The Manchester journal. [volume] (Manchester, Vt.) 1861-current, 1882-03-30
Aarilultnral.
pr. uo.lia. on rn.liAg..

nevor gone crazy on novelties We take
a. our motto 10 agriculture The following
couplei
10 Dot the ilfst 10 lay the old aside,
Nor vet the last Nv whom the new Is tried
Bat uew were tbe frs, 10 The state to call At.
teutiou to The discovery Tor rather the per.
fection o. this process Of saving green
fodder by Mons Gofari, and 10 express
and opinion IN favor Of It, usefulness, II
not for cows ia milk. al least for feeding
other stock. We have repeatedly caution
"a our readers agAins, the exaggerated
statements Of men like DR. Bailey Of Mass.
achusetts aud Mr. Mills Of New Jersey IN
regard to the feeding value OF such fodder
and the crop TO be expected from an acre,
We DO not regard cora in any form AS
suitable feed for any kind of stock when
given alone. Its elements are not rightly
proportional as single ration for any an
imal This is shown theoretically 10y ag-
ricnltural chemists, aud We have proved 1t
to our own satisfaction by many trials in
practice No kind Of stock can be kept
healthy aud thrifty for long time togeth'
er on corn fodder or on corn fodder and
corn meal The proportions of the heat
making to the Hesh-formiug constituents
in this grain are not right to make it a per
feet or even an economical food for any
animal. This is especially true for stabbed
stock and still more especially true for
stabbed COWS in milk Store cattle expos
ed to the weather at all seasons can get
along on corn, but housed stock require
SIN aller proportion Of carbohydrates,
heating food than cattle running out,
while cows in milk not only require less Of
carbo-hy drates, but they require more OF
the heterogeneous element, full proportion
Of which is required to make the casein or
cheese material Of the milk, while for the
fatty part cows do better with somewhat
oily rather than starchy ration, which, If
transformed to fat at all, is done at great
loss, both Of food and vital energy.
We are not yet quite certain that dairy
cows will keep their health year after year
when literally fed on ensilage in the acid
| state in which we usually see it. Already
the evidence begins to accumulate that
while liberal feed of ensilage increases
the flow of milk, there is no increase OF
butter, unless cotton-seed or linseed
meal is fed with it. This practical result
is Just what the chemistry OF these foods
would lead us to expect, and ought to help
TO give farmers confidence in agricultural
chemistry. But that cows appear to do
well on ensilage and are very fond OF 1t, is
a fact not to be overlooked. To our mind
ensilage is simply a cheap and easy sub
stitute for roots 1t occupies the same
place in the dietary as beets, turnips and
carrots, while it is very much more easily
and cheaply produced, harvested and pre-
served. Succulent food is essential IN
some form in dairying and more particu-
larly in winter dairying Ensilage is un-
questionably the cheapest succuleEt we
can grow, and if care is taken that 1t does
not become too sour, and is not fed IN too
large quantities or without liberal feed
ing of grain and some hay, we believe 1t
will prove a very valuable addition to our
resources. Certain it is that all who have
used it testify to the increased flow OF mix
and the good appetite Of the cows fed up
on it. Very few dairy herds, however,
have been fed on ensilage more than one
or two seasons.
Most exaggerated statements have been
put forth as TO the yield of ensilage corn
per acre, and upon these estimates togeth'
or with others equally exaggerated regard
ing its feeding value, calculations have
been made showing that by this means four
or five times as much stock can be kept as
by other methods. One hazards little IN
saving that such calculations are mislead'
ing in the highest degree, but they ought
not to mislead any practical farmer who is
man of thought. Figuring upon facts,
we cannot make ensilage in the long run
very much cheaper than hay, in proper
ton to its feeding value. We must ma
nure high for corn; and if we would manure
our grass lands as we do our ensiiagt
fields, we should then have better and
fairer basis of comparison. Hay is made
of lighter grasses than ensilage corn, and
to get the same amount Of food in thu
form Of hay we must take moro land. Bn
on the other hand we save in labor wheth
, er we dry our grass or ensiloe IT. A sil'
filled with green grass (which for ensilag'
may be allowed to attain its full growth
would contain much more feeding materia
than il filled with corn. Ii is also nucl
more perfect ration than corn, the analy
} sis of our hest grasses, especially whei
mixed with clover, showing them to be
complete food, requiring no grain or oil
meal to give the best results. IL VII
probably cost less to ensiloe grass than II
make IT into hay aud it would be NOR
! nutritious feed in the moist than IN the Or.
state, and would be more freely eaten. !
would not astonish us at all If the silo
now being built for corn should eventual
" be filed with grass, clover, Hungarian
: moved oats, and other kinds OF green foo
! more concentrated and better balanced a
7 feeding ration than corn. When farm
ers are willing to "farm high" in the mead
ow as well as in the corn fold. ensiloe'
grass will be found quite as profitable a
anything But meanwhile We may reloic
that we have found cheap aud easy wa.
4 81 uniting nm and nreseryiug milk maxi nI