The Opelousas courier., 1895-01-26
FARMER AND PLANTER
SALE OF COTTON SEED.

na1 Price Can the pinuso~
to Pay ? @aA Men Afford
m;i,aa'he time when ccttsonseed oil
- We're safely established the nr;ce
=: sec has been an annu;a theua 80
oAseussion between the farmer and MIL
men' Lately the matter has rece,vad
;oaa st state Importance from the polit.
trust. VAC
WIN the farmer the question sbop,a
y" AT what price car I afford =, sal1
Ay cotton seed?' and mo-. What nr;o.
49, .ne null men afford to pav?- since
troll, '~Soho MS con-
1t is not likely that any discussion in
PRESS or otherwise, will materially
.EANee the majority offarmers In the
.hIposai OK their cotton seed. Whether
sne price Is sl4 or s. per ton. the seed
WI, oe sold 1ustthe same-reluctant]v
uefoafs, but none the less steaa;lv'
Hhs farmer is too prone to ,ool, uno,
me sale Of the seed as so n,cb saraa
.ssardiess OF the price, but I believe
mere are ome who. if clearly reminded
- sas iafm value of the seed, will de-
Hiana a certain price of the mill men or
use Inc seed at home upon the farm.
especially should this be done nv tine.
tarmers living upon the poorer lands Of
.he state-land that is not sufficiently
fertile to begin with, and that will ran
laiy grow poorer al each annual crop
o. cotton Is sold and nothing returned.
tpon richie land of the state, like the
oiaek waxey and the alluvial fMver bot
TOMS the seed is Q: less Importance.
but even there they have a great feed
ing value that should not be thought.
iessly disregarded.
THE SEED NEAL AS A FERTILIZER.
A tor OF cotton-seed meal on an aver.
8 yields approximately, 1000 pounds
OF meats, $50 pounds of bulls, and 20
POUNDS OF lint. The meats weld about
eee pounds Of meal, and go pounds, or
SO gallons of oil.
At this time the seed is worth q ho,,t
50 at the mill, the meal SIC, and the
huiis 81 at the same place: the oil at
~ cents per gallon. and the lint 3 cents
per pound. The mill man, therefore,
converts So for the seed into s1e.47 for
It's product, a difference of S1o. Al, even
at the very low present price Of oil and
meal. At a future time 1 will estimate
IN bulletin form the profits to the mill
man IN this sio.47. At present I shall
confne myself to the farmers side Of
the question.
The average composition of a ton Of
Ii e in fertilizing material is COS
pounds of nitrogen, e3.2 pounds OF
phosphoric acid, and a5.l pounds
Of potash. The money value of u
ton of meal is SIG, and at that
price it is the cheapest all-pur-
pose fertilizer which the farmer
can buy. Add s. to this for hauling
home. and the price becomes SIS per
ton. But how does its price compare
with price OF the seed at So a ton? The
average fertilizer composition of a ton
OF the meal is 1925 pounds of nitrogen,
$50 pounds of phosphoric acid and
a5.s5 pounds of potash. This would
make about the following valuation
per pound Of the above ingredients:
Nitrogen, 10 cents: phosphoric acid, 6
cents; potash 4 cents. These prices
would give a money valuation to cot
ton seed themselves of So. Is. So when
the farmer sells seed at So per ton, and
buys meal at $40 per ton, he. is losing
about 81. so, not counting the cost of
hauling the seed to the mill or nearest
market. This estimate is based on the
fertilizer value alone. But to apply
raw seed or meal is the most wasteful
way to use them for a fertilizer, since
their feed value is thereby lost. Let
us compare:
The seed contains, per ton, S74 pounds
Of protein. or heterogeneous material,
514.3 pounds of nitrogen free-extract,
including starch, sugar, resins, etc,
ALAS pounds of oil. The meal contains,
per ton, s46 pounds of protein, 47a
pounds Of nitrogen ~free-extract, 26s
pounds Of oil. 1t is difficult to place
anything like a correct money value on
the above ingredients. But they show
the seed are richer in oil-too rich, as is
well known-and in nitrogen free-ex-
tract, than is the meal. But the meal
contains two and one-half times the
amount of protein in the seed. There
fore, SO far as chemical composition is
concerned, two and a half tons of seed
used would more than compensate for
one of meal. But the meal costs the
farmer s1s, and he receives SIS for the
seed, 4 loss of SO. It may be said that
the meal is a better feed than the seed.
practically, regardless Of chemical COM
position. In some respects It is better,
but can no more be fed without rough
ness or coarse fodder of some kind than
the seed.
In an extensive feeding experiment
covering two winters, it was shown by
Professors Gully and Carson bulletin
No. 81 at this station. that for differ
emit cattle foods, a ration made up OF
cotton bulls and cotton meal il. equal,
IL not superior, to a ration OF any other
two feed stufs used for fattening cat
tie. but q cheaper ration may be con
pounded of silage and cotton seed, or
of corn, hay, and cotton seed at the
prices given, namely: Forty cents a
bushel for corn; $50 a ton for cotton
seed meel, silage at So per ton. 80 per
ton for hulls, and 81 per ton for cotton
seed.
/ conclude, therefore, that it the
farmer wishes to make > choice be-
tween seed and meal for fertilizer pur-
poses only, at the present prices, he
loses about g.. so per ton if he decides
IN favor OF the meal. If for feeding