GREEN FOOD IN SILOS. 181 



half of non-nitrogenous matter : in other words, you waste 

 half. The same is true if you feed green grass alone, or hay 

 alone, or clover-hay alone. The proportion of nitrogenous 

 to non-nitrogenous matter m good clover-hay is about one 

 to three, or one to three and seven-tenths. Now, if a cow 

 needs only the proportion of one to five, you waste a fair 

 proportion of good fodder in that clover-hay. The experi- 

 ment has been successfully tried to see if we can supplement 

 our hay and clover by straw, or by materials that contain 

 one to nine, or one to ten. Here comes in the question of 

 cheapness of feeding, which the farmer has to study. There 

 is an actual waste of feeding value in feeding the best hay 

 without any addition, under almost any conditions. That 

 fact has been established by practice. The same is true 

 with regard to clover-hay and other leguminous plants. 

 We are just beginning to discuss tliis important question of 

 rational feeding; and we can never come to a decision, 

 unless we take into consideration, besides the character of 

 the fodder, the particular requirements of the animal. If 

 we feed for sustenance merely and for the production of 

 milk on the same scale, we waste, in one way or the other, 

 our food ; and it is necessary for us to learn in what propor- 

 tion we can economically supplement by lighter and inferior 

 articles of fodder our strong articles of fodder, as, for in- 

 stance, good clover or meadow hay. It is important to 

 consider the requirements of the animal with reference to 

 what it is to do. A horse to do good work requires a larger 

 relative amount of nitrogenous matter than a horse that 

 stands idle. An ox which is kept through the winter simply 

 for work in the spring can be kept at a far cheaper rate than 

 an ox that is put to daily labor. With us the question 

 remains, how to make a practical application of this fact. 



I listened with a good deal of interest to the discussion on 

 feeding yesterday ; but, for one, I must say that there is no 

 basis for comparison. Without having any information re- 

 garding the quality of the fodder which has been fed, how 

 can we draw any reasonable deduction as to its feeding 

 value? The question of quality is of the first importance. 

 The discussion of ensilage, I think, has come up at the 

 proper time. It may serve as the means of stirring up the 

 fodder question, which needs further ventilation (there can 

 be no doubt about it) as much as the fertilizer question. 



