DlVISIOy OF AyiMAL HUSBAyORT 



437 



SESSIONAL PAPER No. 16 



A week previous to the coniiueiieenieiit of the experiment the lambs were arranged 

 in their respective jirciiips and fed their proper rations so as to got them accustomed 

 to their feed before the experiment was set in running order. The prices charged for 

 feed in computing the cost are as follows: — 



Grain, $20 a ton. 



Mixed hay, $10 a ton. 



Alfalfa hay. .$10 a ton (not well cured). 



Turnius. $2 a »on. 



Oat straw, $2 a ton. 



Results of Lamb feeding Experiment, 1913-14. 



Group 1. 



Oat straw 

 and grain 

 (oats and 

 barley in 



equal pro- 

 i portions.) 



Group 2. 

 Oat straw, 

 mixed hay, 



and same 

 grain. 



Group 3. 



Oat straw, 



mixed hay, 



same grain, 



and 



ttimips. 



Number of lambs in experiment 



II days in .i 



Total weight at beginning of exjjeriinent . lb. 



II II end of experiment •■ 



Gain during period (112 days) n 



Gain per head n 



Gain per day per head n 



Amount of grain eaten by lot n 



II hay II II II 



II alfalfa hay h 



II oat straw n 



II turnips i 



Total cost of feed $ 



Cost of feed per head $ 



II II II II )jer day cts. 



II II II pound gain cts. 



Original cost of lambs $ 



II II II plus cost of feed S 



Total receipts from sale $ 



Loss on lot $ 



II lamb cts. 



25 



112 



1,.590 



2,030 



440 



17 



3,4o2 



6 



19 



50 



1,980- 



3(i 58 

 1 46 

 ■013A 

 ■08,3, 



95 40 

 131 98 

 121 SO 



10 18 



.to 



25 

 112 

 1,770 

 2,490 

 720 

 28-8 

 •26 

 3,662-5 

 2,362.5 



25 

 112 

 1,922 

 2,605 

 683 

 27 -3 

 •25 

 3.4J2 50 

 2,187 -5 



1,8.55 



.oO 20 

 2 00 



•06^ 



106 20 



156 40 



149 40 



7 00 



.28 



1,737-5 

 4,462 -5 

 51 18 

 2 04 

 Olit 

 •07? 

 115 32 

 166 50 

 156 30 

 10 20 

 .40 



Group 4. 



Oat .straw, 



alfalfa hay, 



same grain, 



and 



turnips. 



25 

 112 

 1,970 

 2,718 

 748 

 29 9 

 •27 

 3,500^ 



2,187-5 

 l,<;27-5 

 4,4(S-5 

 51 96 

 2 07 



•06A 



119 20 



171 16 



163 08 



8 OS 



•32 



From the foregoing it will be seen that, though the cost of feed per head in group 

 1 was the lowest, yet the cost of 1 pound gain was far in excess of any of the others and, 

 as noted before, did not prove very satisfactory. This ration will be continued another 

 season, but an endeavour will be made to have included some laxative food, such as 

 flaxseed meal. 



Strange to say, group 2 made better returns than group 3, even though the latter 

 had the advantage of roots to keep their digestive organs in order. This can partly 

 be accounted for by the fact that group 3 went off their feed during the first two 

 weeks of the experiment, when it was attempted to make the root.s and snow suffice 

 without giving water also, since many people believe that sheep require no water. 

 After this happened, all the groups received water and drank a little each da^'. Group 

 4, getting alfalfa and roots, gave the most satisfactory returns, and compared well 

 in cost of feed per pound gain with group 2. 



The conclusions that can be drawn are: (1) There is little profit in lamb feeding 

 because of the difference in price of lamb and shearling; (2) the ration fed group 1, 

 while the cheapest, was not satisfactory and was one of the most expensive when con- 

 sidering the cost per pound gain; (3) for the average farmer who has mixed hay, a 

 ration fed as in group 2 would prove quite satisfactory; (4) where alfalfa is being 

 grown, fattening sheep will respond to this feed most readily. 



Indian Head 



