Vermont watchman and State journal. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1836-1883, 1880-10-13
eIarirnlfWaL.
t. II. HOsKINs. Agricultural Editor.
Dry, Green, and Ensilaged Corn-Fodder.

cred worth saving, though stock are often
turned into the corn-feds to eat what they
will after the ears have been gathered.
The only eastern man Of prominence who
has talked against corn.fodder is Dr. Loring,
president of the New England Agricultural
Society," and even he is willing to admit a
difference between corn-fodder ard fodder
corn, meaning by the first the stalks or
"stover" of field corn after removing the
ears, and by the second corn grown thickly
on purpose for feeding either green or dry.
This last he admits to be valuable, though
he thinks even that is over-estimated. On
the other hand that other medical farmer,
DR.. Sturtevant lately editor of the Scientific
Farmer, reckons his slower at two-thirds
in value of the price of good hay, and he
raises large fields of corn partly with the
view of using the dry stalks for cow-feed and
selling his hay.
Though we have grown and fed both
fodder.corn and corn-fodder for many years,
yet we never tried feeding it alone to milk
cows until the present season. We confess
that we have been disappointed with it.
Until our early sweet corn was in the milk
we soiled our cows upon grass, cut upon
Amasa SCOTS plan before the stem APP
peared, and with excellent results. We
had one haf-acre of sweet corn growing in
alternate rows with newly set Strawberries
as a shade to the young plants. In August
we began cutting this and taking about
half the best ears for the pig, giving all the
rest to the cows The decline in the guam
tity and quality of the milk was immediate
and marked. An allowance of a quart of
meal additional per day did not bring either
quantity or quality back to the standard OF
grass. Lately, the sweet corn being ex-
hausted, we have been feeding Sanford
corn, which is much better liked by the
cows and, probably as a consequence, is pro-
ducing more milk. We should not have be-
leved Sanford corn to be so much better
than sweet corn had we not seen how much
better it is eaten. Yet even the Sanford is
inferior to grass.
Cured corn. fodder, if well cured, with the
has always proved with us SO nearly equal
to fair average hay that we could not notice
difference. But when fed alone it makes
very white butter that is hard to churn.
Nicely cured corn fodder, not grown so thick
but there are good many nubbins on it,
is better, in our experience, than average
hay for butter production.
We have never, however, been able to get
any corn-fodder of SO good kind, or so
perfectly cured, that less than twenty per
cent of the total weight was rejected by
COWS. This rejected portion, consisting Of
the butts of the stalks, is not total loss, as
horses will eat good deal of what the cows
leave. We do not believe that il could be
made profitable to force COWS in milk to eat
up the best corn-fodder, or fodder-corn, per
fectly clean. No doubt they could be
starved into it, but where is your milk in
that case You won't find much of it in
the pail.
Here, if anywhere, comes in the main
profit OF ensilage The fermentation of en-.
silage, according to the chemists, makes
about four per cent more of fodder corn di
gestible than in the raw state. Add this to
the twenty per cent usually left by the cows,
if not forced to eat it, and we have gain
of one-fourth in the feeding value of ensilage
over perfectly cured corn-fodder. When we
consider the difficulty, and we may say, in
some seasons, the impossibility of perfectly
curing cornfodder so that it will not mould,
we think it would be fair to say that the gain
OF ensiage (as to feeding value) over cured
less than one-third.
If corn-fodder could be preserved by en-
silage without the production of alcohol or
vinegar in the mass, there seems no reason to
doubt that its use would prove of vast bene-
fit to dairy farmers. To increase the feed
ing value of fodder-corn one-third, as we
have no doubt is the case when enslaged, is
to put it about on an equality with the best
hay cut in the blossom. When with such
ensilage a mixture of bran or oat meal with
corn is fed TO milch COWS in winter, we
should expect the milk and butter yield to
be quite satisfactory. But the effect of
sour and alcoholic ensilage upon the teeth
and stomachs of cows would, we greatly
fear, soon prove so injurious that the loss in
the end would be greater than the gain. II
is not impossible that chemistry may be able
to give us some cheap and harmless sub
stances which, sprinkled upon the ensilage
will prevent these harmful Preventative pro
cesses, and give us perfectly sweet ensil.
age. If this result can be reached we should
expect to see the use of ensilage become gen
aral nm our dairy farms