Vermont phÅ“nix. [volume] (Brattleboro, Vt.) 1834-1955, 1882-11-24

Among reports to the department of agri-
culture of practical tests of ensilage is one
from LeGrand b. Cannon of Burlington who
on his Shelburn farm has a silo on the same
level with his feeding rooms, in size 14xl5
feet, fifteen feet deep and divided by wood
en- partition. Ten feet in height of the walls
are of stone, with four feet of wood on top.
The cost of this silo was $3.50. The only
crop used for ensilage was fodder corn, the lat
ter planted in drills and cultivated three times
the land being well MANFRED. The fodder
was harvested after the grain had formed on
the ear. BY actual weight twenty three tons
to the acre were harvested on three acres, and
on ten other acres about twelve tons to the
acre, fifteen tons to the acre being about an
average crop Experience shows that the
harvesting, chopping and filling should be-
done as rapidly as possible. If convenient
the silo should be filled, covered and weighted
in two days. Assuming Sl5 per acre for ma
nure, S15 per acre for planting and cultiva-
ting, with crop of fifteen tons to the acre
seventy. five cents for cutting, drawing and
packing, eDsilage would cost 50. 70 per ton.
Six weeks elapsed before opening the slo.
The temperature of the ensiage on opening
was found to be 800. The condition was APP
| parently perfect, the fermentation vinous and
stopped at that point No deterioration was
noticeable during the consumption of the 100
tons of ensage. Mr.. Cannon, in estimating
the value of ensilage for stock considers it
more than the equal of hay considering the
cost of each. An average of eghty-fve
pounds per head was fed daily to three-year-
old steers for five and a half months Ensi-
lage was fed in connection with three pounds
| of grain daily for each animal. Cattle thus
| fed made a greater gain and were in better
health and condition than others fed on TWEEN
| ty pounds of chopped hay and three pounds
| of grain. Mr. Cannon writes: II consider
ensilage profitable and believe it is entirely
healthy, taking the place of roots. It is east
| ly digested, as is shown by the uniform tenn
perature of the animals and the condition of
| the skin and hair That ensilage has certain
advantages cannot be denied though certain
claims made by enthusiasts are extravagant
| Not more than fifteen TO twenty-five tons can
| be depended upon per acre. 1t is more GER
| tain as a crop than hay. Twice as many au-
| imals can be kept on the same acreage. 1t is
largely a substitute for roots. The labor of
feeding ensiage is much less than hay. The
| space required to store it is not one quarter
that required for hay present the follow
ing experiment; fed ninety three y ear old
steers, divided in three lots cattle and feed
weighed monthly, First lot-fed twenty
pounds hay with three pounds grain daily
run in yard with shelter. Second lot-kept
in warm stable and sanchions; fed 175
pounds of hay, one peck mangles and three
pounds of grain. Third lot-fed eighty-fve
pounds ensilage with three pounds grain.
The third lot gained one quarter pound day
more than lot number two, and one half
pound more than lot number one. The COM
parative cost of feeding was five per cent in
favor of ensilage,