48 N. H. Agr. Experiment Station [Bulletin 275 



next highest income had half as many cows, about the same produc- 

 tion per cow, same price for milk, nearly as high production per man, 

 a large income from miscellaneous sources and low cash expenses. 

 The operator with lowest income had a small herd of 16 cows, fair 

 production per cow, low price for milk, no net increase from stock, 

 poor pastures, and low output per man. 



A general idea of the range of factors on individual farms can be 

 had when the 38 farms are grouped according to family income. The 

 first group of 13 had incomes over $700, the second group, from $175 

 to $700. and the third below $175. The averages in these groups were 

 $1091, $372 and -$294, respectively. 



Within the first group are two farms having only 19 cows and one 

 with more than 50 cows. The average for the group is 30 cows. In 

 the second and third groups the average is about 23, the number rang- 

 ing from 11 to more than 40 in the second, and from 13 to 35 in the 

 third. The second group had no advantage over the third in size of 

 the cow herd. 



The reason for the higher net returns in the second group compared 

 with the third must be in advantages in some of the other factors. 

 In this case these are mainly the higher price received for milk, higher 

 miscellaneous income, and lower expenses. 



The first group tended to have higher milk production per cow, bet- 

 ter price for milk, larger net increase in livestock, less protein hay but 

 heavier grain rations per cow, greater output per man and higher 

 expenses. 



VARIATIONS IN PERSONNEL 



As this study progressed the authors were impressed again and again 

 with the possibilities of improvement in the management of many of 

 the farms. To be sure, some of the variations are not within the con- 

 trol of the farmer, as, for example, the difference in price of milk due 

 to being in Grade A or Grade B territoiy, and the differences due to 

 soil and farm topography. As far as income is concerned, some of 

 these differences are at least partially evened up by capitalizing farms 

 with good locations and good soil at proportionally higher values. But 

 after making due allowance for these uncontrollable factors, there are 

 still marked variations which can be accounted for only by differences 

 in the effecti^•eness with which the managers do their work. 



High achievement in dairying requires a diversity and high quality 

 of skill, a wide knowledge of technical agriculture, constant energy and 

 ability to plan and to execute the plans such as only a few possess. 

 The ^'alying degrees in which men fall short of having these qualities 

 in balance accounts to no small extent for the great differences in pro- 

 duction per man and in milk production per cow. Some who are espe- 

 cially interested in cows tend to let the crop work slide. Others who 

 are good crop men may have little interest in their stock. Still others 

 are not able to apply themselves to either task at full capacity because 

 of lagging interest. Such men tend to have no objective and merely 

 drift along doing chores and other work absent-mindedly, making no 



