SE 37 i bce: Contribution from the Bureau of Animal Industry JOHN R. MOHLER, Chief Washiugton, D.C. Vv December 10, 1920 UNIT REQUIREMENTS FOR PRODUCING MILK IN WESTERN WASHINGTON. By J. B. Ban, Dairy Husbandman, and G. E. Braun, Market Milk Specialist, Dairy Division. CONTENTS. Page. Page. Character and scope of the work___ 1 | Factors involved in production of Methods used in obtaining the Malik eae Se oe 10 EDITS AN 2 Se ee 2 Mee, eee te PS eee eee 10 Comparison of winter and Pasture: = = eS aT Lee 11 Summer results. -) 22 — 3 aborige se ue ee = ee 12 Mescription of herds’... 3 @ther’ costae. as SE a ee 13 Requirements for producing 100 Per cent comparison of factors in- HOUNES Ol, Mtl ~ = = 4 volved in milk production______- 15 Requirements for keeping a cow Average compared with “ bulk-line”’ SOE QD pe ae ea 6 COS GS 5 ee ea ae ee ee 16 Credit for manure__._____-_". 7 | Monthly distribution of factors in eredits for calves. 2-222 83. 9 milky productione =a = == sam aly ¢ Requirements for keeping a bull___ ORR SUMIM Arye cane ee ae epee lee 19 CHARACTER AND SCOPE OF THE WORK. What does it cost to produce milk? This is a question which has brought increasing concern to each dairyman as the cost of feed has increased and hired men are being attracted to other industries pay- ing higher wages. The United States Department of Agriculture, through the Dairy Division of the Bureau of Animal Industry, began a series of studies in 1915 intended to give the dairymen of the United States information on the cost of producing milk. These studies were made in different sections of the United States. The project with which this bulletin deals was organized in August, 1917, in Skagit County, Wash., about 70 miles north of Seattle. Other objects of these studies were to separate and analyze various factors to obtain data which would aid in improving general milk- production methods. The climate and fertility of the soil in this section produce excep- tionally good pasturage throughout the larger part of the year. The many herds of black and white cattle grazing over the large ex- 12649°—20-—1 2, BULLETIN 919, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. panse of low-lying meadows, together with the numerous windmills dotting the landscape, remind an observer of the description of the Holstein breed in its native country. At the end of the first year the work was discontinued until Janu- ary, 1919, because of the war. The value of this work to the dairymen cooperating the first year is reflected in the fact that 15 out of the 17 continued the work for the second year. Two dairymen sold out, and their places were taken by neighboring dairymen during the second year. The data obtained in this study are actual records of facts obtained by regular monthly full-day visits to 15 farms for two years and four other farms for one year. - Most of the milk in this section is sold for condensing purposes and is delivered by motor truck to large milk condenseries. None of the dairies selected were conducted as hobbies or as breeding estab- lishments, but were representative of average dairy conditions found in this section. It is the custom to hire milkers, who milk and take care of 25 or 30 cows per man and give their entire time to the herd. The figures reported show the amounts expended in producing milk under the system of dairy management found. The dairies were inspected by representatives from the condenseries, and the sanitary conditions were subject to such supervision. The cost of production would have been somewhat different if either higher or lower grades of milk had been produced. METHODS USED IN OBTAINING THE DATA. The field agent recorded in detail all available information?’ rela- tive to the dairy business, including the amounts and classes of labor, feeds and bedding used, pasture cost, amount of milk sold and used on the farm, and the current expenses for the month. The data on calves and handling of manure were systematically collected. By obtaining records on every dairy regularly each month the influence of unusual circumstances at the time of any particular visit was lessened, and by using the records of all the herds for each month average figures could be compiled for each or all of the dairies and representative data for each month, season, and year were thus obtained. Records were obtained the second year as a check on the first year’s work and to increase the amount of data available for study. At the beginning and end of each year an inventory was taken of the dairy buildings, livestock, and equipment used in the care of the herd and its products. On his regular monthly inspection tour the field agent arrived at the first farm of a group in time to observe the first labor operations connected with the evening chores. With 1 Copies of the blanks used can be obtained upon request from the Bureau of Animal Industry, Dairy Division, Washington, D. @. DEC 15 (920, --. ox om Ze PRODUCING MILK IN WESTERN WASHINGTON. 3 watch in hand he noted and recorded the exact minute each labor operation connected with the dairy was begun and ended. The labor operations during the next morning were recorded in the same man- ner, to complete the 24-hour period. The field agent also noted the feeds that were being fed on the day of his visit, recording the kind, quantity, cost, and description of each and comparing them with the quantity recorded by the cow tester in the cow-testing-association books. The quantity of milk sold and receipts each month were obtained. In addition the whole milk used by the proprietor and his help or fed to calves was measured or weighed and used as a basis for deter- “mining the quantity kept on the farm during the month. Each dairyman kept an itemized account of expenses that were incurred between the monthly visits, and these items were recorded by the field agent. A monthly record was also kept of the purchase or sale of cows, calves, hides, outside bull service, and other miscel- laneous information relating to the herd. The condition and method of handling the manure were noted and reported each month. When all the labor operations about the dairy had been completed for the day at the first farm, the field agent drove to the second farm in time to observe the labor operations connected with the evening chores. This program was followed until Saturday afternoon, when he returned to his headquarters and finished his reports for the week’s work. The same program was followed each week in the month, and each farm was visited for a full day every 30 days throughout the two years. COMPARISON OF WINTER AND SUMMER RESULTS. Since the winter and summer seasons have a marked influence on the principal factors entering into the cost of producing milk, the results have been computed separately for those periods. The months from November to April, inclusive, represent the winter season and from May to October the summer season. This division of time was based directly on the change in methods of herd management made in November and May. The various tables found in this bulletin are based upon figures ob- tained during two years of study, and the weighted average of the two-year records was used whenever it would more accurately express the result. The weighted average was obtained by giving each item a weight in the average according to its relative importance. DESCRIPTION OF HERDS. During the first year records were obtained on 17 herds, having an average size of 31.3 cows, with an average annual production of 7,369 pounds of 3.74 per cent milk per cow. During the second year, 18 herds, 15 of which had been in the first year’s work, had an avefage 4 BULLETIN 919, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. size of 28.6 cows, and produced an average of 8,323 pounds of 3.59 per cent milk per cow. The cows were mostly Holsteins, and the average annual production for both years was 7,833 pounds of 3.66 per cent milk. During the first year the pastures were poorer than they had been for years, whereas during the second year they were exceptionally good until the last month, when the herds were pastured on the second-growth meadows. As a matter of record, many herds grazed on pastures in which the clover stood a foot high—high enough to be cut for hay. ‘The extreme variation in the condition of the pastures during the two seasons largely accounts for the increase of 954 pounds of milk per cow during the second year. For each 100 cows in the herds during the two years, 55 freshened during the winter six-months period and 42 during the summer season, while 3 cows did not calve during the year. During the first year the cows dropping calves in winter were dry 1.9 months, while those cows dropping calves in summer were dry 1.4 months. The corresponding figures for the second year were 2.2 months in winter and 1.5 months in summer. Nearly one-half of the cows freshening dropped their calves during the months from February to May, inclusive. REQUIREMENTS FOR PRODUCING 100 POUNDS OF MILK. The unit requirements for producing 100 pounds of milk during this investigation are shown in Table 1. In order to secure more uniform results and to overcome the effect of fluctuating prices, money values have been eliminated as much as possible. By showing the feeds in terms of pounds and the labor in terms of hours it will be possible to use these figures for some time to come. TABLE 1.—Units required, except cost of management, for producing 100 pounds of mill: in winter and in summer. Winter. Summer. Two... j= ee Item. winters. summers. 1917-18 | 1919-20 1917-181} 1919 Feed: Purchased concentrates. ..... pounds..| 25.8 18.8 22.1 4.3 4.9 4.6 Home-grown graims............. do.... 1.1 12.9 ie Oba Uleseeee see Weil 6 Total concentratesmacceseeee esc eeeee 26.9 31.7 229.4 4.3 6.0 5.22 Hauling and grinding concentrates....| $0.016 $0. 028 $0. 022 $0. 002 $0. 004 $0. 003 Noncommercial roughage. ...pounds. - ot) 10.2 DuS) A Necisew ces -2 a! Commercial carbohydrate hay..do....| 90.1 70.0 79.5 4.4 9.0 6.8 Lesume hay... 2-2 eee eee dows: 3.1 nt7, 7.6 53 -& .6 Totalidry roushaee ssa e eee eee 94.1 91.1 92.9 4.7 10.0 7.5 Silage and other succulent rough- Ce eso) Sesame ara. = pounds..| 156.8 131.1 143.3 42.7 38. 2 40.4 IPASGUNE Sees coos - ee ACTOS! S| ae Ee ie eae ee . 027 .02 025 BSC GING eects cre ecine tase pounds. . 12.4 5.9 920) © [Ses eeeaes ~2 oi 1 This season consisted of September, and October, 1917, and May, June,and July, and August, 1918. 2 ase summary of the unit requirements by seasons is printed in bold-faced type for convenience of the reader. PRODUCING MILK IN WESTERN WASHINGTON. - 5 TABLE 1.—Units required, except cost of management, for producing 100 pounds of milk in winter and in summer—Continued. : Winter. Summer. ee A ee LE ae EB oe (ee a I! fe YK Item. Winters. summers, 1917-18 | 1919-20 1917-18 1919 Labor - EAE eee re oe saat ne ec ees hours. . 2.0 1.8 19 3 1.3 13 PTOUSC ema sels ah anacee cesses dosst- -O1 .O1 -O1 .01 .02 .015 Other costs: E Building CHATIOS Maen sacanssne Soeneet $0. 124 $0. 130 $0. 127 $0. 085 $0. 092 $0. 088 Equipment charges and dairy supplies - 088 . 088 . 088 . 060 . 062 . O61 Herd charges: Taxes, insurance, veteri- nary, medicines, disinfectants, and cow-testing associations............. 043 .034 .038 .029 .024 026 Interest on cow investment..........- .118 .108 .113 . 080 .076 -078 Cost of keeping bull................-.- .078 .074 .076 042 . 042 .042 I GPOL=UrUCkaChanees see nec ne Ue eck eae cae Ae nia] ete eames ert ete oe Me OE Bt eerste Cash hauling of Mk 2 cccc cme cee . 066 . 065 . 062 .067 . 062 061 Total other costs, except deprecia- (OM ONCOWSEemen nti e = seen sn 517 499 - 504 - 363 - 359 -356 Depreciation on cows.............--.- 144 007 072 098 - 005 050 POL MOULeL: COSUSe cos ceee cece faeces $0. 661 $0 506 $0.576 $0. 461 $0.364 $0. 406 It will be noted in Table 1 that for producing 100 pounds of milk in the first winter there were required 26.9 pounds of grain, while during the second winter 31.7 pounds were required, an increase of 4.8 pounds. For dry roughage there is a decrease of 3 pounds, and for succulent roughage a decrease of 25.7 pounds per 100 pounds of milk. This increase in grain and decrease in dry and succulent roughages can be accounted for by the fact that two of the herds that were sold out the first year consumed very little grain but a large quantity of roughage. Since the pastures were of a very excellent quality summer feeding of grain was not followed extensively. Some of the best-producing herds received no grain throughout the summer, which accounts for the low average of 5.2 pounds of grain per 100 pounds of milk during the summer seasons. While there was a slight advance in prices for both hauling and grinding concentrates during the second year, the increase for these charges per 100 pounds of milk from 16 cents to 28 cents in the winter and from two-tenths of a cent to four-tenths of a cent in the summer of the first and second years, respectively, is due primarily to the in- crease in the quantity of feeds ground rather than to the advanced rate of hauling and grinding. The work of collecting milk through this section is thoroughly or- ganized. The milk, shipped in 10-gallon cans, is collected once daily by motor truck. On the return trip the truck brings back the empty cans, which makes it unnecessary to have two sets of cans. As the roads are very good it is not uncommon, in the season of greatest pro- duction, for a motor truck and trailer to haul 100 cans. The efficiency 6 BULLETIN 919, U. 8S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. of the truck method of hauling milk is shown by the very low cost of 6.2 cents per 100 pounds of milk in winter and 6.1 cents per 100 pounds of milk insummer. The use of the motor truck also accounts for the small amount of horse labor. The cost of keeping a bull includes feed, labor, and other costs expressed in dollars. For closer study a table will be found on page 10 expressing the costs in terms of pounds and hours. REQUIREMENTS FOR KEEPING A COW ONE YEAR. The greater production per cow, in summer, of 1,399 pounds of milk, shown in Table 2, is partly due to a larger percentage of cows freshening in the winter and early spring, but more particularly it is the direct result of good pastures. The value of this pasture is espe- cially noticeable when one observes that in winter the cows required 946 pounds of grain to produce 3,217 pounds of milk, while in summer they required ‘only 241 pounds of grain to produce 4,616 pounds of milk. Tasty 2.—Numober of cows, average production per cow, and requirements for keeping a cow during each season and for the entire year, except cost of man- agement, based on records of the two years’ work. : Item. Winter. | Summer. |Entire year Num ber/OhcOws=s-.2s-cesqae oe sse ss tae bocen = see acme sence sees 1,043.1 1, 049.3 1, 046. 2 Average production: per COW <= <2 22-22. sene ees eee pounds 3, 217 4,616 7, 833 Feed: Purchasediconcentratesa-n- seo seaene seer eee neers doseee 711 214 925 fome-prowil grainsr. ea. dees soe e eee eae eee eee do.... 235 27 262 Totaliconeentrates: 2/05 -j2.<-snss s ee eee ene eee dolre: 946 241 1, 187 Haulingiand' grindins/concentratesten 2 ss ee eeee eee eee eee eeee £0.72 $0.15 $0. 87 Noncommercialroughapels poses. sssse eee nee ee tee pounds. . 186 4 190 Commercial carbohydrate hay.....-.....-...---.---.----- donee 2,558 314 2,872 Legume tary: ste): ein cee smerny. one eee ae donee 246 28 274 Total dry roughagest.2.-cees.o- sce ee ae deen do.... 3,360 1,790 5,150 @gUMO MAY eer ho cece ee ee eee OSE Ae eee doe 193 ct 270 Totaldry-roughare:.5Gceces soe a ee eee paren do 3, 892 2,075 5,967 Succulent: TOUCha rea ws 25. see ee oe ee ae eee doses 1,669 1,400 3,069 Bed ging ica oso. 5 no ee ae ee een ares ae Gowers 31 12 43 IPASEUTO oad soa Siesta ee See ae ee CE eee ee ena $1.68 $11.88 $13. 56 Humandaborsssssoss Saco oot ee ee eee hours 16.4 4 | Other costs: Interest and insurance on bullinvestment..............-------------- $10. 54 $10.48 $21.02 Bulls:share of buildings 320s. oe ae ee eee 4.06 4.09 8.15 Mepreciations s2e-sceseeee be oee aera teoninn cece See ee ee eee 6. 36 6. 28 12. 64 *Totaliother costs: soe oe ee oc OS eee eer ei 20.96 20.85 41.81 Creditiforioutsidepwlliservace recone epee eee ee 10. 22 10.10 20, 32 Total other cost less outside bull service...............------------- 10.74 10.75 21.49 Table 5 shows an annual depreciation of $12.64 per bull per year. Most of the bulls were purebred and were purchased when young at purebred prices. As they grew older their values increased. This appreciation in value helped to decrease the depreciation on old bulls sold for beef for less than their purebred value. A credit for outside bull service of $20.82 per year was due to service fees obtained from four of the bulls in the association, one of which was an animal of special merit. However, the large credit for outside service for this bull was partly offset by the increased charges for interest, insurance, and depreciation. If both the “ other costs” of keeping the bull and the credit for outside service had been stricken from the records, the net “ other costs” per year for keeping the other bulls would have averaged $31.69. FACTORS INVOLVED IN THE PRODUCTION OF MILK. FEED. Concentrates is a term applied to grains and to their manufactured by-products which contain a large amount of nutritious substance in a relatively small bulk. Home-grown grains refer to concentrates grown on the farm or in the locality where fed. Dry roughage includes various hays and other rough feeds, which are subdivided into the three following classes: PRODUCING MILK IN WESTERN WASHINGTON. 11 Noncommercial dry roughage applies to coarse feeds, such as corn stover and velvet-grass hay, for which price quotations are not given in the trade papers. Hay or other dry roughage so foul with weeds or so damaged in curing as not to be readily salable is also classified under this heading. Leguminous roughage includes alfalfa, clover, cowpea, soy bean, and other commercial legume hays, when pure, or when so slightly mixed with grasses as not materially to affect the protein content. Commercial carbohydrate roughage refers to all commercial hays except those classified as leguminous roughage. Succulent roughage consists of mangels, potatoes, silage, and soil- ing crops. The quantities of the various feeds used were obtained from actual weights made by the field agent on his regular monthly visit to each farm. Purchased concentrates were chargec at the prices paid, less the value of the sacks in which they were purchased. These sacks were readily salable if not desired for use on the farm and were given the same value for which they could have been sold. The home-grown grains were given the farm price plus such extra charges as hauling and grinding when necessary. When baling or hauling dry rough- age was necessary the price for such was deducted from the market value of the feed. If the succulent roughage was salable the farm price was used in determining valuations per ton; however, if it was not salable a price which was commensurate with its value as com- pared with the value of a marketable product was placed on it. PASTURE. In western Washington pasture plays a very important part in milk production. With cool weather throughout most of the sum- mer, plenty of moisture, and a rich soil there is abundant pasture until late in the fall. During the pasture season almost 60 per cent of the milk for the year was produced and at one-third the yearly ~ feed cost. The charges against pasture consist of interest, taxes, upkeep, and repairs on fences, cutting thistles and weeds, and seeding. Interest was figured on the unimproved value of the land, which was obtained by deducting from the improved value any increase in worth due to the dairy buildings contributary to it. The rate of interest allowed varied from 6 to 8 per cent. The rate was deter- mined by the per cent the farmer would have to pay if he borrowed money to buy the land. The amount of the taxes on the whole farm was ascertained from the books of the county authorities; from this the amount incidental to pasture was calculated. 12 BULLETIN 919, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. Upkeep and repairs to fences were largely an approximation. They were determined by asking the farmers the value and life of posts, wire, etec., and the labor required to build and keep the fences in repair. From these data the annual cost was computed. Cutting thistles and weeds is a necessary operation on most of the pastures; where this was the case the cost for such was included in the pasture charge. A seeding charge was allowed where the pasture takes a regular place in the crop rotation, for in this way the pasture derives some of the benefit from the seeding for meadow. The annual pasture rent per cow amounted to 1.1 acres, or $23.04. LABOR. The average labor rate per hour was obtained by dividing the wages per month, plus such extra considerations as board, house rent, milk, and fuel, by the total number of hours available for work. The hours available for work during the month were determined on the monthly visit to each farm. The times work began in the morning and when it ceased in the evening were noted, and from the period of work was subtracted the time out for meals and rest. The hours per day thus obtained were multiplied by the number of work- ing days in that month, to which were added the hours of work necessary on Sundays. TABLE 6.—Per cent of labor performed and hours per 100 pounds of milk pro- duced for each class of help. Winter. Summer. Distribut: f k vein D but, f work per istribution of work per- per istribution of work per- er 100 Class of labor. formed. pounds formed. Cine of milk. of milk, 1917-18 | 1919-20 | Average. | Average.| 1917-18 1919 Average. | Average. Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent.| Hours. | Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent.| Hours. 27.5 23.8 25: 0.48 7 27.3 27.0 Managers............- i b 0.3 Hired imenicn 2 c.cnees 62. 4 66.1 64. 2 1.20 60.3 58.1 59. 2 .78 Total man labor 89.9 89.9 89.8 1.68 87.0 85.4 86.2 1,14 IWiOMent Niece. sesniae 2.5 1.0 1.8 . 03 2.9 1.1 2.0 - 03 BOY Sseseaceescsciccde 7.6 9.1 8.4 .16 10.1 13.5 11.8 .16 Total. esse ve 100.0 100.0 100. 0 1.87 100.0 100. 0 100.0 1.33 Table 6 shows that 64.2 per cent of the work during the two win- ters and 59.2 per cent of the work during the two summers was per- formed by hired men. It is a practice in that part of the country, especially with the larger dairies, to hire a man and put him in charge of the dairy. The men who follow this line of work are for the most part of Scandinavian or Swiss descent. They become very proficient and make excellent dairymen. They follow regular sched- ules for doing their work and develop a wonderful capacity for PRODUCING MILK IN WESTERN WASHINGTON. 13 milking. During the first year six dairies were handled by these pro- fessional milkers, and each man had an average of 32.8 cows in his “ string” which he fed and milked alone. During the second year the average “string ” consisted of 28.8 cows. In two of these dairies the milkers were accustomed to be at the barn and ready to start their work at 2 o’clock in the morning. At other farms the time for starting work ranged from 2.30 to 4 o’clock. The number of cows which a man can care for depends largely upon the quantity of milk they are producing, but usually it ranges between 18 and 30. A specific instance is known where one man milked 42 cows twice daily for a month. The average daily pro- duction for a “string” of cows varies from 6 to 10 10-gallon cans in winter and from 10 to 14 10-gallon cans in summer. On one farm one man, for more than a week, milked 22 10-gallon cans full a day. Milking usually starts between 2 and 4 o’clock in the morning and the same time in the afternoon. Any work which can be done at odd times, such as throwing down feed and mixing grain, is done between noon and milking time in the afternoon. Small dairies, which do not require all of one man’s time, are quite often cared for by the owner and his family. Only a small percentage of the work was performed by women and boys, as shown in Table 6. The women did very little work around the barn, confining their efforts to washing utensils, which was done in the house. OTHER COSTS. Other costs include all charges on buildings, equipment, and cattle, such as interest, depreciation, upkeep, and repairs. TABLE 7.—Per cent relationship between other costs and capital invested. Item. Buildings. |Equipment.| Cattle. Total. @Capialanyested. 22.2. . Soo. omine vsee see e incor ee = oe $54, 647.14 | $17,223.89 |$108, 679.00 | $180, 550. 03 Percent. | Percent. | Percent. | Percent. et rasta ents aloeiansncacense smcensecel 7.0 tk WO sescececees.- penis RAI ORCS OG BEB OE Soa aera PROB R EE Beanoac 4.5 19.4 BAe nan aeee ane _ ) Sa age geen eee fall oe eee: Sal Sar, om Upkeep: BNO TOPAITS osc pees cs s+ --< nese ao = === | 3.1 a) |boogosucacde| sascscecaste ilking-machine repairs....-.-.-.--.------------------- jreeeeeeceeee Aff |beooscobeosd) basoesSeccsc Ariat pean ene ras a nena woes 2 een ain'ses 16.2 28.4 12.3 15.4 1 Per cent of capital invested in the various costs. BUILDINGS. At the beginning of the work the buildings and silos were inven- toried at their replacement value in normal times. Interest was charged on this value at the rate of 7 per cent. After the first inven- tory the subsequent values were determined by deducting from the 14 BULLETIN 919, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. value at the beginning of the year the amount of depreciation during that year. The depreciation per year was based upon the remaining years of usefulness of the buildings. The average depreciation for the two years shows an annual depreciation of 4.5 per cent. There were no direct taxes on buildings; but, since pasture figures were based on the raw or unimproved eae of ie land, it was neces- sary that the dairy should be charged with the taxes dis to the im- provements caused by the dairy buildings. Insurance charges were taken from the receipts of the insurance companies. A monthly account was kept of the money spent for such items as whitewashing, repairs on doors, etc.; but, to determine the amount necessary for painting, roofing, and such expenses which come less frequently, it was necessary to make an estimate on each dairyman’s buildings of the amounts required yearly for such purposes. The total cost of upkeep and repairs amounted to 3.1 per cent of the capital value of the buildings. EQUIPMENT. The interest charge on equipment was 7.4 per cent of the inventory value of the equipment. Tools and equipment around a dairy barn are usually worn out quite rapidly, which explains the large annual depreciation of 19.4 per cent. The charge for upkeep and repairs was 0.9 per cent and for milking-machine repairs 0.7 per cent. Supplies, such as gasoline, kerosene, washing powder, etc., amounted to 99 cents per cow per year. New equipment purchased during the year was added to the first inventory before subtracting the second inventory. CATTLE. Milk produced by a purebred cow has no greater value than that produced by a grade cow. Raising purebred cattle is a separate busi- ness involving a greater investment and resulting in larger credits for calves. In this investigation the purebred cows were given values of grade cows of corresponding production and purebred calves were likewise given credits as grade calves from dams of corresponding production. At the beginning and end of the year each cow was given an in- ventory value. The first value was based on the price at which the owner thought he could replace her. In order to avoid the influence of market conditions her subsequent value remained the same unless her owner thought that she had become a better or poorer cow. Interest was figured at the rate of 7 per cent upon the investment at the beginning of the year. PRODUCING MILK IN WESTERN WASHINGTON. 15 To obtain the depreciation on cattle the value of every cow that entered the herd during the year was added to the herd inventory at the beginning of the year; from this result was subtracted the total value of the cows at the end of the year plus the prices received for cows sold during that year. A depreciation of 4.4 per cent of the capital value of the cattle is shown. This figure would have been considerably higher had it not been for the large number of cows sold the last year for dairy pur- poses for which the dairymen received a very good price. Taxes chargeable to the dairy were taken from the county auditor’s tax books, and insurance was taken from insurance receipts. Such items as veterinary fees, medicines, disinfectants, and cow- testing-association dues amounted to $1.45 per cow per year. PER CENT COMPARISON OF FACTORS INVOLVED IN MILK PRODUCTION. How did the cost of producing milk in winter compare with the cost in summer? What items were chiefly responsible for the wide variation in the seasons? These questions are answered in the fol- lowing table: : TABLE 8.—Per cent of the total costs represented by feed, labor, and other costs, by seasons. Item. Winter. | Summer. ae Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent. MGGd est M1 eNOS GUMETCOS tenets = Bare lec slae qt ta Saints =e winforslaie sims =e a wie\s le misje'sisisiaie : 5 : SEES ELEC Seer ee een see win cheictal ste aie im eestsie elelate misicyeld cla's/enin x acre 'sietnteia sinless 9 11.6 12.5 Feed, bedding, and pasture cost ......--- argo rsecesnceas sono SsacdeS 37.5 18.9 56.4 Bn sRV OT COST eet eels enters Soe tle nlcloiniale c ciniseseisio eh cialate been eieislslainiaiaiei= Siniaineieeievetere 11.4 12.1 23.5 Other costs, except herd inventory variation...........-.-....------------ 8.7 8.9 17.6 Total cost, except herd inventory variation.........----.-.--------- 57.6 39.9 97.5 DEES Gillon On neil sa— dot ep soe secabsepe snes Sse sac seo sa sce pecan acssebee 1.2 1.3 2.5 Mofalicostiot production. s.s.2-2.s- oo == 6-19 =a =i oe = =i 58.8 41.2 100.0 The first two columns show that the wide variation between the winter and the summer costs was due largely to the difference in the cost of feed and pasture. The combined feed, bedding, and pasture cost in winter was 37.5 per cent of the yearly costs, while the cost of these items in summer was 18.9 per cent. The fact that the labor cost in winter was 11.4 per cent and in summer 12.1 per cent shows there was a difference of only 0.7 per cent in this item for the two seasons. — The high prices received for cows sold during the year reduced the depreciation charge, and this item is reported separately, so its effect on the total cost can be seen. The cost of producing milk in winter was 58.8 per cent of the yearly cost, while the summer cost was 41.2 per cent of it. 16 BULLETIN 919, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. AVERAGE COMPARED WITH “ BULK-LINE” COSTS. During the last few years attempts have been made to use the aver- age cost of production as a basis for determining the selling price of milk. Where the average cost basis is recommended it is evident that practically all those producers whose costs are above the average will find the profits reduced if they are so fortunate as not to suffer an actual loss. This will tend to discourage production and reduce the available supply. In using the bulk-line method for determining a necessary price, only a certain number of the extremely high-cost producers may have costs above this price. The use of this method is illustrated in Table 9. TABLE 9.—Net cost, quantity, and per cent of milk produced by each herd, two winters and two summers. Winter 1917-18, Winter 1919-20. v4 Milk produced. Milk produced. COSt Sa era es oe eet oe Pel | COSE per 100 per 100 pounds.| Quan- | Per cent | Cumula-|/pounds.) Quan- | Per cent | Cumula- tity. of total. tive. tity. of total. tive. Pounds, | Per cent. | Per cent. Pounds. | Per cent. | Per cent. $1.91 | 67,036 4.2 4.2 || $2.50 | 156,032 8.8 8. 2.26 | 113,716 7.2 11.4 2.80 | 113,302 6.4 15.2 2.39 88, 736 5.6 17.0 2.88 | 144,577 8.2 23.4 2. 43 60, 595 3.8 20.8 2.96 | 127,348 te 30.6 2.56 | 144,362 9.1 29.8 3.10 66, 98 3.8 34.4 2.63 66, 956 4.2 34.1 3.11 90, 257 5.1 39.5 2.69 | 195,756 12.3 46.4 3.16 |} 213,169 12.1 51.6 2.80 99, 931 6.3 5257 3. 20 92, 420 5.2 56.8 2.84 82, 857 5.2 5759) 24)/0 3220 chances cen|s seec.s aes coeeeeeene 2.86 | 131,097 8.2 66.1 3.30 | 202,567 11.5 68. 2 2.89 | 113,785 (eal 73.3 || 3.31 56, 349 3.2 71.4 DD OAR Mee pete Me ea ce ite | sre cute oe arees 3.48 54, 677 3.1 74.5 3.02 48, 222 3.0 76.3 3.50 62, 631 3.6 78.1 3.29 91, 896 5.8 82.1 3.60 | 100, 453 5.7 83.8 3.47 | 112,754 7.1 89. 2 3.83 39, 680 2.2 86.0 3.59 80, 523 5.1 94.2 3.95 | 113,973 6.4 92.5 3.82 61, 283 3.9 98. 1 4.01 79, 539 4.5 97.0 4.85 30, 126 1.9 100.0 4.61 53, 581 3.0 100.0 Summer 1917-18. Summer 1919, $1.06 | 174,306 7.5 7.5 $1.14 100, 428 4.0 4.0 1.24 83, 089 3.6 11.0 1.18 | 210,813 8.4 12.4 1. 25 85, 339 sbi 14.7 1.30 | 123,893 4.9 17.4 1.31 92,050 3.9 18.6 1.33 | 145,812 5.8 23.2 1.33 | 160,589 6.9 25.5 1.36 89, 853 3.6 26.7 1.34 | 166,339 Zeal 32.6 1.39 | 177,018 iil! 33.8 1.35 | 132, 277 5.7 38.3 1.42 | 211,960 8.4 42.2 1.38 | 167,584 7.2 45.5 1.60 89, 982 3.6 45.8 1.39 | 112,097 4.8 00537 | VA6Ol Pe. Sense coe |eeeeeeeae ease eee 1.40 | 213, 498 9.1 59. 4 1.62 | 309,716 12.3 58. 2 amt bets ei esc eee 2 ciel lomo ae 1.64 98, 174 3.9 62.1 1.53 63, 466 2.7 62.1 1.7 102, 351 4.1 66. 2 1.57 | 462,128 19.8 81.9 1.74 | 89,637 3.6 69.8 1.65 | 112,066 4.8 86.7 1.77 | 167,586 6.7 76.4 1.93 | 136, 413 5.8 92.6 Ue 92,741 3.7 80.1 1.95 | 125, 893 5.4 98.0 1.87 | 182, 253 5.3 85.4 3. 48 47, 846 2.0 100.0 2.03 98,741 3.9 89.3 2.12 | 91,808 3.7 93.0 2.32 | 175,642 7.0 100.0 1 Average. PRODUCING MILK IN WESTERN WASHINGTON. 17 In Table 9, for the winter 1917-18, it will be noted that only 73.3 per cent of the milk was produced at $2.89 or less per 100 pounds, which is the first cost below the average cost of $2.91. In many sec- tions this volume of milk would be an inadequate supply. On the _other hand, 94.2 per cent of the milk was produced at $3.59 or less per 100 pounds. In order to include 98.1 per cent of the volume of milk, the cost advances to $3.82 per hundred, thus increasing the cost 23 cents per 100 pounds and adding only 3.9 per cent of the volume. If the price of the milk were placed at $3.47 per 100 pounds, a profit ranging from 18 cents ($3.47 minus $3.29) to $1.56 ($3.47 minus $1.91) per 100 pounds would tend to increase the volume of milk produced by the more efficient dairymen. Similar deductions may be made from the other portions of the table. MONTHLY DISTRIBUTION OF FACTORS IN MILK PRODUCTION. A study of Table 10 shows that the per cent of milk produced each season did not vary greatly from year to year; however, there is a noticeable increase for both years in summer production over winter production. During the first year there was 19 per cent more milk produced in summer than in winter, and in the second year 17.4 per cent more was produced. The larger flow of milk in summer can be attributed to better pasture more than to any other cause. With the exception of the month of November in the first year the feed, pasture, and bedding cost for the winter in both years was de- cidedly higher than in the summer. The same is true of feed and bedding cost minus the manure credit. A study of the results of the two years’ work shows that the feed costs for the first and second summers were 33.5 per cent and 33.6 per cent, respectively, of the total yearly feed costs. Likewise it is found that the summer production was 59.5 per cent and 58.7 per cent of the total production for the corresponding years. Taste 10.—Monthly distribution of milk prices, milk sold and used, feed cost, and labor required. YEAR 1917-1918. Feed, | Human labor. Horse labor. Income d Weed." | DAsenne, |: Se an per 100 | milk | sold poses bedding Month and season. ounds sold A cos Per 100 Per 100 Afmilk.| and | used became minus | pounds ae pounds eee used * | manure | of milk. * | of milk. credit. Per cent.|Per cent.|Per cent.|Per ene ns: Oe: ee Hours Tee oe cic x $2.95 7.4 6.5 7.0 Sth i i i L ieee 2 eee 3.01 7.3 6.3 11.3 10.0 2.2 10.0 - 008 - 04 WAMURULY Ss eos aa 3.02 7.0 6.0 12.1 10.8 2.2 9.8 .O11 .05 Webruarye---------- 3.01 6.7 5.8 11.6 10.3 aoe 9.2 .014 . 06 PIC RES clos s 2. 81 7.8 7.3 12.8 11.4 1.9 10.2 O11 . 06 PAI ree eee ec tases 2.52 8.3 8.6 ins 10.4 1.5 9.4 . 005 -03 Winter....... 2. 86 44.5 40.5 66.5 58.6 2.0 9.6 008 .04 18 BULLETIN 919, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. TABLE 10.—Monthly distribution of milk prices, milk sold and used, feed cost, and labor required—Continued. YEAR 191/-1918. Feed, Human labor. Horse labor. Income pasture Income from Mille Bae and / per 10 mill so ?) bedding Month and season. | Sounds | sold and race cost | Per100] po, | Per100| po, of milk.| and used. east 8! minus | pounds com pounds AR used. * |manure | of milk. of milk. credit ji Per cent.|Per cent.|Per cent.|Per cent.| Hours. | Hours. | Hours. | Hours May discos theese cee $2. 21 10.0 11.8 Teh 1.3 1.2 10.6 0.007 0. 06 JUMEZ ase ease 2.09 9.4 11.8 4.7 4.5 1.2 10.3 . 009 08 AaiyeGe atne SARE 2.28 9.1 10.4 5.2 5.0 1.3 10.2 - 012 10 AV SIIS Ha se a ee 2.78 9.4 8.8 5.3 (hy A 1.4 9.8 . 005 03 September.......... 2. 66 9.1 8.9 4.8 4.6 1.4 9.1 006 04 OX 0) 01) peo 2081 8.5 7.8 6.0 5.8 1.6 9.1 033 19 Summer...... 2.43 55.5 59.5 33.5 32.3 1.3 9.8 O11 08 Wear settee! 2.61| 100.0| 100.0] 100.0| 90.9 196 | Panlan7 010 06 | | YEAR 1919-1920. November.........- 3.19 7.0 623 10.6 9.9 1.9 9.7 009 05 December.........- | 3. 28 7.4 6.5 11.9 11.2 2.0 11.1 004 02 VANUATYs« eisnes