276 ILLINOIS DAIRYMEN'S ASSOCIATION. 



by the cows substituted for them during the first weekly test. 

 The owner began to go beyond the boundaries of his own com- 

 munity to buy cows of approved ability, and the comparison made 

 here is to show how rapidly the standard of production was rais- 

 ed. The dates of calving and the date when the test week ended 

 are given in each group to show how long the cows had been 

 fresh. Although the stage of lactation and the season of the year 

 are not entirely comparable in the two groups, the superior excel- 

 lence of the latter is apparent. Notice that the average yield per 

 week of the seven cows which were' sold is 113.24 pounds of milk 

 and 4.88 lbs. butter fat, while for the other cows it is 224.14 lbs. 

 milk and 8.21 lbs. of butter fat, the production in the latter case 

 being nearly twice as much as in the former. The season or 

 improper food, cannot be offered as a valid excuse for the low 

 production of the original herd, because it was well fed so that 

 cows of proper capacity calving on August 16th and October 18th 

 should have been yielding more than 81.8 and 95.6 pounds of 

 milk, respectively, per week. Some of the new cows, after hav- 

 ing been in milk two months during the fall, were producing 

 from 220 to 264 pounds of milk per week, containing as high as 

 nine pounds of butter fat. If the yearly production of the orig- 

 inal herd could have been obtained, it would stand in striking 

 contrast to the annual production of cows 10 to 14, inclusive. 

 The fact is, the owner felt they were too poor to be retained in 

 a herd where progressive methods were in vogue. However, one 

 should be careful about disposing of a cow on the evidence of one 

 or two tests unless he happens to know she is not a persistent 

 producer. For example : No. 4 was yielding enough at the time 

 of testing to justify her retention in the herd, but the owner hap- 

 pened to know she would not hold out. 



Table 4 gives the annual production of all the cows in Herd 

 3 that completed a year's record. The best cow yielded 324.0 

 pounds of butter fat, while the poorest one produced 221. 13 

 pounds of butter fat. In justice to cow No. 11, it should be 

 said that she is a good individual, but that her low record was 

 due to excessive crowding the previous year. She is now well 



