Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1916-09-22
Feeding VS.. Selling Farm Crops

this method of producing beef would
still De practicable and profitable as
we'll
In this connection il is well to point
out that these experiments show that
the amount OF. beef produced was SO per
fed OFF i'm ninety days than where they
cent greater when the crops grown were
were fed of in sixty days. In other
words, the longer feeding period ena-
bled a much better finish to be put on
the cattle and they thus brought from
one-fourth TO one-haf more per pound
than steers fed for only sixty days.
This is an illustration of the inadvisa-
bility of trying to warm up" cattle,
as il were. a practice so commonly met
with in the south. The result is that
the animals can not be classed as fat
or finished. and thence they are greatly
Disseminated against when sent to the
market and this leads the farmer to
feel that he is being uniustly dealt
with. whereas. the fault is really due
to the lack Of finish on the part Of the
cattle he is offering for sale.
The return per bushel for the grain
and hay fed under a system such as
has been suggested will be of interest.
IL appears that the SOY beans brought
an average of about S1.4O per bushel; the
cowpeas. $50: the wheat, $1.39; the
oats. 81 cents; the barley, S1.O2; the
corn. 81; SOY bean hay, $3.50 per ton,
and alfalfa hay, S14.2O per ton. These
were all good prices; as much probably
as the farmer could expect TO secure
for most of the products if Offered for
sale in the open market. of course.
these are farm prices. In other words,
the producer was at no expense for pre-
pairing, bagging or transporting the
grain and hay TO market. Naturally,
this would add considerably to the cost
of the grain and hay concerned in this
discussion.
Tie possible prices which may be OBJ.
tanned through feeding the foodstuffs
mentioned to beef cattle are worthy of
emphasis, for they indicate that under
proper management the farmer can Sc
cure about the same return, therefore,
as when he sells the crops from his
land Naturally. if he keeps the grain
and hay at home and feeds them, ne
IS building up the fertility of his soil
at a rapid rate: whereas, when he sells
them he is depicting the fertility to an
alarming degree and must depend large
" on commercial fertilizers 10 maintain
a productive equilibrium in the plant
food constituents of his soil. In other
words, IL the farmer were to sell his
grain and hay, instead of receiving the
price indicated above, he would of neces-
sity have to obtain $2.O5 per bushel for
soy beans. S2.03 for cowpeas, $3.50 for
wheat. 60 cents for oats, $1.21 for bar
Ley. S1.17 for corn. s27.s9 for soy bean
hay. and S24.O3 for alfalfa hay in order
to protect himself from the loss of
plant food. or in other words. replace
the plant food in a commercial form
taken away from his land from the
uE hn u-ff
them.
These figures are worthy of very
careful study and consideration and
should make a deep impression on the
mind of every man who is now failing
to rotate his crops or to maintain
sufficient quota of live stock thereon.
IL is little wonder that it has become
automatic in agriculture that those sec
TORS OF the country are only perma-
nently prosperous and able to build up
ami maintain the fertility of the soil
in 4 thoroughly economic and satisfac-
tory manner where live stock industries
have beer developed on a basis some-
what commensurate with the needs of
the community. These experiments also
show that the pounds of beef produced
PEI acre were much larger when the
winter grown cereals were fed instead of
being piowed under. This would nat
urally be anticipated, and is another
argument In favor of the wisdom of es-
tablishing beef production on a COM
prehensiTe basis in the SOUTH for where
animals are lacking it is certainly neces-
sary to 10 build up the humus supply of
the soil. and under existing conditions
this can only be done by the expensive
method of turning under a part of the
food crops produced without first utiliz-
ing them for food. Where only a sin
gle crop of the two grown on an acre
of land was harvested and fed, the
yields of beef per acre were as indicated
below: With soy beans. 473 pounds;
with cowpeas. 294 pounds. and with
corn, los pounds. Compare these figures
with re return 70 sos pounds from bar
ley and SOY beans; 451 pounds from bar
ley and cowpeas; and 434 pounds from
barley and corn, and the great benefits