94 Journal of Agricultnre, Victoria. [10 Feb., 1919. 



came under notice recently of a fanner who milked twenty-six cows on 

 a farm somewhat understocked, yet his cash return for the year was 

 within a few pounds of that of his neighbour, who had milked forty- 

 eight head on a very much overstocked farm. The smaller herd had 

 sufficient feed all the time, while the other, prohably, only had enough 

 during the flush of the spring. Tn the latter case, nearly twice as much 

 work was done by the owner for a no greater cash return; or really 

 for less, if the money invested in the extra land and cattle is taken 

 into consideration. 



How many cows are there in Victoria at present capable of producing 

 250 lbs. of butter fat per annum, but which are making less than 150 lbs. 

 per year, owing to insufficient feeding? What sane farmer would get 

 two horses to do a one-horse job, or buy a four-horse power engine when 

 one of half its power would do his work? On the other hand, how 

 many dairy farmers are milking and finding paddock room for a large 

 herd of cows, and getting no more return from them than half the 

 number would produce if properly fed? The low average return of 

 less than 150 lb. per cow shows there must be' very many farmers 

 working their herds on this principle. When dairy herds are to be 

 found averaging less than £6 a head per year, with butter fat averaging- 

 Is. 4d. per lb., is it any wonder that the cry is heard, '' Dairying does'nt 

 pay." However, the trouble does not lie with the cow, but rather, in 

 the majority of caes, the cause arises from insujficient feeding. Illus- 

 trating this is a case in which two dairymen bought a line of heifer, 

 and divided them equally; yet, with one man, the year's return was 

 about 50 per cent, more than that of the other, the only apparent reason 

 being that one lot of cattle had sufficient feed whilst the other had not. 



The old comparison which likens a dairy cow to a machine is too 

 often lost sight of, and especially is it forgotten that the cow machine 

 requires a certain amount of raw material for her upkeep before she 

 can produce profitably. Put into figures, it means that about 60 per 

 cent, of her full daily feed requirements (which is, roughly, about 1 lb. 

 of feed per 10 lb. of body weight) goes for her bodily sustenance, and 

 only such surplus as may be supplied to her above this is available for 

 the production of milk. This is the reason why, on overstocked farms, 

 production of milk eases off, or even stops altogether, as soon as the 

 flush of the spring grazing is passed. Dairy farmers who are good 

 feeders are rarely ever without a reserve fodder supply, and conse- 

 quently droughts have not the same serious menace to them as to 

 those whose stock are always more or less underfed. Such of their cows 

 as fail to give satisfactory results require but little " topping off " for 

 the meat market, while the man who is an indifferent or careless feeder 

 rarely has anything other than store cattle. 



Again, it is only the owner of well fed cows who can truly estimate 

 each cow's dairy value. The scales and Babcock tester only tell what 

 a cow is doing, and not what she can do, for any shortage of feed will 

 at once set a limit to her producing capability. An under-fed herd 

 may possibly yield a good return in a particularly favorable season; 

 but even then the calves dropped will not be healthy, and losses from 

 impaction, redwater, cripples, and kindred ailments, will probably make 

 big inroads on his profits. 



