xt7qbz61730k https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt7qbz61730k/data/mets.xml   Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. 1927 journals kaes_circulars_212 English Lexington : The Service, 1913-1958. Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Circular (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n. 212 text Circular (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n. 212 1927 2014 true xt7qbz61730k section xt7qbz61730k UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY
COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE
Extension Division
THOMAS P. COOPER, Dean and Director.
A Kentucky Cow-Testing Association
and
A Cooperative Bull Association
CIRCULAR NO. 212
I Lexington, Kentucky
August, 1927

 Kentucky Extension Circular No. 212
. . . Oi
A Kentucky Cow-Testing Association “
0
and “
. . . a
A Cooperative Bull Association C
By H. F. LINK I C
a
V 0
. . I
This circular reports some results secured thru a Kentucky C
Cow-Testing Association and a Cooperative Purebred Bull (
Association. 1 ‘ (
THE COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION (
Part I, a 1·eport of production of herds tested during three t
years, 1920 to 1922 inclusive, in the Campbell County Cow-'t`c=st-
ing Association. 7
THE COOPERATIVE BUI.I. ASSOCIATION A I
Part H, a report of the production of daughters sited by
Campbell County Cooperative Bull Association hulls, in mnt-
parison with the production of their dams. 1
I

 CIRCULAR NO. 212
Part I
THE COW-TESTING ASSOCIATION
A Cow—Testing Association is a group of dairymen, usually 25
or 26 in number, organized for the purpose of employing a tester
whose duty is to keep records of the production, feed, and income
of each cow in their herds. The tester spends one day each month
with each dairyman, arriving at each farm, as a rule, in the
afternoon and remaining until some timle the following day. He
carefully weighs the milk produced and feed consumed by each
cow at both the evening and morning milkings. He also secures
a composite sample of each cow ’s milk and tests for percentage
of butterfat. All these records for the entire herd are kept in a
I herd book so that a member can at any time get the record of
lucky I each cow, or of his entire herd, fo1· each nronth during the period
Bull over which they have been tested. From these figures the profit
or loss from each cow can be computed and the dairyman can
eliminate those cows that are unprofitable and feed the remainder
three according to their production.
.'l`est- The farmer can use the information obtained from the Cow-
'l`esting Association in selecting, breeding and feeding his cows.
l By keeping only high producing cows in the herd from which to
raise calves the farmer can soon breed up his herd. The Cow-
Od by A Testing Association also enables the members to test the prepo-
('OUL teiicy of the herd sires being used, as the production of the
daughters of these sires can be compared with the production
of their mothers. The Cow-Testing Association also adds to the
sale value of all cows making creditable records.
One of the first Cow-Testing Associations organized in Ken-
tucky was the Campbell County Association, organized late in
lillfl, thru the combined efforts of a number of progressive dairy-
V inen of the county and the Extension Division of the College of
4\2l‘i@ulture. These leading dairymen, who had learned the value
of better feeding and better breeding, felt the need of such an _
organization for the improvement of their herds.

 4 Kentucky Extension Circular N0. 212
After several meetings enough menrbers were secured to  
Warrant starting the association, otficers were elected and with i
the help of the Section of Dairying of the College of Agriculture, ¤
a tester was selected. The association was financed for some  
time with the payments by the members at the rate of $4.00 per
cow per year, with a minimum of eight cows per member. At
first the payments were made quarterly in advance but later the
method of payment was changed so that the first. quarter was
paid in advance and three notes, without interest, were given for
the remaining paymgents. S·till later, because of the tendency of ,
to·o many small cow owners to join the association, the method of {4
financing was changed to $50.00 per member per year with a J
maximum of 30 cows per day. The tester was paid $100.00 per fi
month and furnished his own transportation. VVith 26 days'  
. testing per month at the above rate the association had $1,200 _  
per year with which to pay the tester’s salary and $100 with  
which to pay for the sulphurie acid, breakage, publicity and all _ C
other incidental expenses necessary for the work for a year. Qi
RESULTS OF THREE YEARS TESTING
Wlieii the tester made his first round, the high cow in the
association produced 45 pounds of milk in one day, and this
record was considered phenomenal. Vtfithin three years 60
pound cows were not unusual and one cow had made an A. R. O.
(Advanced Registry Official), record of more than 20,000 pounds
of milk in one year on twice a. day milking. ‘
This report. deals chietly with the production of three herds
which were the only herds in the county in both the Cow-Testing
and the Cooperative Bull Association for the three years. The
owners of these herds, Louis Clark, Alfred Eisen and Joseph
Herringer & Sons, all of California, Kentucky, were organiZt‘1‘S
and leaders of both associations. As was previously explained, a
mistake was made in financing the association at the start in that
it was financed on a. quarterly rather than a yearly basis and a `
number of the members did not understand that the full benefits
could not be obtained in a few months’ test and withdrew dur-
ing the year. \Vhile most of these members later came back into ·

 A Kentucky Cow-Testing Association 5
it , ‘ AA   A AA    ·?§t¢ 1¤·  
d t0 $1, ~’ { Am  
·     if ' ·   'A ¤¥*    
with A   ` * _ L in V 3:** AA
iure, A     ,· A »»,__   A ‘ A· " Ae A  A AV ·_ ;  
sA     5;. A     _   . A. ~ A   , . A  Wo?
SOIHQ   . »   »’ —  A     A A A A iq, ·· A- ·4‘`     .   i ,  
p .     x iii,     ‘ ,-   A `A   A. A .1   ie
PGI ,. A     _ l»A 5 .. A = , V.    A   , 4; AA- , `*· * I
in i ¢..     .. —. ·A·iL·:·;A· A-. ·   ·. ` .* ¢ 1 A‘ 
fthe A     ` i"‘* V``‘V   AA A I Y   ·.  A ` A  
W12 A ~   5 ‘ `'"V A AA r ‘; A  in   A .A i   ...  " A  ” 
$ “ A A‘ \` ’ .A   _:_; ..t.  it    A   .
1 for ’ _ " A~u¤··»·A A A      _    AA f  
    _ W {tr   3   k` X" wk  _ HiL ` ·, i  — [$ :7-  A A * V 
l},      -M- iv -    I _     tp?   A.:A:~” A FA s   *A j.,   K   f%A;{f,V_;  ,55%
  A     A=».     AA ·A   A       _           .
Wl of  if  " A   i>=“AA`§i¤A»~AA§ AA ·‘ A scct   AA A AA . A . A Aii _A 
·A.,>x3~a··é·   -~ .`_    i~<:~·: · —&·—$f ~A A 1
. ..1 ?$.ii?’A*"* A   - `   *A_;gl*£»¥2*A%f£AX»f4?l§?{%`A$°§,fw? A   *  
A} ”   f §‘*A ¢$"i · $1   ·;*:A>A‘1  Ai;  
200   A· NE ==·" .€£¥       ‘V·#~<°   12*% AA· *f2*T¥»¢;;;;;»§¤.¤;_ egg m;’Z*€s€*»?A»  ;;§s
YH       ¤A·       ’t'‘  
\\`1 1
    Fig, 1.—Tl1is cow produced 7,760 lhs. milk :111d 263 lbs, butterfztt. The A
~ d mw pictured in Fig. 1, to ull z1ppcz11Az111<·es, is et good producer. She pro-
l, duced well for at short. time but did not hold up long e11ougl1 to make :1 good
· record.
y ··_V ’Ie A , M '  , \"’
· -  A- i;¤»AAA :!°¢i¤`?A" A GA":} 1  `
Ax A    `   EJ JF@$’tj~—=,.*·  A  A
1 Tilt? g *’> _ ww` , V1;   .,··.‘, ..n · ‘A; -*-3 ‘ A , A , A
· A '* _  '$`;§g.“>;’ M ’,;_   · J, `B JV. {_ ·?§*‘• , ’ ,) » TA  
this A '   "`·’—?~"- "·i‘= A`:°·£`A ' 4*  A ;A A {
Q 60   . A A 4 g, ,:__` M ·• ,
{O V" _;· *·` x M -; 2._. 4. · '    
luids AT " A A `.A   '. 0 ` A“ 0*: ·' ,*
crtls A A ~1 A i ~ A ‘A A
 A   A` ·¥=#A ,,_W     g.A  »,_ 
qiiiri T      L1  1 A’_ Y ;, A_ 0     A. `A y r   ,
_  L J I ESV .. >   sr ~ , _ »..,..»;.·/1,;..  _  H , _~ _ ( . . rk _.  _  Ml; J§ , 1  ,¤;_t,A 
1%   ;:(j, ’ 2;  ` , _A    ~ · ` " ` A  ` · > ` M is   ~i.A¢*;¤é; d._¤A1 J,;• “L~¤¤lfgA3v;+r$‘f__ v -
ggph   .        ¤; ¢ A      
· ~                  xs    A          
lzgyg    A  AA    r   · A A — =. *A»A ¤ A A~.AA   s      ’J`·~  
  A ° . A ··¥!4»;;»A.A,A . -***5
1·"‘·~**’Aw- , , A     s*·#»Aé~¤~~€·&" ~4.AAi,.
Nl H   As     .A  ~A  . AAAAA i,   ,  .  · m e   
’ mi} _·~·F`,4· M, _ A _ ` A ~. A_   =A X · * ` WJ ’· AA ` _ ` '.  .A if   ti ;·.§E:~~A‘¥9$¤’i*M¤7i‘·Ai~?`» es 2
    .A ~ ¤r?·A*’· ‘ 1  - ‘f2;;t’+'·*"I¢‘$A.2 A . `AA.e.,?',;    ;AAA  ag . o   it  ‘·   :*€¢¤s;~’g.;p·.:»A
~  s Wi’·%’???A'ZL*¥%“"“ `Q   —;;»·?~é~m$.é ·'AV ‘Y ’¤?;§,;;;   `°A
nd 3  A    V; .    QA 
A ,    >:1*·#: A ·   A,A  l%¤'#<1**¤i"€·?.A   '¥$»t¥*  " <_T—‘f  __   `       :i¥.‘é*€»·3*i¥ 
[viii; is A   ‘ < ~x A:%£A;L· .     A·_i‘        fi  `
dll? Fil;. 2.—Tl1i:~: Cow from tho same herd p1‘<1d11<·0d 1],627 U18. lllllk 11l`1(l HX}
· to t Wi l>\¤¥l®1‘f:nt under the some eoiiditioiis or reed, ture und niuuzigeuieut. The
m ‘?0“'l>1CtU1‘€cl 111 Fig. 2 shows poor dairy t-o1i1`o1·m;1tio1i und probably would
l1:1ve lbeeu culled out on her looks. \Vhile not 21 good type to _be used for
l’}°?d{¤S. her production record would easily justify keeping her 111 the herd.
lhis is one of the reasons why 21 Cow-Testing Association pays,

 6 Kentucky Extensiion Circular N0. 212
the association they do not have a complete record on their REI
herds, so that it was not possible to include them in this report.
EVQ11 after the HSSOC121ti011 WHS 1`Il1il11C€Cl 011 & yQ&1’l}’ basis diff]. im
culty was experienced with a few members who, believing that I cia
they had obtained all the information necessary about tlnqp am
herds, withdrew after completing a year’s test. of
Records are given from the beginning of the Cow-'Pesting till
Association. No records were available previous to the organiza. wv
tion of this association. These records are for the calendar year lor
in each ease. Records of cows eliminated because of low prodne. IW]
tion, co·ws purchased or heiters frcshening during the year, and
cows not having a. complete year’s record for other reasons are
not included in this report. These herds were composed of about »
one-half registered Holsteins and the ~o~t.her half grades, for the
, most part Holsteins. Following are the records of the three d
herds for the period January 1, 1920, to December 31, 1922. I
AVERAGE YEARLY PRODUCTION PER COW OF EACH HERD
I I
1920 I 1921 I 1922
I I I
Herd Owner
.5 .   .   .
. £¤ 2*;; B¤ SG? Ee Ei
A2 Qh A2 as A2 oai
‘;€‘l*“;’1”i“T*"IP”I*
Louis Clark ________.._____.._______._.._.._ 7,604I 2s9.s>3| 8,666I 302.95I *8,243I 29464
Alfred Eisen ..._...__.....,,._._.......... I 7,293I261.64| 8,47SI 301.38I S,777I310.rlli
Jos. Herringer ............................ I 5,923I 213.46I 6,502I 235.38I 7,386I24T.36
Average production, all herdsI 6,846} 250.36I 7,794I 277.44I $198,286.47
Total No. cows tested ................ I I 63 I I 59 I I 62
Total No. cows tested, 12 mos.I I 39 I I 38 I I 39
______;_jI?|__|_;__I__|__,
 
Ave. production, lst yr. of test, 1920439 cows—6,846 lbs. milk; {
250.36 lbs. buttertat. ~
Ave. production after lst yr. of test, 1922 and 1923-77 cows—7.999
lbs. milk; 282.02 lbs. butterfat, I I,
Ave. increase last 2 years over lst year (1921 and 1922 over 19210.
1,153 lbs., or 16.85% in milk production; and 31.66 lbs., or 12.64%, ni 0
butterfat production. ’ I-
*This decrease from the 1921 figures was due to Eve helfers being: a..=
L1 4-7 lm
=g§ 222 ¤2 Q % 2:
Q} y-( ' '
QM E 0 0 g E
::0 $3 °° °`° N N
 
or-· E
xsd *
UQ)
22* !--
EE ””_”_‘— 2
¤.·N 5 $3 N <~ (
qs? E 5; **1 3 L'?
>¤) E w ¤$ L`- {
<1¤i1
<
.2 ¤> . ____—__"”‘ `
N ··;:.¤" ·».> M ‘*‘ cc i
E Has? JE °* Q =* g ‘
·-• G5 v-1 ' ' [
IJ QH; is g w 2 2 2
‘ 3 ··s*·s¤ 2* N °" °‘
5
‘¤ ¤¢-·g Q3
, S 0***0 _
ns ;;;¤·°..¤
0>‘E<  ‘_'—*"‘————-.;_
X ¤ _
Z www wm M `
E 0**-5 €> cn 23 z
__ ¤’j(¤·¤ 3: Q ¤~1 cn m
¤ :62   ¤~ ¤- uf 25 · 
· O
S we
ZG <¤ V
<>  
3 _"*·*—·———..____
E if
@ QD
E $22 E E ==»: $ Q
· E OH gg S § 2 2
Q-4
; Ogg E N N
:-*0-iq)
E .§<¤2~ ‘°"
E °§"'°_m  ___
O 55:.. __*———-
'S EUS gg :0 co M
5-· G5
*5 ¤<€>* E va N E Q
qg .5   in LD LQ .5
n: QU
“' <:
22 2 5 5 ‘
g 2 2 sg
a Q F E;
O   E r-4 *:1
'E :< 5 if 3
°’ E6 E ·;· .2:: `
m a #2 z “
*5-l
'U O
  an m _
0 E Q 2
_ Q <1 rw  G5 2
Obg EES $£ Eg M   15
II} mw Q ggvo _
FBC]; ____—— mwzig '§
"—__ OQ
Yof A vg}, mm c> _"`—-._ Q4
2* +4 qi g Qgwd M
____ rh-1 my-·<` - »-+mOc> W
1 ___ -**2-2 2 L;`F°l=¤ "'
._·_ VN "
2)Qgn ·§ e ___——;O§,§g§ggEE O
{0212- .¤ Q ':.m¤s¤,‘°‘*»¤¤¤¤> E·°3‘ Q
. ;` £§B·@¤`5w3d$®§ ¤
*2*222 E —-— ?¤§j*’j€£E»¤;¤·"°?E=·‘ ` E
2, · ,1. _—-j¤-2;;qE;:-·—·¤.::§ ¤.
“2~<>i I wu- K0 _— °"¤*’“B
L $¤"’ Ng ¤·¤w_‘—£-¤~ S
U ¤¤•¤·¤ 0*4,, 00,,., 0 *-—__ on
, Q m Q NN s 35gb 6
%; as 2 ____·_ **‘<>¤:{§ 25
‘}'€211·. ‘ ,¤ . wm’_——__ ¤>
vm. E :2 @Q`2; mkw-—- ¥
" *¤ EA 2:;,; qw gg §(°,g»O_ E3
uggd ° (_ v-4 '~"L¢ 6 qwgo >
E .._ H O<§u5°cZ. cd
E *:5 ———·_ H com FZ!
¤> . ——.. r3
yr E mi   . _—`—- m
2 all · . E m- E
._ _ UQ;   . E as
w -__ rb Bj ._ ¤
¤> —-_ Mw .¤
$ 2 __*—— 9-
2 wb. _——--_ :,*21
  C\`| · O
____* Nm Eg; :5
-¤ § 2 i=-__ :§’ ‘:,
Q —‘ c 2 E E E *#—.. gg if
. 7 E0 2 Q 2 Q : 2 {_ ¤·-*
G, - E :_¤d Q ; ¤ : Q E 2 éa EE
E5 22522 2 2222 W- z~
===—¤ 2 BE 5 2 § 2 Q E 2 55 [QE
ZE i §¤-2,,, Eg iu E E E E Eh mz
m E I N E'··‘ N : : E E B ·F'¤*
cv! <1> ·r-· · m0°“ - · · »¤·¤ :··*‘°
Q 45:]   '   ' ¤ FUN
¤¤>'g·(£';¤“°:::m°°3€•~;§J¤ in gl!
§=:='E3‘»:’$E;:2·¤.£¤=B=¤ Mg [II;
\1N<¤q'··*;_‘:4.¤¤>g¥-· mw _
“¢¤E$°$ ~ zég
, ¤·<1 S

 M
Kent ·
Ncky 1?wtcnsi0n (Wren!
a'-N0.21g
vb
Q) . \.f.>5x]c¢`,`
-u’*·‘w Mm`, rug
rv-*d»¤ cov °° O0 m V
5““ “” M55 °
_____ " 2
. v-* _ ‘—··--
iz géég zgg Q
EQ 6:65; °"L°1<< ·¤
___ HHHH ggj g
·¤ _~_~"`——— cf
3 ¤¤‘· 2
§ § ·.»-¤’T‘·¤1 m gg
2$ .,_ Uwdé a g
G ·—...;
Em g '—·——- B
SBE <} mmmm N §
E“ ‘·— E
-¤§ ¤¤ :3:i¤ $5 ·.·
¤_ Sk E£W8E= »
zg dm &e&z·; $
0 Z,¤ 1:§:;5*¤; m
gi ya é2s@z£; é
w EQ ?§i§¤$° N
-9.5 +-¤ =:§:.¤\¤m *5
mm ·§n·¤ ¥E=E¤·¤’¤·g
?” ¤¤ " &2¤~ J
5~¤ Q
. 0 »-· "JN
g? L ’—2i§E§g &  
Q? 3~Q @£&g mcg' M
IE   `"¢'¤m¤q ggm O -
m __CQ Q)
:3 .__ H §
-¤*d ··—-_._ s.-
E°·’ . cc __`—‘—·... °°
=? im g%££ Nmm S
Z¤< EQ .l`1¤=¢:» §¤>u·.>
»-· Q mm ~ ~ No :1
C2 ,.4 P-r.~ ~ ~
€¤ - *26 “
mi  W “*~-—-» 2
°·¤ E .. _'"—· G,
$-< ` ' .
gg g mmm; m ·¤
z ‘··· . x
WE 7,4* GUUU pq as
BQ (D ___"—*‘—__. 5 .
L bn **2- ¤
‘·· 'CS
(D (U 22mm cc gg
____ EU
“T*#<·--_ 35
9 ¥EEiBE¥i_ mg
g iaézgaiz m¤
iaiazia ~
Q; ézéssazz §§
¤¤ %z%z¤ iz w~
z¤ @a;a¤$;a ¤§
FQ ;%=5g$;% S;
: N :‘ `
E za§§§~mw ¤¤ ·
. Q "°,Z®mq;·;qB%) _':2·»·<
®¤E“568H ms
2@;2~s 2 E
mzOm< 2

 ul. C00
2 per
,..·-·· <1¢·
am T1;
5*5 2 612
___ nn Q 1€Z[A
__ `” ccF.sNl_ SSO .
,:4 __ mgm Cqla
T"u§ — Q. s.:  
",¤ .... v-T 0 07;,
Eq :2 -
___ "‘ E ’.- U?
nr.; qq v-ll -— E
'U _—H zo:   ;— g 1
g 23 ·-_   » sg: 7
..§ 5 - ——_"‘E ·¤ §§=~j M ·
wg ti m _ _ Cl lt 00
Nm D: m .. cd <¤  
.0'¤ dp -— · .   -_ gf _ ··
*25 fu" ·" °* . #2   —__ §
sg __ N’,¤= as 25 E- ::
Q ____ .-. __ .. la
, gg g _ N _. gl _ 3 0
*"_ ·¤ ... r
-9;, N:. E ;-__ ,2 ua —_ E
mb. zu: _¤>: ; _ ___ . ¤,> ___
M °¤¤ mg E? §.g€z=-`§ § EE d OO
gs ;;,¤ zimizziéf ¤ g¤=.... 2
rn :, ' :7: ·
§¤   §a.g§`; 2 §; ‘— @2 QJ —_¤= -2
2 G 1; ; ,, ._
;,E· ¤¤ _m2,°.%g».gi=E $ °°‘° <: — =<=
NSG} jj Imwa Z ii c; g.$  _ N .
mj; Q p ‘E ¤ *mE .:-3 va 5
aa **22 ¤§j$5s: M :00 ·- z
Q5 ___ ~¤-vm>·‘° q·E‘ ,__ X ~ E #__ 0
{Q L, ;€Q·9E¤¤§bD¤p 0 $ = I3
ll q) ·*___b_<€®"¤l_¤b[) g© NH   '¤
E 33*;,,5 —g§=_¤:¤5 ,5 _g** Z3 a 2
33 :3.,.(,¤ M .-:I`a..>'¤¤> E ..bD _mE ni Q.
CD ,.1 cu —=r< > 0:* L. ¤‘
Ev ____ —~ °° —2<¤ —~ rm ¤>¤ <¤? E
aq, I gc] O _ M 5 gz .¤ ·..
Z; x - wo- g g, irc 5§ E
°E ’=;é _·- Li}? M QQ 55 mz 5
go 2,,3 Q ’__ ¤   Q gb- é
·=° __ °i $ _— ii, =; ___ in H
§+'E:,_‘¤;i=§¤;—s 3::: 5::;
Z8 3 _—_ c:°1$ ' 3 §E _·°§..» ._—2 ,_
mv ». — "‘§"¤»;? <¤ zo :::522 — <>
· ·— nn · — ·-· ·-· na "°
E-· 1 m ”`~ ¤ ‘¤·¤ A E ”
._:d· ·   _ cd cm    
"’ ~ .5   _ 2 '"E · "`
EQU -_-Cd _ g uq rf"; —·__ S
T _ ns ·¤ E5 gn O-. OO
°° ___ s.· NO »-T ao -5
. é w ___   ZU ti rc, M
` U —__ N _ .¤ _m,;’ :5 O
:1 ._ ·-’. .,,_, - ··' CD
#5 _mE <__ ·¤¤ . .=;o E —__ bn
(D 5: : _ EQ wu Q) __ N
Eh ¥·· Eg? :— -·** 2 s.: *-·
2§ if   ?‘*   g L “  
EF1? E € E ca ‘
E; E 2;: 2:% 2; gg) —-" 5
¤m `U E ¥ E *‘ ____
N gzwé = is 3:: j_ H
Q mzno v-1;; .¤•g-4 N cd
O,__c>¤n’> ;; bn--. rg
cdm¤¤~1ON;: gg ·—_
'U G\lD.U-W ;: dh, 'U ,,_;_ 7-*
Zcyg 00* rg; LZ ra -.. Q)
~ m __·.Wd¤‘•’D Im Q cd »-·: »·¤
£¤>E;¤.~¤‘§¤¤ M Q, ii ¤
N<:·,.;·Og _m.g_ Ep gz 2
mlwg c? . 52 EE as
M § ¤J¢ u'
‘ 2 QE 2% ¤§
N E `goo :.:1:
"’ ¤.>‘° 22
£== :1:
QE QE
°* xs
E

 18 I(entucky Extension Circular N0. 212
Summary of Results of Dams' Records Compared with Daughters’ I
  (
I I 5; E gg.?} " E <
. i-< ,¤ L
·—,¤ ·—· ¤
rz ¤ EA mu z Q · 2 A c¤$ I
  (
I I
Pietje Segis Eden De I I I I I
Kol 211510 .................. 7 I 65,097 2,428 I 7 I102,206 I 3,497 ·
Johanna Aaggie B00nI I I I ~ I · I f
Champion 118660 ..,... 5 I 45,293 I 1,610 I 5 I 57,292 I 1,875 .
King Veeman.Daisy I I I I I
Pietertje 281026 .......... 3 I 32,072 I 1,201 I 3 I 43,575 I 1,462
King Helbon Keyes I I I I I » ‘
310600 ..; ......................... 1 I 15,630 515 I 1 I 20,497 I 683
Total ...................... I 16 I158,092 5,754 I 16 I223,570 I 7,517
I I I I I I I I
I Average .................4 I 9,881 I -360 I , I 13,973·I 470
., . _ I I I ‘ I I I I
The 16 daughters excelled their dams; an average of 4,092 lbs. in
milk, or 41.41%, and 110 lbs., or 30.5%, -in butterfat production.
* Average Production of Dams arid Daughters of Each Dull.
, I  Oil`;} $1 `iiiolilrx Daughters Excelled
- Dams Daughters Dams
Name of Bull ` E