The Globe-republican., 1890-02-12
AGRICULTURAL HINTS.
VALUE OF FoDDER-cuTTERs.

VALUE OF FOOOER-COTTERS
Some Interesting Trials ut the Wisconsin
Experiment. Station.
Short crops over the Northwest two
years ago drove many of our farmers to
economizing feed in a way never before
thought of, and feed-cutters were bought
BY thousands, as manufacturers of those
machines can testify. The abundant
harvest of the last season and the indif-
ference of farmers to cattle have caused
many of the machipee to lie idle the
present winter; yet some farmers have
not grown discouraged with the low
price of cattle, and still have the ambi-
ton to make their farms carry as much
stock as possible, and such are still in
terested in any facts that touch upon the
question of economical feeding.
We have conducted at this station
three experiments with cut versus un-
cut fodder for mich cows, and in each
instance the result, measured by the
amount of fodder required to produce a
given amount of milk and butter, was in
favor of cutting the fodder. In one ex-
pertinent we used corn-stalks of the
Pride of the North type. small yellow
dent, with rather small-sized stalks.
The fodder had been grown for the
grain, and the ears had been husked from
it. The fodder was run through machine
which cut it into pieces about an inch
long and shredded the coarser parts. The
result of this trial was that 721 lbs. of
cut fodder, fed with grain, produced as
much milk as 1, 1873 lbs. of the same fOd-
der when uncut, with the same amount
of grain as in the first case. In the Sec
cnd trial, with the same sort of corn
stalks, 1,217 lbs. of cut stalks, with
certain quantity of grain, produced as
much milk and butter as 1000 lbs. of
uncut stalks, with the same amount of
grain as in the first case. In the third
trial Stowelrs Evergreen sweet corn,
grown for fodder. but containing many
ears, was used. The stalks of this corn
were quite soft; 1,6OO lbs. of cut fodder
of this variety lasted two cows twenty
five days, while the same weight of un-
cut fodder lasted twenty-five days, with
the daily yield of butter about equal in
both cases.
From these trials we note that there
was a saving Of thirty-six per cent. of
fodder in the first case, thirty-oue per
cent. in the second. and nine in the
third. The first two experiments may
be considered representative of such
fodder as is usually grown by the farm
ers of Wisconsin, and shows that it is
fair to assume that something like one
third of the fodder is saved by running
it through the feed cutter, while for
such corn as Stowelrs Evergreen, with
very soft stalks, when carefully fed, the
loss when fed whole may be as small as,
nine per cent. compared with cutting.
For corn with as coarse, large stalks as
pect that the loss from feeding whole
may reach forty per cent.
An interesting question arises in this
connection. viz: whether the saving is
due simply to the cows eating the
coarse parts, which would otherwise be
wasted, or to less labor in mastica-
ton because of the fodder being finely
divided by the cutter. Our figures
show that in the first trial fourteen per
cent of the uncut fodder was uneaten,
while there was a saving by cutting of
thirty-six per cent In the second trial
the uneaten stalks were thirty per
cent, while there was saving of fodder
by cutting of thirty-one per cent. In
the third trial the weight of the uneaten
stalks represents the saving by cutting.
suspect that the saving of labor in
mastication is after all merely nominal,
and that the gain by cutting feed is
mainly in getting the cattle to eat
portions of fodder which they otherwise
would not.-Breeder's Gazette.