Rocky Mountain husbandman. [volume] (Diamond City, Mont.) 1875-1943, 1878-06-20

is twice as valuable as an acre of corn"
Now, if he means an acre of peas in a good
pea producing country is twice as valuable
as an acre of corn where you cannot raise
corll--or at best only a few nubs of ''squaw''
corn for roasting-his comparison is simply
an absurdity. From the general tone Of his
statements, it is fair to presume that he
means the produce of an acre OF peas is
twice as valuable as the produce OF an acre
of corn in a corn country would be to feed
to hogs here in Montana. Now, upon this
presumption of his meaning; let Us indulge
in a fewaf figures. From Agricultural Re
ports for 1866, 1867 and 1869, we find that
corn in the State.ot Iowa averaged in those
three years. 80 4-5 bushels per acre. Let us
take this, as an average corn crop. Many
Eastern feeders claim that ten bushels of
corn judiciously fed will produce one hun
dred pounds ot dressed pork, While others,
more economical in feeding, claim that less
than ten bushels wifi produce one hundred
pounds Of pork But in making the COM
parison. we win take the ten bushel estim'
ate, and throw off the two and four-fitths
bushels from the yield of corn per acre to
balance the extra cost of pea seed, and then
we have three hundred pounds of pork per
acre of corn, which, at ten cents per pound
(not above the average Montana price,
amounts to $30'per acre of corn. Then, as
Tan acre of peas is4tWice as valuable as an
acre of corn,' we will double this amount
for peas, giving us $50 per acre of peas. AS
we "can raise two crops of peas in season
from the same ground" we will double it
again, making $120 from two crops OF peas,
in one season, on one acre ot ground. Is
not that pretty good? A farm of one hum
dred acres, cultivated in this manner with
peas. and fed to hogs,s*would give us annu-
ally the snug little SUM of $4,000. = Surely
the Courier has shoWn4the farmers bon
ANA.
1t seems to me that such exaggerated rep
resentations of the productions Of our Ter
ritory are detrimental to its true interests.
Whoever is led to engage in any enterprise
through exaggeratien is snreto meet with
disappointment, and disappointment leads
to discomfort, and discomfort usually makes
poor citizen.
" Now, Mr.. Editor, let us candidly examine
the merits of the pea, and the advantages Of
it's cultivation in Montana as a feeding crop.
The pea ranks lower as 1alte,tsng food, for
stock of all kinds, than wheat, buckWheat,
corn, rye, oats, and linseed cake, !. e., ac-
cordng to scientific analysis. From the
best English and American authorities, the
percentage OF nutritive constituents found
in peas, barley, oats and corn Zone hundred
pounds of eaeh1@is as follows: Peas, flesh
formers %. l, fat-formers 41.9; barley, flesh
formers 1870, fat-formers $40; oats, flesh
formers 1910, fatformers 51.1; Indian corn,
f1esh-tormers 1l.0, fat-tormers 66.7. The
total nHtritive percentage of one hundred
pounds Of each is Peas, $40; barley, $50 !;
oats, 69.1'; Indiancorn,7 III. Thus we see
that the pea makes better 7aesh-torn,ing
food than barley, oats or corn, but is for
tattening purposes not as goodas either, and
| very much inferior 10 co1as. I'm total nutri-
tive value it will be seen that the pea is
equal to barley, but inferior to oats or corn.
This is what we learn from chemical analy-
sis, and probably should also be taken with
some allowance, as it is well known to feed
ers that such analysis does not always give
the true practical valueaof food-only, the
approximate value. But, taking the above
as indicating the correct comparative value
{for feeding purposes) of peas and thecereals
named, we might conclude that good way
to raise pork in this country would be to