320 



TEE AGRICULTURAL JOURNAL. 



torn of the udder, making it pendulous 

 Such an udder not only is unsightly, but 

 the cow with such an udder is quite hkely 

 to transmit this undesirable quality to her 

 offspring. The most common fault found 

 in the udder is the imperfect development 

 of the front udder. This is often seen m 

 a very marked degree in certain famihes, 

 or sometimes whole breeds. _ 



I believe the lack of development m 

 the fore-udder is the cause of a large ag- 

 gregate loss to the dairymen of our coun- 

 tryfand that it is well worth while to at 

 least make the effort to overcome this 

 fault, which is so common m our dairy 

 cows. To give some idea of the gre^^ 

 difference between the quantity oi milk 

 produced by the front and ^^ar udder, I 

 ^uote the results obtained f of^-^ 

 Plumb in some studies of the iidder 

 which he made a few years ago. In 2Zb 

 different lots of milk obtained ^rom 65 

 different cows, representing several types 

 "rs! he'fo^nd that the aver.^.e 

 yield of the 226 front udders was 4.1 



quarts, while the average yield of the 226 

 rear udders was 4.9 quarts, or f difference 

 of over 16 per cent. It should be borne 

 in mind that these were average udder*, 

 and not udders noticeably deficient m one 

 part or the other. 



^ To note the effect when the front 

 udder was noticeably ^^^cleveloped, the 

 same observer took 13 cows that had 

 a more or less inferior front couiorma^ 

 tion, and weighed separately the milk 

 produced by the ^ear and front uddeis^ 

 In these cases it was found that the rear 

 uddei produced 57 per cent, more milk 

 £Ve front udder^hich plain^^^^ 



the difference existing .'^^f ^ 

 ofudders. Professor Plumb furthe no ed 

 VhP difference in the yield of the ironx 

 Ind rear udders, where the udders were 

 1 Klnnced In the nine cows studied, 

 W'that the difference in the 

 rni yield of the front and rear udder 

 rin;:;! to only 4 per cent.--a compara- 

 tively insignificant difference. 



I 



Market Reports. 



r StaiemZ^Opinions of ike .foUmoinc, Reports rests .itk 

 (ResponsihiUty for the accuracy of the Statements P 



the respective contributors. ) 



was a fortnight back. . 



about 10s. , r,ripPS 



Pora,je.-'Yh\^ article i^^e7^««=^''"/'t ,d ne? 

 have fluctuated between 6s. 6d. and 9s. Id. per 



10011^',; _Whilst ^^^^ ^^^^1^^ i,^^e been as low 

 as 1 9d.per lOOlbs, others have reached 4s. per 

 lOOlbs Bedding from 7s. to 28s. per load. 



5s. 3d. to H?. -^n- P«' ^ inferior; good samph s 

 Ta^e^ Sober fro'r^5f 1^17. Id ler lOOlbs. 

 Sweet potatoes 5s. to 5s. 6d. per .ack. 

 Beans.-From 8s. 6d. to 16s. per lOOlbs 

 Onio«a.-From 16s. 8d. to 37s. Gd. per lOOlbs. 



PumpMns-Froxn 3s. 6d. to 6s. 9d. per dcen. 



Po«/^«/.-Fowls from 2s to 98 6d.jach 



?c'^ots)«6'6^ 

 7s. 3d. each. 



stitute the varieties sold 



Wri.s.-Beef Sd. to 9d. per 



^/e^b^^-r^.u^^titV^rfish fish deposed 

 °'S:-From6^d.to Is. Ud. per lOOlbs. 



Agricultural Show, 



New Hanover, Wednesday, July 24th. Secre- 

 tary, H. A. Light, York. 



