THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
THE VALUE OF COW TESTS. 
There is no ready means of judging 
of the relative worth of different cows 
in the herd except by weighing and 
testing the milk. The cost of feed for 
different cows of the same breed or 
class will vary but slightly, yet their 
productive capacity will vary greatly. 
While the cost of feed per cow, be¬ 
tween tbe lowest and the highest, will 
seldom show more than 20 per cent in¬ 
crease, the income, at a fixed rate, will 
often be 125 per cent more in tbe most 
productive over the least productive. The 
value of weighing and testing the milk 
is twofold. It affords a basis for culling 
out the unprofitable cows, and, second, 
it indicates the cows best fitted for use 
as breeders, and thus affords the best 
basis for improving tbe herd. Perform¬ 
ance in milk production can as readily 
and as surely be transmitted to the off¬ 
spring as trotting qualities in the race 
horse. 
During the past five years the writer 
has been studying tbe practical value 
of weighing and testing the milk of 
individual cows. The herd under 
consideration has comprised from 30 to 
40 purebred Guernseys, and the milk of 
each has been regularly weighed twice 
daily, and samples from each cow’s milk 
have been tested for fats once each 
month. In order to insure a good aver¬ 
age sample, the milk to be tested is 
collected through a period of three 
days by taking small portions from each 
of six successive milkings, the test sam¬ 
ple being drawn from this mixed sam¬ 
ple. Samples taken from a single milk¬ 
ing seldom give a good average, unless 
they are taken very frequently, because 
of individual variations in the milk of 
different cows due to unknown causes. 
A mixed sample from four successive 
milkings, taken not less than two months 
apart will give fairly reliable results. 
In our herd the weight of milk and of 
fat is made up monthly, the total fat 
being obtained by multiplying the weight 
of milk for the month by its percent¬ 
age of fat. The value of these tests can¬ 
not be measured by the time required 
in making them. The increased interest 
on the part of the milkers more than 
covers the expense for weighing the 
milk. The time required for taking the 
samples and testing is worth many times 
its cost. As this work has been in 
operation for five consecutive years I 
am going to try to point out some les¬ 
sons that may be drawn from the re¬ 
sults. 
The first thing that one notices in 
examining the results is that there is 
very little relation between yield of milk 
and yield of butter fat. This is true 
even where all the animals are of a dis¬ 
tinct breed, and where one would 
naturally expect the milk to vary but 
little in composition. The average milk 
yield for a period of four years for 
three of our largest milkers is 6,395 
pounds, and the average fat yield for 
estimate of values and in considering 
their worth as breeders. As matters 
stand now several of our largest milk¬ 
ers are being rejected as breeders be¬ 
cause they fail to make satisfactory 
yields of fat. Of course, it must be 
remembered that these variations are 
slight compared with what may be 
found between individuals of different 
breeds or between grades of a single 
breed, while the variations would be 
still more marked between individuals 
of the ordinary mixed herds. 
A valuable fact brougl - out by the 
regular weighing of the milk is that 
CATTLE POWER ON MILK WAGON. 
the same cows is 273 pounds, while the 
average fat test of these cows is 4.4 
per cent. On the other hand, if we 
select three of our moderate milkers 
with high fat tests we find the average 
yields for a similar period to be 5,782 
pounds of milk and 322 pounds of fat, 
with an average test of 5.8 per cent. 
This means that while these cows gave 
an average of 600 pounds less milk, they, 
at the same time, gave an average of 
almost 50 pounds more of fat than the 
other group. Except by the use of the 
Babcock test we had no possible means 
of discovering this difference. Had 
we judged the cows by the amount of 
milk, only the heavier milkers would 
have been given the preference in our 
the largest milkers during the early 
part of the lactation period are not al¬ 
ways the best yearly producers. In 
most cases cows that started the lacta¬ 
tion period with only a moderate milk 
flow, but that kept up a fairly even 
flow throughout, gave better yields than 
the large producers in the early _ part 
of the milking period. The persistent 
milker is usually the one that rounds 
up the year with the largest yields. 
The regular weighing of the milk for 
a full year is the only means' of dis¬ 
covering this peculiarity. A surprising 
fact was that there was so much varia¬ 
tion in the fat content of the milk of 
purebred animals of a single breed. 
The highest testing cow in the herd 
March 13, 
gave a yearly average of 6.2 per cent 
fat, while the lowest testing cow gave 
a yearly average of 4.2 per cent. This 
condition shows that purchasers should 
not rely on yields alone in making their 
selections. chas. s. phelps. 
OXEN AND AUTOMOBILES. 
I read editorial on page 144. On Septem¬ 
ber 5, 1908, automobiles and oxen passed 
through the same entrance at Huntington 
Valley campground, bringing local people 
to the Sunday school picnic. Oxen are not 
quite so plentiful here in northeastern 
Pennsylvania as automobiles. The farm¬ 
ing conditions are much like those of the 
hilly part of Connecticut. Huntington Val¬ 
ley is about 20 miles from Wilkes-Barre, 
Luzerne Co., where the Matheson cars are 
built. As this local picnic is composed of 
nearly all the Sunday schools in six town¬ 
ships, and has an attendance of several 
thousand people, it may be regarded as a 
public appearance of both oxen and auto¬ 
mobiles. WM. H. LEWIN. 
I have just read your article on page 144 
of The It. N.-Y., in which you say that 
there is probably no place in the United 
States outside of Connecticut where the 
automobile and the ox cart can be found 
side by side. On the shell road over 
which I drive to the city one may meet 
both automobiles and ox carts almost any 
day, the latter driven by colored citizens. 
Still stranger than this may seem the fact 
that within 12 miles of the centre of the 
city of Norfolk, in the Dismal Swamp, the 
Black bear and the wildcat are found in 
abundance. I have had bears steal green 
corn out of my fields within 1% mile of 
the turnpike leading from Norfolk to Suf¬ 
folk, where automobiles may be seen any 
day. If there is another place in the 
United States where an almost primeval 
wilderness can be found so near a great 
centre of population I have not heard of it. 
Norfolk Co., Va. john b. lewis. 
On page 144 there is a statement re¬ 
ferred to as having been made by one of 
your readers who .thinks it improbable that 
anywhere in this country automobiles and 
ox teams can be found side by side. I call 
attention to the fact that here in the 
capital of North Carolina it is no uncom¬ 
mon sight to see autos, electric cars and 
ox carts at one and the same time. There 
are at least a half dozen ox carts which 
frequent the streets of Raleigh. All of those 
are, I believe, owned and operated by ne¬ 
groes living in the country around the 
city. The same conditions may be found in 
a number of other localities in the South. 
In the Appalachian Mountains and their 
associative foothills you occasionally see 
oxen ridden and driven to church, other 
meetings and to cross-road stores by men, 
women and children. 
(PROF.) C. L. NEWMAN. 
On this page is shown a picture taken 
in Chenango Co., N. Y. The yearling bull 
is harnessed to the wagon like a horse, and 
all last Summer he hauled the farm supply 
of milk 1o the creamery. We have received 
a number of other statements from different 
parts of the country showing that auto and 
ox teams travel on the same road. 
See That Can? It Never Moves! 
Other separator manufactur¬ 
ers have been trying to imitate 
it for five years. That shows 
their hi^h opinion of a low, 
steady supply can which need 
not be moved in order to 
take the bowl out of the 
machine. 
O ur machines are the only cream 
separators that have such a supply 
can. Other manufacturers have not been 
able to imitate it. That is because all com¬ 
mon “disc” or “bucket bowl” separators 
have bowls fed through the top—such bowls 
must have the supply can set directly over 
them. Consequently, the supply cans are 
always the highest part of all common 
“disc” or “bucket bowl” machines and must 
always be lifted off before the covers or 
bowl can be removed. 
L ow supply cans, which need not be 
moved, are only possible in cream sep¬ 
arators having a suspended bowl fed 
through the bottom. Our machines are 
the only cream separators having such bowls, 
and our patents prevent any other manu¬ 
facturer from making them. 
JjUPPOSE you had the supply can, on 
any separator, full of milk and found it 
necessary to remove the bowl? It would 
be mighty inconvenient to lift the supply 
can off, wouldn’t it? No need to with 
the Tubular. 
jpUBLIC appreciation of Tubulars has 
made the Tubular cream separator 
low supply can, so easy works the biggest and finest in the world. We 
to fill, not necessary to . . . . 
move to take out the bowl, have additional factories in Canada and Ger- 
1 lie solid, one piece frame. man y 1908 sales were way ahead of 1907—far 
Ihe suspended bowl and J J 
bottom feed. Enclosed, ahead of any competitor, if not of all compet- 
p^umb'^bobrT^baclJ^ itors combined. The additional good feat- 
machine, for quick, easy ur es in our 1909 Tubular “A” have already 
leveling. Ihe crank, set 
just ri^ht for easy turning. made the Tubular even more 
popular than before. Write 
for Catalog: No. 153. It will 
1909 TUBULAR “A” 
Exclusive Tubular ad¬ 
vantages are surprisingly 
numerous. Observe the 
The Sharpies Separator Co. 
Toronto, Can. 
Winnipeg, Can. 
WEST CHESTER, PA. 
Chicago, Ill. 
Portland. Ore. interest yOU. 
ranrisrn. ( nl. J 
San Francisco, Cal. 
