The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1900-06-12
KAFFlR CORN AND ALFALFA
Reports of Cattle Feeding Exper--
menfs at saltwater

| saltwater, q. z. june LII olloWiDg L
press bulletin No. 81. just issued by the
Oklahoma agricultural experiment staten
| here on '+Kafir Corn and Alfalfa as Beef
| ProAneers:'
The steer feeding expe. 'men:s Of the
| pas winter az the OiIallcms eXDerin.ehr
SITS ton were the arst IF a five years ser
| les to compare The feeling value OF Hahr
corn, corn, alfalfa and fir slower for fat
tening steers. Twenty mead Of tHo-yea--
cid grade short-horn steers. natiTe 10 the
region of Saltwater. were fed up in four
lots Of five steers each. They averaged
976 pounds in weight when put INTO The
feed pens the last of October and were
fed as follows for III days:
| Lot one, kaf1r neal anE falf2 hay.
! Lot two. corn neal AM alfalfa hay
Lot three kafir neal and lIaar slower.
Lot four corn meal AID air slower.
Daily gain per steer: Lot one, IA
pounds; lot two. 2.54 pounds; lot :hiee,
2.3S pounds; lot four, I'll pounds.
Gain produced by each bushel of grain
fed: Lot one. 7.62 pounds; lot Two. s
pounds; lot three. SO pounds: lot teUr,
6.02 pounds.
Kafr corn and alfalfa versus kair corn
and kair slower.
The kair corn aifalfl fed steers re-
quired 1888 per ceat less grain - produce
a pound Of gain than The kahr cor, kaar
slower fed steers, ayad The gains Of the
| former cost IS De-. cent less Der poIl d.
With the former lot it required IS pounds
| OF grain to produce a pound Of gain. with
the latter 1857 poaa is.
| Corn meal and alfalfa versus corn meal
and kafir slower:
| The corn and alfalfa fed steers required
24.73 per cent less gsin to pcolIee a pound
of gain than the corn ana kafr slower fed
steers did, and pound Of gain [ : the corn
alfalfa fed steers cost : per cent l~-s.
With the former lot it required rornds
| of grain to produce poua1 Of gain: with
| the latter 9.3 pounds.
Kafr meal versus corn pleaI:
| When both grains were fed with alfalfa
| the kafir corn fe5 steers required per
cent more grain to produce a pound Of
gain and at a cost of SIS per cent more.
| ccrn9 and kair being figured at the same
price per bushel.
When both grains were fed with kafr
kstover the kafir meal fed steers required
1915 per cent more grain to produce
pound OF gain than the corn meal fed
| steers and at cost of 7.3S per cent more.
An average of 10 per cent more kafr
corn was required than the corn to pro-
! duce a pound of gain.
The original plan was to finish the
steers on the feeds started with. but, due
to the supply Of alfalfa running out. the
feeds were changed at the end Of 112 days
and the steers finished on other feeds.
All lots were fed the same kind OF
roughage, mixture of prairie and millet
mixture as follows: Corn meal or kafir
meal / Sparts; cottonseed, 4 parts; cotton
seed meal, ? parts.
The lots were fed as follows: Lots one
and three kafir meal and cottonseed prod
ucts. Lots two ard four corn meal and
cottonseed products.
After being fed for thirty-five days on
| the above feed the steers were fairly well
finished, and were marketed at the close.
For the second period daily gains per
steer were: Lot one, &c pounds; lot two,
! 80 pounds; lot three, 2.45 pounds; lot four,
2.99 pounds
! Grain eaten per pound of gain: Lot one.
SOC pounds; lot two. 654 pounds; lot three,
S73 pounds lot four, 701 pounds.
! In the second period we have another
comparison between corn and kafir corn,
but fed in connection with other grains.
The steers receiving kafir meal with cot
/ tonseed and cottonseed meal gained 1873
per cent less than the steers fed on corn
nal and cottonseed and cottonseed meal.
and required 1858 per cent more grain
TO produce pound OF gain.
The steers were Skipped to the Kansas
| City market The average shrinkage per
head in transit was 81 pounds.
Lot one sold for st95; lot TO sold for s.:
lot three sold for $40; lot four sold for
S4ss
Lot one. dressed. 6l21 per cent; lot two,
| dressed, Gil; lot three. dressed. 59.21; lot
four, dressed. so 50 per cent.
/ Over the cost Of steers and cost of the
! feed lot one made profit OF sit33; lot
two made a profit Of 30; lot three made
"a profit OF se7.1l; Lee four made a profit of
/ S3i.75.
/ There IS agreat argument in the forego-
/ ing results to induce the klahoma farm
/ ers to make greater efforts 20 grow alfal-
] "a. as there is no doubt but that ther
must have it TO make the most econoui-
/ cal use Of their feeds tgain. at the aver
! age prices Of cottonseed and cottonseed
/ meal. there viii be a great saving in the
cost Of beef production II they are used
/ in connection with corn and kaHr corn
Especially when the farmer has no, tire
( alfalfa 70 feed. ana more especially for
I ths last thirty or sixty days OF the fat
I te1ing period
The common feed raised on the Okla
homa farms are deficient r protein. and
stock viii not make TIE best g.ins on
them without the additions ~ such feed.
a. alfalfa. cowpeas. cott1nseed. cotton
seed meal iinsed OF meal. SOY beans. etc
that contain quite a large per cent q
protein. Our experiments are planned 70
show the worth and encourage = more
extensive utilization OF these feeds
/ WOODS C0UNTY'S PROSPECTS
Glowing Predict ions Based on Actual
Aeh evements 10 Date.