The Richmond Virginian. (Richmond, Va.) 1910-1920, 1916-09-10
FISH PACKERS

CONTINUED from First Page).
pounds while that for the pigs get
ting the tankage supplement was
1913 pounds. a difference Of ten
pounds From observation there could
be noted no difference between the
two lots with respect to growth In
he way Of general development
which would In dicate that one ration
was not particularly superior to the
other in meeting requirements Cor
growth in pigs
Finishing Period.
AZ the close Of the sixteen weeks
growing period the same twelve pigs
were divided into different lots In
order to have them a uniform as pos-
sible TO start the finishing period OF
twenty-etght days
Lot received four parts corn meal.
four parts middlinxs. one part fish
meal
Lot 4 received nine parts corn meal,
one part fish meal
Lot received nine parts meal, one
part tankage
The lot fed corn meal. middlings
and fish meal during the finishing
period did not consume as much feed
as the lot fed corn and fish meal or
| cost OF producing 100 pounds gain In
the lot fed corn meal. middlings, and
| fish meal was seventy-two cents less
than in the case of the lot fed corn
meal and tankage; both lots, however.
were about equal with respect 70 the
average gain per pig during this
period The lot fed on nine parts of
corn meal and one part Of fish meal
made better showing than either
OF the other lots in the rate OF gain.
pounds OF feed fed per 100 pounds
gain, and hte cost Of 90 pounds gain
From this experiment the conclu-
sion is Justified that fish meal is
very effective supplement TO a grain
ration for pigs. Hogs relish - and are
extremely fond Of IT, principally be-
cause, like tankage. It Is a flesh pro-
duct
In this experiment fish meal was
superior to tankage in all compari-
sons although the average daily gains
and rate OF gains in all three lots
used n the experiments were excep-
tionally good
Where Ash meal can be obtained
conveniently at a reasonable price and
In suitable quantity it, has very
considerable value In hog feeding
Fish Meal for Poultry.
~ the poultry experiments a pen
or laying hens receiving a ration con-
tanning fish meal was compared with
a pen of the same breed fed with
the same ration except that meat meal
was substituted for fish meal Mash
fed consisted Of one part each Of
bran, middlings and Ash or beef
scrap, and two parts Of corn meal. A
grain mixture Of equal parts OF corn,
wheat and oats was fed.
The yield of eggs from the pen fed
on the ration containing Ash meal
averaged 1854 per hen. at cost OF
S. cents per dozen and with food
consumption Of sixty-eight poundr DER
hen. The average number of eggs per
hen in the pen fed on the beef scrap
ration was $50 at cost of ct cents
per dozen and with eighty-four
pounds Of feed eaten.
The profit from the pen fed on beef
scrap exceeded that Of the pen on fsh
meal by seven cents per hen, ON ac-
count Of the greater production IN the
former pen At the price quoted
ts4s.o0 per toni. Ash meal has been
nearly as profitable as beef scrap.
At the present time the hens have
eaten the beef scrap little more free
ly and have given a slightly greater
egg yield. No differences were notod
In regard to size or flavor Of the Aggs
or the health and weight Of tho
fowls -''-y----
In addition to he appointments 40