The Dairy Cow as a Producer of Human Food |
Previous | 1 of 4 | Next |
|
small (250x250 max)
medium (500x500 max)
Large
Extra Large
large ( > 500x500)
Full Resolution
All (PDF)
|
This page
All
|
April, 1976
TIlE DAIRY C{M AS A PRODUCER OF HUMAN FOOD
Considerable national attention has recently been given to various people ~ho
advocate the abolishment of the dairy cow as a producer of human food. These
doomsday advocates contend that the dairy cow competes for food that could other~
ise save dying hungry people in other parts of the ~orld. They have tended to
confuse scientific facts in building their case . To combat these groups, the
following facts are presented . The dairy industry has an opportunity to tell a
good story .
STATEMENT: The cow competes ~ith man for her food.
FACT: In general, only 10l of the dairy cow's ration comes frem feeds suitable for
direct human consumption such as cereal grains, beans, etc. About 2/3 of
the ration is fiber material such as grass, hay or silage that is never considered
as human food . Of the concentrates ration, a very large part are
by-products such as beet pulp, millrun, brewer's vaste , cottonseed meal, etc.
STATEMENT : Americans DlUst conserve cereal grains so they can be shipped to starving
humans overseas.
FACT: As much as 80'7. of our exported grains are used overseas for animal feeds.
Developing nations are rapidly expanding cattle numbers. For example,
Tunisia is importing 5,000 dairy cows and Tanzania has a $13 million dollar
deiry development program. Russia vith the largest production of milk in the
vorld, is increasing their dairy industry 2l end importing grain to support
it. European nations vith strong government subsidy programs are mostly
importing grains to feed cattle. The developing nations actually own 607. of
the ~orld's livestock and poultry, but supply only 227. of the ~orld ' s milk,
meet and eggs. The U.S . owns 87. of the livestock, but supplies 19'1. of the
world's animal product!>.
STATEMENT: More human food cen be produced per acre vith edible plants than with
forages fed to live!>tock.
Thi!> is true when the be!>t tilleble soil is considered. The advantage may
be as much all. 3 to 1. However, there are vast arees where cereal production
is risky but good forage production is routine.
:,U~~:~::;:~!~~:'.~b~~--:"i.~,,:,u~~::<:<Oo~f~';: ~~.;:~ C;':::~,,~~~~,:.II ;:.~,;u~~:~~~~:
cI" .... o •• and ,h. U. S. O.p.nmn" of Alrr><ul,u .. , <OCP"-'''"Ir-
Object Description
| Title | Dairy Herd Improvement Notes, April, 1976 |
| Series Designation | Dairy Herd Improvement Association Monthly Report |
| Description | The monthly report of the Dairy Herd Improvement Association (DHIA) was initiated by E.E. Anderson, Extension Dairyman in the 1940s. From the 1960s forward a cooperative report had been prepared jointly by staff members of the NMSU Dairy Department, Agricultural Engineering, Agronomy, Veterinary and sent primarily to dairy herds on test (OS, DHIA, DHIR), County Extension Agents, and Instructors of Vocational Agriculture. The publication of the DHIA report was overseen by Philip Leyendecker, a director of the NMSU Agricultural Extension Service in cooperation with U.S. Department of Agriculture. The title of the report had changed over time; it had a couple of variations, New Mexico Dairy Herd Improvement and Dairy Improvement Notes. This digital collection includes historical issues published between 1961 and 1980. |
| Subject | dairy cattle (NAL); dairy farming (NAL); dairy industry (NAL); Dairy cattle--New Mexico; Dairying--New Mexico; Dairy cattle--New Mexico--Periodicals; Milk and milk products; |
| Creator | Ells, Borden; |
| Date Original | 1976-04 |
| Digital Publisher | New Mexico State University Library |
| Rights | Copyright, NMSU Board of Regents |
| Collection | NMSU Cooperative Extension Service and Agricultural Experiment Station Publications |
| Digital Identifier | UAAPdhi197604 |
| Source | Call number J87.N6 X313.99 D13; http://libcat.nmsu.edu/vwebv/holdingsInfo?bibId=556737 |
| OCLC number | 35302385 |
| Type | Text |
| Format | application/pdf |
| Language | eng |
Page Description
| Title | The Dairy Cow as a Producer of Human Food |
| Series Designation | Dairy Herd Improvement Association Monthly Report |
| OCR |
April, 1976
TIlE DAIRY C{M AS A PRODUCER OF HUMAN FOOD
Considerable national attention has recently been given to various people ~ho
advocate the abolishment of the dairy cow as a producer of human food. These
doomsday advocates contend that the dairy cow competes for food that could other~
ise save dying hungry people in other parts of the ~orld. They have tended to
confuse scientific facts in building their case . To combat these groups, the
following facts are presented . The dairy industry has an opportunity to tell a
good story .
STATEMENT: The cow competes ~ith man for her food.
FACT: In general, only 10l of the dairy cow's ration comes frem feeds suitable for
direct human consumption such as cereal grains, beans, etc. About 2/3 of
the ration is fiber material such as grass, hay or silage that is never considered
as human food . Of the concentrates ration, a very large part are
by-products such as beet pulp, millrun, brewer's vaste , cottonseed meal, etc.
STATEMENT : Americans DlUst conserve cereal grains so they can be shipped to starving
humans overseas.
FACT: As much as 80'7. of our exported grains are used overseas for animal feeds.
Developing nations are rapidly expanding cattle numbers. For example,
Tunisia is importing 5,000 dairy cows and Tanzania has a $13 million dollar
deiry development program. Russia vith the largest production of milk in the
vorld, is increasing their dairy industry 2l end importing grain to support
it. European nations vith strong government subsidy programs are mostly
importing grains to feed cattle. The developing nations actually own 607. of
the ~orld's livestock and poultry, but supply only 227. of the ~orld ' s milk,
meet and eggs. The U.S . owns 87. of the livestock, but supplies 19'1. of the
world's animal product!>.
STATEMENT: More human food cen be produced per acre vith edible plants than with
forages fed to live!>tock.
Thi!> is true when the be!>t tilleble soil is considered. The advantage may
be as much all. 3 to 1. However, there are vast arees where cereal production
is risky but good forage production is routine.
:,U~~:~::;:~!~~:'.~b~~--:"i.~,,:,u~~::<: |
