Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1910-05-27

the ranid strides which are now being
made toward the permanent eradication
Of the cattle tick in the southern states.
The tick. as all stockmen realize, mas
proved a menace 10 the progress OF ami
mai industries for many years past, and
now that the life history of this parasite
and means for destroying 1t have been
worked out, the greatest single obstacle
TO the development OF beef production on
our cheap lands has been overcome, pro-
vided the people take SUFFICIENT interest
In this matter to insure the hearty CO.
operation % the state and federal author
iiies in pushing forward the work OF Grad
ication.
The destruction Of the cattle tick rs
not as serious 8 problem as many may
imagine. for there are hundreds Of farms
on which pure-bred cattle are kept to-
CAV where no ticks are 10 be found, and
the difference in the thrift and develop
ment Of the cattle on these tick-free
farms and those infested tell their own
story ts the keen observer in very
graphic manner. The fine type OF ami
mails developed on farms surrounded by
lands which are tick infested shows that
q suitable variety OF food stuffs can be
crown. even in the heart of the cotton
country. TO maintain both beef and dairy
rattle Of high quality at reasonable
lost II would be a comparatively simple
matter: therefore, to secure the needed
Iires for the Improvement Of our native
stocks TO that point where they can be
made into beef at a proht 10 the grower
h Il we're possible to put these pure-bred
Esres out on lands infested with ticks:
cut the moment they are removed from
hek-free lands on which they may have
teen developed. they are subject TO tick
lever, in a great majority Of instances
perish from the same. Suppose. however,
hey were entirely immune. the tick In
testing the young calves and older ami
naIs viii seriously interfere with their
rniform and rapid devsIopment-points
which are absolutely necessary 10 econ
pny OF production. Hence the tick so
lonx as IL exists Is a definite obsta-
lie 20 the progress Of beef production
A proper realisation OF this fact and
he snefeial results which will nov
from establishing animal Indus
greater diversihcation OF crops
han IL now possible. viii insure the
youfherr states cooperating more rapid
y for Tire destruction Of this miserable
parasite which inhicts millions OF dol
nrs Of less on the south eevry year. Since
IN aTes probably as great as that OF
EeoFEiE was placed north Of the quaran-
hne lire last year, the practicability OF
destroying the tick can no longer be CALI
his ihne is bound to prove as beneficial
70 our people as anything else that can
Ae undertaken at this time
SO much has been said about the IA
TorabIe conditions existing for beef pro-
iuetion in the south that some may
properly question why substantial pro-
ress has not been made I'm this direc-
ION The claims made with regard to
lalubFious climate and the ability 20
produce the NEST desirable foods for beef
production in great variety and at q
moderate cost are founded I'm fact which
ian not be successfully eentroverted.
why. then, has this industry languished7
Simply because the grade Of animals
which have been fed has been of such
an inferior character and 50 slow I'm
reaching maturity as to render the husi-
psss improbable. The practical man has
.ound this out very often to his soT-
TOW and has concluded that feeding beef
rattle can not be pursued except at heavy
Dss. even when he has such a wonder
.uily satisfactory concentrate as cotton
iced meal available to feed and can pur-
.hase his supplies Of the same at rea-
benable cost.
That the grade OF stock has much
10 DO with this question is further
Illustrated by the fact that feeders IN
some Of the cotton states who have
secured a better grade or cattle from
Tennessee have succeeded IN finishing
them at q coed proft and are yearly
eHlargiHg their operations The cattle
FED are simply grade animals-the prod
uet OF pure-hred sires on the native
rattle Of the mountain sections These
native animals do not diner materially
from the cattle found throughout the
coastal plains region, and a SIMILAR I'm
provement can ceFta-nsy be effected
uuff
entire region when the cattle tick is
eradicated and the puFe-bred sire can
be brought in and utilized freely with
out fear Of loss. except the small per
cent which may sueeumb by reason or
some OF the common diseases to which
cattle are subject.
II has been said that the south can
not produce beef eheaply because
enough corn Is not raisrC Tor this pur-
pose. Demonstration after demonstra-
ton has been made TO show that corn
alone Is not more satisfactory for beer
Production than for fatteniRg hogs. AS
a matter OF fact, cotton seed meal
and bulls may be utilized as the sole
foodstufTs and fed at a profit II the
grade OF cattle used is Of the right
type. Hulis, however. are somewhat
high, and the farmer can certainly pro-
duce roughness at home which will
isea their place for much less than IL
will cost him to purchase the bulls. We
have advocated the use Of cowpeas
and soy beans with silage as adiuncts
IN beef production for years past, and
have maintained that corn was not
shszD food 20 use. nor was II even nee
essary 10 feed Il in considerable guam
tity. This opinion so opposed TO the
ideas which have held sway for a long
time has naturally not been accepted
as rapidly and as uniformly as is de-
sirable for the good Of the cattle indus
try, but the force OF this argument is
gathering strength from year to year.
and is being borne out by experiments
made by various other investigators.
For instance. in tests made at the Ten
nessee experiment station recently, IL
has been shown that cattle fed on the
product Of an acre OF corn made a
pound OF beef at a cost OF from TO .
cents: while those fed on the product
OF an acre OF soy beans made a pound
Of gain at a cost or from rs TO ga
cents; and those fed on the product or
an acre Of cowpeas a pound of grain al
q cost OF from ~ TO SIS cents. These
cattle all received some silage. The
cOrn-feJ cattle made gains OF from SO
20 80 OF a pound per head per day:
the soy bean fed cattle, l.27 10 l.6S
pounds per head per day; and the cow
pea fed cattle. 40 to Isl pounds per