make a few improvements and get 

 oriented before he is able to effectively 

 take additional steps. If the sugges- 

 tions made in this bulletin seem be- 

 yond practical reality to a particular 

 individual, perhaps he can make a 

 few changes now in the direction of 

 greater efficiency and then after a few 

 years he can visualize his future farm 

 organization with a different perspec- 

 tive. Since the purpose of the study 

 was to project, if possible, pi-actices 

 into the future, the discussion neces- 

 sarily has been beyond immediate re- 

 ality to many dairymen. It may in- 

 dicate direction and stimulate obser- 

 vation of present methods and of pos- 

 sibilities of improvement. 



In examining each task, or a seg- 

 ment of a task, and in raising ques- 

 tions such as — Is it essential? Can it 

 be eliminated or simplified? — the au- 

 thors were confronted with complex 

 problems involving dairy technology, 

 sanitation, health of animals, produc- 

 tion, and most economic production. 

 In many cases, very little or no data 

 were available upon which to formu- 

 late decisions. Practical dairymen 

 have strong opinions about the ef- 

 fect of certain practices and yet oc- 

 casionally one or more dairymen have 

 changed or eliminated such practices 

 and seem to have maintained produc- 

 tion. An attempt has been made to 

 proceed on a forward looking basis, 

 obtaining the advice of dairy tech- 

 nologists, practical dairymen, and 

 others, and avoiding as far as pos- 

 sible the bias due to habit and custom. 



Sf-anchion Type Barns 



The study was confined to chore 

 practices in conventional stanchion 

 type barns. In doing so, there was 

 no intent to make comparisons or 

 draw conclusions with respect to pen 

 type and stanchion type barns for 

 New Hampshire. There has been 

 little opportunity in this state to ob- 

 serve chore work in pen type barns 



operating under normal farm condi- 

 tions. The problem of a satisfactory 

 and abundant bedding material has 

 restrained farmers from developing 

 the pen type of housing for their 

 cows. A few, however, are housing 

 their older heifers and even a few 

 dry cows loose in pens. This practice 

 seems to work out satisfactorily and is 

 discussed under Young Stock in Chap- 

 ter XII. 



Relation f-o New Hampshire 

 Farms 



The analysis of the problem has 

 been directed quite largely to large 

 dairy enterprises. The basic data 

 were collected from farms with 20 to 

 55 cows and have been adjusted to a 

 40-cow basis for comparison. The 

 suggested schedules have been pointed 

 toward a 40-cow farm. The authors 

 of this bulletin recognize that most 

 of the present herds on specialized 

 farms are small.* They are deeply 

 concerned about the prospects and fu- 

 ture of the small specialized dairy- 

 man who depends on 8 to 10 cows for 

 his living. They are sensitive to the 

 ever-widening gap in efficiency, in 

 output of milk per worker, and in net 

 income between the small operator 

 and the man who has followed a sound 

 program of expansion to use re- 

 sources to greater advantage. 



However, they feel that an expan- 

 sion to large volume of output and 

 adoption of modern methods is essen- 

 tial to the continuation of the dairy 



* UNH Agricultural Experiment Station 

 Bulletin 340 (1942), Dairy Opportunitij Areas 

 in New Hamijshire by Harry C. Woodworth 

 and John C. Holmes. Assuming that the 

 9115 farms reporting less than six cows in 

 the 1943 tax assessment were noncommercial 

 dairies, the 3818 farms reporting 6 cows or 

 more were distributed as follows. : 



Pei'centage of commercial 

 Size of herd No. of farms dairy fa-rms 



6 to 10 1839 48.2 



11 to 15 956 25.0 



16 to 20 492 12.9 



Over 20 531 13.9 



3818 100.0 



There has been a definite trend in increase of 

 farms with over 20 cows, but no estimates of 

 the distribution in 1950 are now available. 



