474 



EXPERIMENT STATION RECORD. 



[Vol. 40 



The great influence of the production capacity of the individual cow on the 

 labor income, as well as the relation of production to the other two major fac- 

 tors, is indicated in the following table: 



Milk yield per cow; its influence on labor income, and its relation to size of herd, 



and area cultivated. 



Yield of milk per cow. 



2.000 or less.. 



2.001 to 2,600. . 

 2,501 to 3,000.. 

 3,ooi to 3,600.. 

 3. ".oi to 4,000. . 

 4,001 to 4,500.. 

 4. .',01 to 5.000.. 

 5,001 and over. 



(In aria. 



Average. 



Num- 

 ber of 

 farms. 



29 

 61 

 78 

 62 

 40 

 15 

 10 



Owners. 



cows c :°p 



per arres 



11.5 

 19.0 

 21.2 

 21.3 

 19.1 

 23.2 

 30.9 

 20.6 



52.0 

 56.9 

 58.8 

 60.0 



I 1.9 

 63.1 

 55.8 



20.3 



58. 2 



Labor 



in- 

 come. 



- $125 



- 161 

 406 



738 



1,083 

 1,618 



1,652 



457 



Tenants. 



Num- Cows 

 ber of per 

 farms, farm. 



11 

 24 

 43 



37 

 19 



15 

 7 



4 



25.2 



25.8 

 28.5 

 27.0 

 25. 1 

 22.7 

 23.0 



26.3 



Crop 



acres 



per 



farm. 



57.2 

 76.. 4 

 75.9 

 68. 1 

 73.2 

 69.1 

 59.1 

 94.5 



71.7 



Labor 



in- 

 come. 



$260 



1M 

 3S3 

 644 

 896 

 091 

 610 

 1,293 



557 



The high-producing cows tended t<> belong to the larger herds especially 01) 

 the owner farms, but their tendency to occur on farms of larger crop acreage 

 was not marked. In fact one of the author's tables indicate that the Dumber 

 of crop acres per cow steadily decreases with Increased size of herd. (Jreater 

 efficiency in the utilization of man and horse labor is associated with t lie bigger 

 herds and the larger farms, and this is an Important Item in their success. A 

 relatively large proportion of crop acres in small grains was profitable mainly 

 because of decreased necessity of purchasing concentrates. An increased per- 

 centage of area devoted to raising corn did not result in lessened purchasing 

 of concentrates and did not materially increase the labor income. The rela- 

 tively few farms where corn, small grain, or hay were sold yielded considerably 

 larger labor incomes than the others. 



Tho crop acreage on tenant farms was larger than on owner farms, but the 

 relative value was about equal, averaging about 36 per cent. The owners had 

 29 per cent of their farm area in permanent pasture, the tenants 21 per cent. 

 The labor income of 28 per cent of the owners and 12 per cent of the tenants 

 was zero or negative. 



In the opinion of the author, these farms are too highly specialized in the 

 production of market milk. The growing of orchard fruits could be profitably 

 extended and would result in a more efficient use of labor. Poultry raising 

 also deserves consideration as a desirable adjunct to dairying. Dairying as 

 Followed on these farms increases soil fertility, but most of them would be 

 benefited by a more extensive use of lime, which could easily be secured locally. 

 A reorganization of the crop systems of these farms is advocated and a 5-year 

 rotation suggested. 



A group of 160 farms where 98 per cent or more of the receipts were from 

 cows was selected for a special study of the cost of producing market milk. 

 The amounts of feed and labor required to produce 100 lbs. of milk was found 

 to be grain 89.7 lbs., silage 31.95 lbs., hay and forage 59 lbs., pasture 1.86 days, 

 and man labor 2.81 hours. The amounts required to keep a cow for a year 

 were grain 2,577 lbs., silage 2,075 lbs., hay and forage 3,832 lbs., pasture 121 

 days, and man labor 182.6 hours. The credits for calves sold and for manure 

 not produced on pasture covered about two-thirds of the other costs, uot count- 



