62 EXPERIMENTAL FARMS 



5-6 EDWARD VII., A. 1906 

 BEEF PRODUCTION. 



EXPERIMENTS IN 1903-4. 



The lines of experiment followed in the winter of 1903-4 were: — Influence of age 

 on cost of beef; influence of manner of housing, i.e., feeding loose vs. feeding tied; 

 baby beef; values of feeds. 



The steer feeding operations may be considered successful from a financial point 

 of view since the selling price covered the cost of the steers, the cost of the feed at 

 market prices, and left a good margin for profit. Full particulars are given in the 

 group reports. 



Of course it must always be remembered in reading the reports that the cost of 

 earing for and feeding the steers is not included in the estimate of the cost of produc- 

 tion. There is not the least doubt but that where feeding operations are conducted in 

 such a manner as to require a reasonable amount of labour for the number of animals 

 fed the manure is of a value quite equal to the cost of the labour. 



In our beef feeding operations here high values are put on hay, straw ensilage and 

 roots, while the market prices are charged for meal of all kinds. If only cost of pro- 

 duction were charged for the straw, hay, roots, ensilage and such meal as is ijroduced 

 on the farm a very much higher margin of profit could be shown and there would still 

 be saved the cost of marketing, a no small item for roots, hay and straw, to say noth- 

 ing of ensilage. Further, by beef feeding operations where it is not convenient or not 

 desired to kee^ dairy cattle on the farm much valuable fertilizing material is kept on 

 the farm that would otherwise have been lost, hence the feeder should be satisfied with 

 somewhat smaller returns than might be expected from the sale of the raw material. 



SHORT FEED VS. LONG FEED. 



Not infreqixently the feeder when starting his operations in the fall is xmcertain 

 as to whether he should try to fit for an early or a late market. Generally speaking it 

 may be said that steers rushed for an early market put on gains considerably more 

 cheaply than those fed for a longer time. Further, steers fed for a short period are 

 likely to consume relatively more roughage in comparison with the necessary meal than 

 are those fed for a long period. To illustrate the two points made, lot A (discussed 

 below) fed for 127 days cost $6.76 to lay on 100 lbs. of increase in live weight and 

 consumed only 4,937 lbs. of meal along with 68,328 lbs. roots and ensilage about 1 of 

 meal to 14 of roots and ensilage, while lot B, fed for 202 days consuzned 10,358| lbs. 

 meal along with only 91,558 lbs. ensilage and roots or about 1 of meal to 9 of roots and 

 ensilage. The rates of gain as will be seen below were practically the same. 



Lot 'A'— Short Feed Steers. 



Number of steers in lot 9 



First weight, gross, Nov. 12, 1904 . 10,880 lbs. 



First weight, average 1,209 " 



Finished weight, gross. Mar. 21, 1905 12,995 " 



Finished weight, average 1,444 " 



Total gain in 127 days 2,115 " 



Average gain per steer 235 " 



Daily gain for lot, 9 steers 16-65 " 



Daily gain per steer 1-85 " 



Gross cost of feed $ 143 35 



Cost of 100 lbs. gain 6 76 



Cost of steers, 10,880 lbs. at $4 per 100 lbs 435 20 



Total cost to produce beef 578 35 



Sold, 12,995 lbs. at $5 per 100 lbs., less 4 per cent. ... 623 80 



Profit on lot 45 45 



