Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1911-07-07
What Others Think of Cotton Seed Meal

counts In some measure for the failure
az the southern farmer TO appreciate
a. completely as he should the virtues
OF cottonseed and its by-products- IL
w1l be interesting. therefore. TO con-
slider briefly the estimation In Wnicn one
OF the principal by-produets OF this won
derful seed Is held In sections beyond
its natural habitat. For years expert
ments have been made with II all over
the civilized world. and these tests In
Glide a consideration OF It's value as
food for the more important classes OF
live stock maintained on cur farms Nat
urarlv the opinion OF those who have ex-
perimented with cottonseed meal In the
northern part OF the United States could
hardly be expected to Be Influenced oy
sentimental reasons, and their judgment
rnav. therefore, be regarded as express
Cd without bias or favor, since X seems
70 be almost universally favorable 70
softonseed meal as one OF the cheapest
ara most efficient substances for sup
nfxSnx the usual deficiency in protein In
artn,al rations. The results OF two or
three experiments may be considered and
studied with satisfaction and benefit by
an who are interested IN the cultivation
OF cotton
At the Indiana experiment station. Tor
Instance. silage, clover hay and corn
the return secured from a oushei OF
corn at the prevailing market price Tor
beef al that time ives as cents the
animals used in this test were OF good
quality. were well finished and brought
what was considered a good price at the
time the experiment Was concluded To
another lot OF beef cattle OF similar
aualluE silage. corn and cottonseed meal
were fed. In this test the return per
busheI OF corn was s67 cents Innss oy
the addition OF a limited amount OF cot
scneaa5 meal 10 the daily ration OF these
beef animals, the return per oushei OF
corn was increased by as cents In
other words. Il might often be prohibit
tive 70 feed corn alone because OF Its
high cost: whereas. the addition OF
small amount OF cottonSeed meal would
enable the farmer 70 pay good price
for corn and stiu feed It at profit
The foregoing figures show the special
adaptability Of a concentrate ricn IN the
elements which go TO build up muscfes'
nerves and tissues for combining with
one ike corn which Is chiefly valuable
for It's fattening propensitites- Argu-
ments relative TO the advisability OF US
ing a balanced ration. or. In other words
one that supplies approximately the ma
terfals needed for the nutrition OF AMI
mails OF given age and weight disappear
IN the face OF figures such as these IL
haz hean pointed out repeatedly to the
southern farmer that corn alone Is not
4 desirable ration for either &orses and
mules or beef and dairy cattle In rac,t
il has been shown that Tor beer ana
dairy cattle much better results VIII oe
secured from feeding cottonseed meal
alone rather than corn alone. while
combination OF the two has proven in
finftelv better than the use Of either
one alone. This last statement applies
with particular force to the feeding OF
horses and mules 70 which class or
stock only comparatively limited
amount OF cottonseed meal can be fed
These figures also illustrate the folly OF
buvfnx large quantities OF corn and per
hitting the export from the south OF
large amounts OF cottonseed meal 1t Is
sad that in Georgia alone sSSOo0.ooo was
sent away last year for corn. whereas,
II the corn produced at home had been
fed in proper combination with cotton
seed meal much better results would
have been secured than were actually
obtained. the corn would have gone
much further, and 8 great saving eff
fecte y keeping at home good many
million dollars
The southern farmer has been urged
20 use cotton seed meal to replace
OF the corn III AttE AAAANA AC A~N~1
a. his work stock, but not as much prog
rass has been made in this direction
As one might have expected In view OF
the wide agitation and discussion which
mis- question has received. That vast
BENEFITS will follow the addition Of even
Two or three pounds Or cotton meal TO
the ration all agree who have studied
the theoretical food requirements OF the
horse and mule. Those who have actual
~ made the test have been readily con-
vfnced. and the EFFORT now Is TO reach
the thousands who are still Following
the old practice with blind persistency.
The dessrabfIity OF such practice as
this Il shown by the increased eff
cheney secured from pushel OF corn
when led singiy and In combination
with cotton seed meal 20 beef cattle In
other words nearly fourth more none
AIRY value was added to the corn by
feeding II in a combination than would
otherwise have been secured II one
fourth might be added 20 the feeding
value OF the corn crop In the south. II
would mean very much to our farmers
IN q financial way 1t would mean even
more because Of the greater efficiency
in productive work and length of serv-
ice our live stock would possess
That this IS not theoretical opinion
is shown BY a recent test at the Iowa
F-xperfment station in which corn and
cotton seed meal were fed TO horses in
opposition to q ration OF corn and oats.
Il should not be forgotten that corn
and oats are two cereals produced in
very large quantities IN Iowa Oats are
grown TO some extent in the south. but
not on a sufficient area as yet TO make
them a crop OF very great importance
10 the horseman. He must thus either
feed corn. or. corn and some other con-
centrate which win offset the we'll
known deficiencies Of the great Ameri-
can cereal in ash and protein constitu-
ente- In the tests rererred 70. the ra-
ton OF corn and cotton seed meal re-
suited in the saving o. 1-6 cents per
head per day. or at the rate OF $3.50 for
the year. which is an item OF great i'm
portance TO the man who runs either
small or a large plantation. Moreover,
the chances are that the saving effected
in the south would be greater than these
figures indicate. for corn is relatively
higher priced here than in Iowa and cot