16 BULLETIN 560, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
variation is probably caused by the greater quantities of cheaper. 
roughage fed the horses in this group and due to the fact that the 
relative amount of manure actually saved varies considerably on 
different farms by reason of differing methods of manure management. — 
TaBLeE 11.—New York farms—Itemized average costs and credits for records showing a 
net cost per horse above the average for the State, and for those showing a net cost per 
horse below the average ! (10 farms, 90 horses). 
Waneadialaianor Depre- | Appre- | Colt Colt 
Range of cost. ciation | ciation loss profit other Manure 
(cost). | (cost). (cost). | (credit).| (cost). | (credit).| (costs). (credit) 
Above the average cost......-- $955070|) 2$2225763)) 8 S13365) |eeeeen see SORIA |S eee $38.54 | $12.60 | 
Below the average cost....---- 85. 66 21.08 S302) | be cereal teers oe $3. 70 29. 64 14.50 
DitkerenC@2s-sa—2--—- —-e 9.41 1.68 dE UGy ese scoue 5 14! 3. 70 8. 90 1.90 
1 Average net cost per horse for the State, $145.02. 
Variations in net costs between the two groups in New York were ~ 
less than those in both Illinois and Ohio. Eleven of the 18 yearly 
farm records showed a cost per head greater than the average cost 
for all records. The average net cost per horse for these 18 records 
was $157.56, while the average per horse for the remaining 7 records 4 
was $126.70, making a difference between the two groups of $30.86. 
Of this difference $9.41, or less than one-third, was for feed. It 
will be seen by this that the cost of feeding horses in New York was 
more nearly uniform than it was in Illinois and Ohio. The differ- 
ence of $1.68 for labor also was less in this State. The difference in ~ 
depreciation cost was $5.13. A small percentage ot this was due to 
a greater loss from deaths in the first group. The high-cost group 
showed an average colt loss of 14 cents per horse, and the low-cost 
group showed an average colt profit of $3.70 per horse, a difference 
of $3.84. There were no deaths of colts in either group. The more 
colts were raised on the farms in the low-cost group. Colts also — 
showed the cheaper cost of keep and the greater appreciation in 
value in this group. These items, depreciation and appreciation im 
the value of horses and loss and profit on colt accounts, were, like 
those for the Ohio farms, of considerable importance. The total 
difference in cost of these items between the two groups was $8.97 
per horse. The principal items under ‘‘all other costs” causing the 
difference of $8.90 per horse were interest, shoeing, stabling, and use 
of equipment. The difference in manure credits was less than $2. 
As on the Ohio farms, the credit was greater in the low-cost group. 
RELATION OF THE WORK PERFORMED TO THE TOTAL FEED COST. 
As previously shown, the greatest item of cost in keeping a farm 
work horse is for feed. The farmer who gets the maximum amount 
of work out of his horses, and at the same time has a low feed cost, 
is reasonably sure of obtaining horse labor at a low cost per hour. 
é 
| e 
