282 IOWA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
of milk characteristic of the Jersey with the thin milk of the Holsteins. 
There are, of course, exceptions, but even with these there is no telling 
what will result from the second cross. 
It has long been an axiom of the breeder that the sire is half the herd, 
and it is generally accepted as a fit expression of an important rule. 
The skillful breeder of any kind of stock does not need to have it point- 
ed out to him how important it is that the sire be properly selected. 
If he is a skillful breeder, it is largely because he realizes the import- 
ance of the sire and knows how to select him. While the skilled breed- 
er realizes the importance of this in breeding, the average dairyman 
does not give the question of the selection of the sire one-tenth the 
attention the importance of the question demands. Thousands of men 
make use of a scrub or grade sire on account of mistaken economy in 
cost rather than pay a few dollars more for an animal that is almost 
certain to transmit desirable qualities. 
It is not surprising that we have so many worthless cows. They 
come by their worthlessness in the majority of the cases from sires 
worse than worthless. Some of these scrub bulls are registered in 
the herd books. 
The most forceful means I have at hand to illustrate the remarkable 
difference in sires is to show some results from our own herd. 
In 1884 the Missouri Agricultural College bought four registered 
Jersey cows and the entire herd we have on hand today is descended 
from these cows. Of course, herd bulls have been purchased from out- 
side, but no female has been bought. Since 1892 complete milk and 
butter fat records have been kept of every cow. Up until 1901 practically " 
every female was retained in the herd regardless of her dairy qualities. 
These conditions give an opportunity to study the effect of sires which 
can hardly be duplicated anywhere. 
The first bull used was Missouri Rioter, a son of Bachelor of St. 
Lambert. There is no record indicating the dairy quality of his dam. 
In fact, his sire is the only animal in his pedigree known to be a strong 
breeder. This bull was a very weak breeder. His daughters averaged 
4,336 pounds of milk per year while their dams averaged 5,380 pounds, 
a decline on the average of 1,044 pounds of milk per year each. The 
average fat production of the dam was 234 while the daughters aver- 
aged only 216, a decline of 18 pounds per cow from the dams to the 
daughters. 
The income from ten daughters, counting milk at six cents per quart, 
fell $313.20 per year behind the dams. Counting fat at twenty-five 
cents the loss was $45.00. As long as this bull remained in the herd 
it was going backward in production instead of ahead. Suppose the 
herd had had thirty daughters of such a bull. Each year we would 
have been $135.00 behind what the dams produced, counting fat at 
twenty-five cents. If these cows were milked six years each the total 
loss would be $820.00. This sum would buy several good bulls. 
The next bull was Hugorotus. This was a cheap bull without any high 
tested animals in his pedigree. His mother, however, is said to have 
been a good cow. The daughters of this bull were inferior to their 
