100 lbs. fat 29 (2.2%) Between 100-200 lbs. fat 445 (34.7%) Between 200-300 lbs. fat 565 (44.0%) Between 300-400 lbs. fat 222 (17.3%) Between 400-500 lbs. fat 21 (1.6%) Between 500-600 lbs. fat 1 Total 1283 100.0 TULARE COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION Although this association has been in existence since 1912, complete records are available for only a few herds. Fortunately the records for several herds for two or three consecutive years have been obtained and are given below in Table 18. Improvement is shown in every herd listed with the exception of one. Table 18. — Tulare Cow-Testing Association No. Total Total Average Average cows lbs. milk lbs. fat lbs. milk lbs. fat Herd No. 1 1st Year 14 86,739 3373 6195 240.9 2ndYear 10 71,389 3047 7139 304.7 Herd No. 2 1st Year 10 69,522 2899 6952 289.9 2ndYear 13 95,353 3892 7335 299.4 3rd Year 7 69,342 2877 9906 411.0 Herd No. 3 1st Year 26 153,602 6737 5908 259.1 2nd Year 29 169,835 8720 5856 300.7 Herd No. 4 1st Year 45 326,328 10,945 7240.6 243.2 2ndYear 48 289,299 9,590 6027 199.8 Herd No. 5 1st Year 16 99,018 4484 6188.6 280.2 2nd Year 6 45,204 1861 7534 310.1 Herd No. 6 1st Year 6 55,234 2146 9205 357.6 2ndYear 10 93,809 3752 9380.9 275.2 Herd No. 7 1st Year 33 224,520 8,319 6804 252.1 2ndYear 46 345,056 12,478 7501 271.3 184 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION YOLO-SOLANO-COLUSA COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION Complete records of seven herds in this association are available for two consecutive years. These are given in Table 19. During the first year 21.9% of the cows in this association fell below 200 pounds of butterfat. During the second year this percentage fell to 11.8%, no cows going below 100 pounds of butterfat for the year. The improve- ment is especially noticeable in herd number 1 , where the 24 cows below 200 pounds during the first year were reduced to 8 during the following year, with no cows giving less than 100 pounds of fat. Table 19. — Summaries of Average Production for Herds First Year Totals Herd No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 7 Herds Under 100 lbs. fat 12 2 1 6 100-200 lbs. fat 23 9 3 3 6 5 4 53 200-300 lbs. fat 50 51 17 4 10 10 16 158 300-400 lbs. fat 22 8 2 3 2 5 6 48 400-500 lbs. fat 2 10 14 Second Year Under 100 lbs. fat 00000000 100-200 lbs. fat 8860005 27 200-300 lbs. fat 44 37 14 2 8 14 13 132 300-400 lbs. fat 29 6 2 5 8 5 9 64 400-500 lbs. fat 40002006 CORCORAN-HANFORD COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION Records of three herds in the Corcoran-Hanford Cow-Testing Association (Kings County), are available; the summaries tell the same tale as in the case of other associations. ; Table 20 Production — Herd No. I Under 100 lbs. fat 3 100-200 lbs. fat 39 200-300 lbs. fat 74 400-500 lbs. fat 10 500-600 lbs. fat RIVERDALE COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION Records of five herds in the Riverdale Cow-Testing Association, (Fresno County) are available. 53 per cent, of the cows in these five herds produced less than 200 pounds of butterfat, while only 11.8 per cent, made over 300 pounds. A herd such as number 5, with 56 cows 2 3 Total 1 4 8 29 56 124 54 88 216 10 25 45 1 1 BULLETIN 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 185 out of 80 producing less than 200 pounds of fat cannot return a fair profit on the investment. Unfortunately, herds such as number 5 are altogether too common in California. Table 21 Production— Herd No. 1 2 3 4 5 Total Under 100 lbs. fat 10 4 5 (2.7%) 100-200 lbs. fat 36 3 3 52 94 (50.3%) 200-300 lbs. fat 23 7 3 3 21 66 (35.3%) 300-400 lbs. fat 4 4 4 2 3 17 (9.1%) 400-500 lbs. fat 13 10 5 (2.7%) Lowest producers, lbs. fat 87 234 152 101 86 Highest producers, lbs. fat 405 441 409 327 363 IMPERIAL COUNTY COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION Records of only two herds were received from this association. Both of these herds were among the best in the county, having excellent averages. (It is hoped that in the future California will have many such herds). Herd No. 1 Herd No. 2 Number of Cows 29 10 Total milk, pounds 264,908 108,137 Total fat, pounds 10,364.3 3,627.8 Average milk, pounds 9,134.7 10,813.7 Average fat, pounds 357.39 362.78 YOLO COUNTY COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION Seven herds completed a year in this association (1914-15). The summary given below is in terms of milk production as well as fat pro- duction. Many dairymen producing market milk have failed to see reasons for testing. In Table 22 given below, it will be seen that the milk production varies in the same way as fat production does, and the dairyman depending upon the volume of milk should be as much interest- ed in cow-testing work as the one who depends upon butterfat produc- tion. Since milk records are available it is only a question of making the compilations. Again the market-milk producer has brought up the question of the test, admitting perhaps that the weighing of the milk is good practice. The test is important in that the producer of market milk should not allow his milk to fall below the legal standard. He should, therefore, take just as much interest in the testing of his cows as the one who depends upon the production of butterfat by the cows. 186 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION Table 22. — Yolo County Cow-Testing} Association Herd No. 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pounds of milk produced between — 2,000- 3,000 10 10 3,000- 4,000 2 12 4,000- 5,000 13 9 5,000- 6,000 2 3 5 3 10 6,000- 7,000 3 4 114 7,000- 8,000 2 7 113 8,000- 9,000 110 2 4 9,000-10,000 3 7 10,000-11,000 11 11,000-12,000 10 4 12,000-13,000 2 14,000-15,000 1 17,000-18,000 1 Pounds of fat between — 100-200 3 3 15 1 1 200-300 8 14 2 3 10 1 300-400 2 2 2 2 11 400-500 8 500-600 3 Total 2 5 6 19 8 22 5 18 6 20 10 18 1 11 3 5 5 1 3 1 1 5 28 18 56 15 34 2 10 3 SUMMARY In every section of California the need for cow-testing is apparent; this is shown in a striking manner by the records of the work of the various associations in the state published in this bulletin. Continued testing is necessary for progress. The dairyman who tests for one year only is not looking to the future. Cow-testing work gives a valuable breeding guide for the dairyman who wishes to build up his herd. Unfortunately the dairymen who need cow-testing the most use it the least. However, the records of the high-producing herds show that the greater the production the more careful the culling of the " boarder" cows must be. At present high prices for feed and labor a dairy herd must produce more than 200 pounds of butterfat per cow annually in order to yield a profit to the owner. Cow-testing associations have proved powerful aids in increasing the production and the returns from dairy herds; every dairy district in the state should have such an association and continue it year after year. The Farm Advisors in the various counties and the Division of Animal Husbandry of the College of Agriculture stand ready to aid in every way possible in the organization and continued work of these associations. Bulletin 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 187 APPENDIX I. CONSTITUTION AND BY-LAWS FOR COOPERATIVE COW-TESTING ASSOCIATIONS CONSTITUTION ARTICLE I.— NAME The name of this Association shall be CO-OPERATIVE COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION. ARTICLE II.— OBJECT The object of this Association shall be to provide means and methods for improv- ing the dairy qualities of the herds of members, through the periodical weighing and testing of each cow's milk, which will give reliable information, on the basis of which unprofitable cows may be eliminated and feeding done more economically; and fur- ther, by ascertaining the profit or loss as compared with the cost of feed for each cow in the herd, through a monthly record of the value of her product and of the cost of the food she consumes during the year; and in general to promote the dairy interests of the members. ARTICLE III.— PLACE OF BUSINESS The principal office and place of business shall be at ARTICLE IV.— MEMBERSHIP This Association shall be composed of dairymen or owners of dairy herds accept- able to the board of directors, who enter their herds for record, affix their signatures to the agreement, and agree to comply with the by-laws. ARTICLE V.— ORGANIZATION The governing body of this Association shall consist of a board of directors of seven active members to be elected at each annual meeting. The board of directors shall annually elect from their own number a president, vice-president, secretary, and treasurer, whose duties shah be those usually devolving upon such officers. The first election shall be held immediately after the election of the board. Subsequent elections shall be held annually on the day of the regular meeting of the board next ensuing after the annual election, the day to be fixed by resolution of the board of directors. Officers and directors shall hold their offices until their successors are elected. ARTICLE VI.— BUSINESS The authority to conduct the business of the Association shall be vested in the board of directors, a majority of whom shall constitute a quorum. ARTICLE VII.— ELECTION Election of officers and directors shall be by ballot and majority vote. ARTICLE VIII.— AMENDMENTS This constitution may be amended by a two-thirds vote of the active members of the Association present at any annual meeting. 188 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION BY-LAWS ARTICLE I.— MEETINGS Section 1. — An annual meeting of this Association shall be held at a place and time designated by the board of directors in on the first Tuesday of the month preceding the month in which this Association began actual work, for the purpose of electing a board of directors and for the trans- action of such other business as may lawfully come before the said meeting. Section 2. — The president shall call one meeting every month, to be held at some member's home or elsewhere, for the purpose of discussing topics of interest to dairymen, and shall at each meeting appoint a committee of three members who shall prepare a program for the next meeting. No member shall be obliged to serve on two successive program committees. Section 3.— SPECIAL MEETINGS. The president or board of directors, acting through the secretary, may call a special meeting at any time. If the special meeting is for the transaction of some special business the secretary must mail each member a written or printed notice thereof at least five days prior to such meeting. Such notice shall state the object of the meeting and no other business shall be trans- acted thereat. Section 4.— MEETINGS OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS. All meetings of the board of directors shall be called by the secretary on the order of the president or three members of the board. ARTICLE II.— BUSINESS The board of directors shall have the management and control of the business of the Association. They may employ such agents as they deem advisable, fix the rates of compensation, and make contracts with all such agents as they deem ad- visable, fix the rates of compensation and make contracts with all such agents and employees. ARTICLE III.— VACANCIES Whenever any vacancies occur in the board of directors by death, resignation, or otherwise, the same shall be filled without undue delay by the majority vote of the remaining members of the board. The person so chosen shall hold office until the next annual meeting. ARTICLE IV.— ARREARS OF DUES No member whose dues, as stated in the agreement, are sixty days in arrears, shall be allowed to vote at any business meeting. ARTICLE V.— ORDER OF BUSINESS 1. Reading minutes of previous meetings. 2. Report of secretary. 3. Report of treasurer. 4. Reports of committees. 5. Unfinished business. 6. New business. 7. Election of officers. ARTICLE VI.— AMENDMENTS These by-laws may be amended by a two-thirds vote of the active members present at any regular meeting. Bulletin 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 189 II. MEMBERS' AGREEMENT FOR COW-TESTING ASSOCIATIONS WHEREAS, the CO-OPERATIVE COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION is organized for the purpose of providing means for the co-operation of its members in ascertaining the relative merits of their cows, and in the economical production of dairy products; and WHEREAS, the Association agrees, from monthly tests (twenty-four hours in length) made by an employee of the association, to furnish each member with a record of the individual performance of each animal subscribed, and to advise the members in regard to economical feeding and the improvement of their herds; and WHEREAS, we by the act of affixing our signatures below express our desire of becoming members of said Association, for the object above stated; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of our admission to membership and the services above mentioned, we make this agreement with said association and with the other persons who are now or shall hereafter become members of said association ; WF, SEVERALLY agree and promise to pay to the treasurer of the Association the sum of for ONE YEAR'S RECORD of each and every one of the cows in our respective herds as entered below opposite our signatures; with the following provisos, namely: That the charge for one herd shall not be less than ; and that the tester shall not test more than in one day, but shall give two or more days' service each month, in proportion to the number of cows in the herd, if larger than thirty; and we severally agree to pay for the yearly records of our herds on this basis. It is agreed that the rate of payment for additional cows entered after the year is begun shall be per month per cow or per cow for the remainder of the year, at the option of the owner. WE AGREE that if any cow in the test dies or is sold from the herd before the year is ended, there shall be NO REDUCTION in the amount to be paid; but another cow may be substituted in place of the SOLD OR DEAD COW. Aside from this no cow shall be REPLACED BY ANOTHER, in the number of cows undergoing test. The secretary must be notified before the second test of all new cows, whether substituted for ones previously in the test or entered as additional cows. We severally agree to make payments for such testing SEMI-ANNUALY, the first payment to be due on or before the last day of the month in which the tester begins actual work, and the second payment to be due on or before the last day of the sixth month thereafter. And we severally agree to TAKE OR SEND the money to the treasurer of the Association WITHOUT BEING CALLED ON THEREFOR. We further agree to furnish BOARD AND LODGING for the man employed as tester by said Association for at least one day of each month, and over Sunday and holidays, at the house to which his regular course brings him to on Saturday or the day before a holiday; and to CONVEY him to his next place of work or to STABLE AND FEED his horse while he is staying at the farm in lieu of furnishing him trans- portation to his next place of work. 190 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA — EXPERIMENT STATION We jointly and severally agree to be subject to the by-laws of this Association. This agrement is not binding unless the said Association secures a sufficient number of cows to warrant starting operations. The term of this agreement shall be ONE YEAR from the time the testing begins. For the Co-operative Cow-Testing Association. President. Attest. Secretary SIGNATURES OF MEMBERS Number Amount No. Date Signature of Cows to be paid 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. III. CONTRACT OF EMPLOYMENT OF TESTERS THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this day of , one thousand nine hundred and by and between the .....Testing Association of , State of , hereinafter called the Association, party of the first part, and State of , hereinafter called the Tester, party of the second part; WHEREAS, the Association is organized for the purpose of providing for the cooperation of its members in ascertaining the relative merits of their cows, and in the production of dairy products, and has agreed with its members to furnish the BULLETIN 31-t cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 191 services of a competent person to make monthly tests of the cows subscribed by them for the purposes of said tests, to keep a record of the original performance of each animal tested and advise said members regarding the economical feeding and im- provement of their herds; AND WHEREAS, in the furtherance of the aforesaid objects and purposes, the Association is desirous of employing said for making the tests and performing the services and duties along the lines stated afore- said and according to the terms and conditions hereinafter expressed, and the said representing himself as thoroughly competent to perform the services required and wishing to accept such employment ; NOW, THEREFORE, THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSETH: FIRST: The Association agrees to employ said Tester for the period of one year, commencing on the day of 19 , and ending 19 , to perform the services hereinafter set forth, paying him an annual salary of dollars therefor, in equal monthly installments, on the day of each month. (a) Making monthly tests of such herds as he may be directed so to do by said Association for determining the relative merits of the respective herds. The herds selected shall belong to members of said Association and be subscribed by them for the purpose of said tests, and said herds shall not exceed a number that can not be conveniently tested in twenty-six (26) days of each month. The animals required to be tested each day shall not exceed thirty (30) in number. Said Tester shall keep a record of each cow tested, and shall advise the members of the Association, owning the cows, how to feed the animals economically and how to improve their herds. (b) Obtaining the weight of all feeds given each cow entered for record each testing day and keeping a record of the number of days each cow is on pasture. (c) Weighing and taking proportionate samples of the milk of each cow entered the evening before and the morning of the testing day. (d) Testing for butterfat the milk of each cow entered. (e) Placing the data obtained from the tests on records blanks furnished therefor by the Association and copying the records of each herd on the record book of the owner. (f) Carrying a skimmed milk bottle and testing the skimmed milk to show the present efficiency of the separators used by the members of the Association. (g) Properly filling out and sending in to the proper State official a monthly report of the work provided for herein, if such report is required by the State author- ities. (h) Making a yearly summary of the records of each member's herd and entering the same in the Association's record book and in the books of its respective members. (i) Making a yearly summary of the entire herds tested, preparing two copies of same, one for the official in charge of cow-testing association work for the State, and the other for the United States Department of Agriculture. SECOND: The tester hereby agrees to faithfully, promptly and efficiently perform all the aforementioned services in manner and upon the conditions herein- before outlined, and according to such directions and plans that may be given him in relation thereto by said Association, accepting as a consideration therefor thb 192 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION salary, payable in equal monthly installments, as specified aforesaid. Payment of said salary is conditioned upon the prompt and efficient performance of all duties and services contemplated by this agreement, and failure on the part of the Tester to perform such duties and services in manner as herein provided shall operate to give the Association authority to summarily dismiss said Tester and terminate this agreement without the Association incurring any liability to said Tester by reason of taking such action, and if said Tester shall be dismissed for cause, as stated, such action shall operate as a forfeiture of his last month's salary to the Association. The secretary of said Association shall examine the records of the Association not less than one week before the day of the month on which the installment of the tester's salary is payable hereunder, and if the records of said Association disclose that the tester has been negligent in the performance of the services herein required, payment of the salary due said tester shall be withheld by the Association until the tester has brought the records required by this agreement accurately to date. THIRD: It is mutually understood and agreed between the parties hereto as follows : 1. That the Association shall have each of its members furnish said Tester with board and lodging for at least one day each month, and over Sunday and on a legal holiday, if his regular course of employment brings him to a member's farm on Saturday or the day before a holiday; and to convey the Tester to his next place of work or to a stable and feed his horse in lieu of transporting him to his next place of work. 2. That the Association shall furnish the Tester with the necessary outfit for the execution of the work herein provided for, for which outfit the Tester shall be entirely responsible, except unavoidable breakage. Said Tester shall, upon demand, return the outfit so provided, to the Association, complete and in good condition. 3. That said Tester shall notify the Association and the State official in charge of cow-testing associations at least one nonth before the end of the fiscal year whether he wishes to continue as Tester for said Association for another year. 4. That in the event the Association disbands for any cause whatsoever such disbandment shall operate as a termination of this agreement and thereafter no salary shall be due or payable hereunder to said Tester. IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have exectued this agreement on the day, month and year first hereinbefore written. Testing Association. By President. By Secretary. Bulletin 314 cow TESTING ASSOCIATIONS IN CALIFORNIA 193 CONTRACT OF COW TESTING DEPARTMENT OF SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY FARM BUREAU Whereas, the San Joaquin County Farm Bureau Cow Testing Department has been organized for the principal purpose of providing means for the co-operation of its members in ascertaining the relative merits of the cows and in the economical production of their product, and Whereas, the Cow Testing Department agrees from monthly tests made by an employee of the department to furnish each member with a record of the individual performance of each animal subscribed, and to advise the members in regard to the economical feeding and improvement of their herd, and Whereas, I, , a member of the San Joaquin County Farm Bureau, am desirous of becoming a member of said department for the object above stated. Now, therefore, in consideration of my membership and the services above mentioned, I agree and promise to pay to the tester or secretary of the San Joaquin County Farm Bureau for the Cow Testing Department, the sum of 15 cents per head per month for each cow tested, if the herd is less than fifty (50) cows; 12 cents per head per month for herds containing fifty (50) or more up to one hundred (100) cows; 11 cents per head per month for herds over one hundred (100) cows, all cows in herd milking to be tested, and I agree to pay monthly for such testing as it is done; and I agree that if for any reason, I do not wish to have my herd tested when the tester calls on his regular round that I will pay the amount agreed upon as though the test were made; and I agree to furnish board and lodging for the tester employed by the Cow Testing Department for at least one day each month, and over Sunday if his regular course brings him to my house on Saturday. The terms of this agreement shall be for one year and the signer hereto becomes a member of the Cow Testing Department for that period. Dated, Stockton, Cal., Signed Address Number of Cows