2 THE CREAMERY PATRON S HANDBOOK. 



$65 per cow for the year, for the cream in his milk, the skim-milk being re- 

 turned to him. The cost of keeping was $35 per cow. This left him a profit 

 of $30 per cow. To another patron in the same creamery, was paid $35 per 

 cow. The cost of keeping his cows was $30 per cow. He received $5 per 

 cow profit. The first patron received six hundred per cent, more of net 

 profit than the second man. The milk of both was taken by the Babcock 

 test, and the butter of both sold at the same price. This tremendous differ- 

 ence in profits lay at the farm end of the business, and not at the creamery. 

 The first patron was a reading, thinking man who kept his mind at constant 

 study on all the points we have mentioned. The second patron did not 

 believe in such things, and he lost $25 per cow for his way of thinking. When 

 he came to compare his ideas and methods with the first patron, he made up 

 his mind that it did not pay to despise dairy knowledge and a better educa- 

 tion in the things that so closely belonged to his business. 



This leads us to suggest that every creamery should prepare a yearly 

 report setting forth the name of each patron; the number of cows in his 

 herd, and the cost of their yearly keeping; whether a silo was used or not; 

 the pounds of milk and the butter yield per cow; the average price at which 

 the butter sold for the year, and the amount received in cash per cow for each 

 dollar spent in feed. Such a report would show each patron at once just 

 what his neighbor's cows were earning, by which he could compare his own 

 work and see whether his ideas were as profitable as they should be, or not. 

 Such a system of reporting would act as a great stimulus to thousands of 

 dairy farmers, and result, we believe, in great benefit to the creamery. What 

 every man needs is a comparative knowledge of the dairy facts about him, 

 and such a report would yield that knowledge. Shut up within our own 

 line fences, we "measure ourselves by ourselves," and so continue to confirm 

 ourselves in mistaken ideas and methods. 



As useful as is the creamery, it is productive of some bad effects on the 

 minds of certain farmers who patronize it. To illustrate: In 1885, there 

 were over one thousand dairy farmers in Jefferson County, Wis., who were 

 making butter and selling it on commission in Chicago and other cities. 

 They were thus brought sharply in contact with the demands of the market, 

 and the market was forcing them every day up to. a higher and more profit- 

 able plane of dairy management. These men were consequently anxious 

 to learn all that was necessary to know about cows and their proper 

 handling. Their minds were constantly being broadened and brightened 

 by their immediate relation to a very exacting market. 



Now, the creamery has come and, to a certain extent, has stepped in 

 between them and the market, so that they do not as clearly see their own 

 responsibility to the quality and price of the butter as they did before. The 

 consequence is that many of these men have grown careless and indifferent 

 to their own improvement. Their standard of dairy farming has been low- 

 ered and they are not as successful handlers of cows as they were in 1885. 



This is a most serious mistake, for every man is in reality just as much 



