Hopkinsville Kentuckian. [volume] (Hopkinsville, Ky.) 1889-1918, 1901-10-15
"Feed stuIis.v

breeder and general farmers
most careful consideration any
year but more especially sea-
son like this, when all sorts of it,
both folders and concentrates,
will not only be high but hard to
get at any price.
l have very much fault to find
with the common idea of feeding
only what grows on the farm. 1t
is most irrational way of look
ing at serious problem, and as
is generally the case, being rigid
| ly adhered to, almost invariably
stints the growing and breeding
stock in the elements of food in
which their system stand the
greatest need.
We have farmer neighbors
who say never buy feed, and
practice what they preach, re-
lligiously. Now, it would seem
that the stockman oughtIto raise
an abundance of his own forage,
not just because he can, but from
the fact that even where such
can be bought at reasonable rates
the hauling of it to his farm, often
doubles the price, But there is
neither sense nor economy in the
conclusion from such a position
that a farmers stock and poul-
try should get nothing but grain.
There are several good and suf-
fcient reasons against such a
practice. One is, it matters not
how large a variety of grains
may be available for ration it is
practically impossible without
the use of at least one of the
various forms of mill by-products
to make up regular system of
feeding that will be rich enough
in protein in proportion to the
fat forming elements. Using
lgrains exclusively, even oats, if
you furnish mich COW or lay
ling hen or their growing pro-
geny as many pounds of protein
as they should have to reach full
productive or growing capacity
the surplus in carbohydrates is
wasted or else laid upin the body,
evidently to it's injury for pre-
sent and future usefulness as
well. If sucha farmer should
refuse to furnish his brick-ma-
son anything but water and sand,
simply because he did not have
to buy them, people would not
only call him penurious, but sure
enough crazy. That our animals
cannot say we need lime and
phosphorus and sulphur and
protein to make your milk and
eggs and wool, does not make the
necessity of such materials any
the less real.
Another, perhaps, equally i'm
portant reason, at least from a
standpoint of profit is, that the
limit of growth and productive
capacity can often be maintained
much cheaper by the use Of, at
any rate, a generous admiXture
of these concentrates than with
farm products exclusively. We
must not forget that their actual
value to the feeder does not con-
troll the price. Hence it very
often happens that market quo
tations and the earning capacity
of the various stuffs in produc-
ing meat, milk, wool, etc, are as
wide apart as the poles. For in
stance, corn has ceen selling
here at 90 to IS cents for two
months. Last spring 1 had
letter from the best authority in
the United States on feeding.
Prof. Henry, in answer to my
question, said that when bran
cost $50 per ton and corn SIS cents
per bushel that one could pay $50
a ton for cotton seed meal. AT
present worth of corn it would
justify on outlay of $40 per ton,
but same can be bought for about
$25. Again, bran can now be
had at $l4 to $40. So here is
another, possibly still better sub
stitute for corn at wonderful
saving. "MAPLEHURsT."
Russellville, Tenn.