The Fargo forum and daily republican. [volume] (Fargo, N.D.) 1894-1957, 1906-09-18
CATTLE FEEDING.
Alfalfa, Prairie Hay and Corn Fodde,
Compared AS Cattle Food.


The Nebraska experiment station
has just issued Bulletin 49, by III. r.
Smith, which gives the results of cat
tie feeding experiments carried on at
that station during the past winter.
The experiment entitled. Roughness
supplementary to corn for 2-year- old
steers, is continuation of the series
begun three, years ago to compare the
efficiency of three forms of roughness
common in Nebraska, viz: alfalfa,
prairie hay, corn-stover when each is
fedSin connection with corn. ssThe last
winters experiment deviatess slightly
from former tests in certains particu-
lars; the corn was all fed asssnapped
corn rather than shelled, iand.sthe per-
iod of feeding was but three months
instead of six, during which time
grain was used sparingly and rough
ness literally, the cattle being. finished
in a second experiment in which heavy
grain rations were used.
In the experiment with snapped corn
Gears in the shuck, or husk), the
AOnSS AAACSo III ScINil lOI was cbS tlOilOWSs
Lot /, prairie hay; Lot 2, prairie and
alfalfa hay; Lot 8, alfalfa; Lot A. corn
slower (stalks without ears); Lot s,
corn-stover and alfalfa; and Lot s,
corn-fodder (stalks with ears at
tached), and alfalfa. AS in the two
former tests, ten steers were fed in
each lot and these were selected. to
make the lots as uniform as possible.
IJEhe steers were 2-year-ol grade
Shorthorns and Herefords, from the
northwestern part of the state, where
they had been reared under semi-range
conditions ,g ,d
Without going into details, which
may be had by sending for the. bulle-
tin, the general results may be told in
brief as follows: eat:ati
The steers fed snapped corn and a9 :
falfa hay made the .ilargest gairis,
amounting to zoo pounds per day, av-
erage for the three months, while those
on snapped corn, alfalfa and prairie
hay gained 2.01 pounds per day; those
on snapped corn, alfalfa, and slower,
1876 pounds; those on corn-fodder and
alfalfa, ISL pounds, while the steers
fed snapped corn and prairie hay
gained but 1.2 pounds per day and
those fed snapped corn and slower 1.02
pounds per day 1t will thus be seen
than in each case where alfalfa formed
part or all of the roughness the
gains were materially increased This
accords with former experiments and
emphasizes further the Importance of
supplying in the ration all the nutri-
ents needed Alfalfa, being high in
Ioalxtrcr In
and that lacking in prairie hay and
gains made in the lots fed alfalfa, but
much less corn was required for each
pound of grain when they were chus
supplied.
But the vital thing for the consider
alton or the feeder is the relative cost
of gains. In the lots fed corn, alfalfa,
and slower, in the one case with corn
attached to theastalk as fodder, the
cost of gains was the lowest, being All
cents per pound of gain in both lots.
Al little more pork was made where the
corn was fed on the stalk and the net
profit per steer in that lot was $4.59
as compared with $4.20 on corn al
faFfa and slower.
On snapped corn and alfalfa, each
pound of gain cost 4.49 cents (net
profit per steer, $3.50; on snapped
corn, prairie hay and alfalfa, 2.77
cents (net profit per steer, $3.10); on
snapped corn and slower 6.97 cents
(net profit per steer, 13 cents; and
on snapped corn and prairie hay, 7.5S
centsI net loss per steer, 5 cents).
The cheaper gains made with slower
and alfalfa rather than with alfalfa
alone or with prairie hay are explained
by the fact that corn slower was fig
ured at $3.50 per ton compared with
prairie hay and alfalfa each at So per
ton. The snapped corn cost 80 cents
per bushel of so pounds and that fed
on the stalk, unhuslSed, was figured at
81 cents. The results were slightly in
favor of feeding as much corn as is
possible on the stalk though this is
the first experiment covering this par
ticular question and other tests should
be made, as Is intended; to make it at
all conclusive. Other comparisons in
the experiment inasmuch as they
agree with former results. would seem
to make the following reductions safe,
viz, "a that prairie hay. and corn
without further supplements is an un-
satisfactory combination both from the
viewpoint, of gains and that of profits;
(2) that alfalfa and corn are capable
Of giving large gains without addition
al foods, but that the substitution of
corn -stover which has been cut and
shocked Immediately after the ears RI
pen may be substituted for half of the
alfalfa with greater economy because
OF the low market value in the corn
belt of such roughness
We want to meet parties who have
some residence lots for sale. Al ten