Atlanta semi-weekly journal. (Atlanta, Ga.) 1898-1920, 1917-06-22

The cortonseed meal contained between
IS and IS per cent Of digestible pro-
tein analysing els per cent OF nitro
gen COR rs per cent OF ammonia anu
was good cottonseed meal
The second ration contained approx
imately the same amount or slage
pounds of peavine hay and pounds OF
mixed concentrates.
The third ration, containing a mini
mum Of silage and a maximum of grain,
consisted of a daily allowance per head
of IL pounds OF silage, 10 pounds OF
hav and 10 pounds of mixed concen-
trates. The large amount OF hay was
added to this ration so as to bring up
the amount of dry matter and totaI dl-
gestible nutrients TO equal that In ra-
ton q The concentrates used In ration
. and 8 consisted of mixture OF cot
tonseed meal. parts; wheat bran.
parts. and corn and cob meal. parts.
The COWS on ration 1 produced 6,S2S.S
mounds of milk, on ration they pro-
duced s.S2O.7 pounds of milk, and on ra-
ton 3 they produced 7o7S.5 pounds or
milk There was practically no diner
ence in the pounds OF milk produced by
ration and g though ration showed
an increase OF 24S.6 pounds over ra-
ton 1. made, however, at so much
greater cost that II represented a imam
cial loss.
The butter produced by the different
rations was as follows: Ration l.
ssb % pounds; ration 2, S27.s4 pounls'
and ration 3. s41.14 ponds. There Is
remarkable accord in these figures
when IL Is remembered that twelve ami
mails with their more or less varied in
dividuality were on feed in this test
for a period of three months. The sell
ing price of milk was figured at 80
cents per gallon, and butter at 80
cents per pound These prices are
much below those obtainable in the
city market for milk and butter of good
quality at the present time, but, as
was the case in the prices used TOT
food, they represent about average
wholesale prices for the past five
years. The milk produced by ration l
at 80 cents per gallon would have
brought s28S24; by ration 2. s2S7.ss,
and by ration 8. S246.5e The butter
from ration l would have brought
SHOOTS; ration 9, 1855. and ration 3.
sIo2.S5. The profits on milk from ra-
tibn 1 was s1S9.20; from ration 2,
s1T672, and from ration 3. s16S.64.
In this test the profit is figured as
the difference between the selling
price Of the milk and the cost Of feed,
and no charge is made for labor On
the other hand, no credit is given for
the manure or the calves produced.
While this does not represent the ex-
act financial transaction, 1t offers q
fair basis for comparing the three
rations.
From the standpoint of milk pro-
duced the difference in profit in IA
vor Of ration l, consisting of cotton
seed meal and silage, as compared with,
ration was SASS. Between raticns
and 3 the difference was S20.56. In
a herd OF forty cows the owner would
therefore make 1892 more on ration
1 than on ration 2, and SS22.4O more
on ration / than on ration 3. From
the standpoint of butter production the
difference is more striking. The profit
obtained from ration l was $51.75;
from ration 2. sS7.15, or a difference
Of s14.6o per COW estimated on a year
ly basis. The profit on. the sale of
butter from ration was s22.4s, or
q difference in favor Of ration / of
s2s.s2 per COW. If estimated on a yearly
basis Multiply these figures by 40,
and II appears that the use of ration
1 as compared with that of ration 2
would represent a saving to the owner
on forty cows OF s494 and of S1,172S0
IN the case Of ration 3. In other words,
the owner would more than double his
profit by using cottonseed meal and
silage. as compared with using a min
imized ration Of silage, with hay and
a generous ration of mixed concen-
trates. In the case Of the sale of
butter dairymen would have the skim
milk for feeding to calves or pigs. be-
sides the manure and calves for offset
ting the labor bill