The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1897-12-08

Oil appearances were more COm1Ort8Dl6
than those kept in a barn. The pigs
did remarkably we'll, living upon the
droppings of the cattle, refuse from
the hangers, but.ermilk and part OF
the skimmilk. This plan I believe to
be as profitable as any which can be
adopted in the growing section
of the State, and certainly has the
merit Of eliminating large part of the
drudgery usually connected with dairy
farming.-American Agriculturist.
Barn Versus Outdoor Feeding.
In making a comparison between
indoor and outdoor feeding, it is nee
essary to state that there are two
kinds of indoor feeding, says r. NJ.
Allen, of Nebraska. In feeding gen.
tie cattle in a stable where they can
be tied up in such moderate numbers
as to admit of easy handling, there
can be no question of the advantage Of
indoor feeding, and a farmer with
small number of cattle can get the per-
lection of results in this. With sew
eral hundred head of cattle it may not
be so easy, but still can be accom-
plished with dehorning, as the cattle
can be managed 80 as to allow them
some freedom. But with several
thousand head of cattle it is impossi-
BILE to feed in a barn without confin-
ing the animals to an absolutely sta
tionary position, and the difficulty OF
putting cattle in the barn and taking
them out again is so great that one
naturally shrinks from it; besides
which there is too much disturbance
to the fattening of the cattle by shut
ting them up in this manner unless it
is Offset by the saving of feed in win.
ter of great scarcity and high price of
feed stuffs, or in the use Of some
waste product.
I ought to say that I would prefer
in our climate to develop kind OF
barn feeding that I believe from ex.
perience would prove to give the best
economy in the production of beef, but
it will probably be many years before
I am able to realize this, if ever do.
NV plan would be to divide the in
terror of barn into pens, for cattle to
be dehorned, and to construct it of
fre-proof material. This would give
the cattle movement enough to prevent
the effects Of too strict confinement,
and I think secure the greatest posi-
BILE economy of food. I should wish
to bed the cattle and save the manure,
and 80 far I have not got over the
difficulty of doing this for alarge num-
Der of cattle under one roof. Thor
oughly good, smooth cattle give very
good results when tied up and fed in a
barn, but cattle that are inclined to be
rough do not, and the result is a
rather low average gain for the cattle.
I do not know that I should consider
any plan at all for feeding large mum.
bers of cattle in barn unless it were
part of plan to feed waste product.
T have such a plan in my own mind,
and if I am ever able to put it into
operation, I expect to make beef at
less cost than I have ever done up to
the present time.
Barn feeding should undoubtedly
be practiced where cattle can be easily
handled, SO that they can be fed when
tied up in a stall and turned loose to
get exercise, but where there are
large numbers of cattle to be fed, 80
that they must be kept for six OF
seven months stationary, it is not de.
sirable when feeding an ordinary feed
of grain and hay, and only iustifiable
when q waste product is fed. 1t is OF
course q satisfaction to have the AMI.
mails under cover in severe weather,
but this advantage is not enough to
make it worth while to tie cattle up
to feed with grain and hay unless it is
a season Iof scarcity and feed stuffs
are very dear. The saving in grain
feed, feeding as much as the cattle
will properly clean up every day,
amounts to from twenty to thirty-fve
per cent, which, if grain is high
enough in price, is enough to offset
less rapid gain in weight. Barn-fed
cattle sell we'll, in any event, and the
carcasses dress well.-Orange' Judd
Farmer.