Bryan daily eagle and pilot. [volume] (Bryan, Tex.) 1909-1918, 1914-08-26

grade. WIN an average or eight tons
per acre-and c. o. Moser grew 25
tons per acre in 1912 on the space
inclosed by the Dallas Fair race track.
and filled a 1OOton silo with the yield
from four acres-Texas can produce
sIlage at as low n cost as any other
State. The cost OF filling the silo
ought not to be any greater in Texas
than in the North.
As TO cottonseed meal, Texas Is the
home OF cotton, and our cattle feeders
should obtain their meal at So to 81
per ton cheaper than II can be placed
on the farms OF Michigan and Iowa.
There seems TO be no data by which
to compare our cowpea hay with the
clover and alfalfa OF the North. Cow.
pea hay Is about equal to alfalfa,
pound for pound, In feeding value, but
a little more expensive to grow. The
1913 Year Book shows the hay produc.
ton OF Texas and Iowa to average
practically the same. lis tons per
acre. but with the price for Texas at
sll.52 and that for Iowa at 5000. The
Year Book does not state what kind
OF hay. but apparently Jumps them all
together, and whether this exceeding.
ly doubtful comparison In favor OF
Iowa offsets the advantage Texas has
In producing her own cottonseed meal
at home can only be determined by
close comparative tests.
An advantage to be added to our
heavy advantage OF cheaper land is
the difference in winters. In Texas
the winter is short and mild. with an
average mean temperature Is degrees
higher than In Iowa and Illinois.
where the winters are long and cold.
The cold weather OF the North means
more feed to maintain the bodily heat
of the animals and more or less heat.
ing Of the COW barns, and IL also
means that Texas butter can be
shipped to the markets at extra high
prices during February. March and
April, while the North Is frozen solid.
The dairyman OF the North is doing
well to maintain his COWS at an aver
age annual cost of $50; in Farmers
Bulletin No. $40 of the United States
Department OF Agriculture, on 1.-THE
Dairy Industry in the South" the cost
OF maintaining a dairy COW is placed
at si5. Without any data from expert
ment stations in the dairying States
upon which to base a definite conclu-
sion, the Texas Industrial Congress
believes that Texas has nothing to
fear from any other State as to cheap
ness OF feed production. and IT. this
conclusion we believe that every well.
informed man will concur. The trans
portation cost is negligible on butter,
but not on feed, and II may be as
sumed that the labor cost will not be
higher in Texas, because the milder,
shorter winters render unnecessary
much Of the constant care OF the
North.
II has been shown in an incidental
way why Texas grows cotton and buys
$30,000,000 worth OF corn from the
corn belt annually. The growing of
cotton. more profitable business, has
crowded out corn averaging is bushels
per acre, and in the same way would
crowd out da.rying as long rs the
Texas farmer does not know how TO
dairy. The average Texas mich COW,
yielding her owner, say, 100 pounds
of butter fat per year, may be de.
pended on to lose him $15 on the feed
and labor she requires; but with a
dairy COW giving 200 60 300 popnds
of butter fat per year. with silage
feeding, the question takes on an en-.
tirely different seeming. Cotton grow.
ing has never competed with dairying
in Texas, because we have never had
any dairying except in a few isolated
instances, and we shall never have any
as long as our producers are the ordi-
nary scrub cows sired by the scrub
bull, 1t remains to be demonstrated
what the comparative profits are of
cotton growing as against dairy farm
ing with, say, two hogs raised for each
COW in order to market the skinned
milk on the hoof and the land in
creased in fertility instead Of de.
creased as by growing cotton only
This much can be said, however
dairy farming has made money lend
ers out of other States whose soils
and climate are far less adapted to
the business than those of Texas.
The Texas Industrial Congress does
mot wish to cut down the production
Of cotton, or any other crop, in this
State, by one pound, although It la
bors to have these crops grown on
less acreage. The Congress does not