371 



periment was begun May 25, up to which time botli lots had been fed 

 on hay and the same amount and kind of grain that lot 4 continued to 

 receive, and lasted for five weeks. Each cow had furnished to her all 

 tho freshly cut grass, clover, and timothy, in about equal proportions, 

 she would eat in two feeds per day, and the cows in lot 4 had in addi- 

 tion 9 pounds each per day in two feeds of the same grain mixture that 

 was fed lot 2 "in the previous experiment. "In the first two weeks 

 [period I] the grass was tender and succulent; after that [period II], at« 

 it approached maturity, it constantly became dryer and harder." Tb ■ 

 following statement summarizes the results of the experiment. 



Yields of milk aud hutfer fat, and amounts of cut grass consumed. 



Atllieboginningof tbocxporiiiient. 

 During period I (May 24 to Juno 7) . 

 Duriugperiod H (Jane? to June28) 



Average daily 

 yieM of milk 

 per covf. 



Lotl, 



cut 



grass. 



Pounds. 

 2.'!. !•:{ 

 21.88 

 U. 19 



Lot 2, 

 cut 



grass 

 and 



grain. 



Pounds 

 30.05 

 31.48 

 29.34 



Average por- 

 cent:igeof fat 

 in uiiik. 



Lotl, 



cut 



grass. 



Per ct. 

 3.17 

 3.53 

 3. 02 



Lot 2, 

 cut 



grass 

 anil 



grain. 



Per ct. 

 3.10 

 3.27 

 3 28 



Average amount 

 of butter fat 

 produced per 

 cow weekly. 



Lotl, 

 cut 

 grass. 



Pounds. 

 5.31 

 5 33 

 3.59 



Lot 2, 



cut 

 gra.ss 



and 

 grain. 



Pounds. 

 6.51 

 7.20 

 6.75 



Average amoiiat 

 of cut grass 

 CO n 9u m / d 

 weekly bw 

 eacli lot. 



Lot 1, 



cut 

 grass. 



Pounds. 



3,187 

 2,362 



Lota 

 cut 



grass 

 and 



grain 



Pound) 



3,029 

 2, 302 



During the first two weeks of the trial the amount of grass eaten by 

 lot 1, which had grass alone, was 158 pounds more than that eaten by lot 

 2, which had grass and grain; but during the three weeks following, 

 the consumption of grass was the same for both lots. " When the grass 

 was so succulent that the cows having no grain would eat more of it 

 than those having grain, the milk and butter yield remained constant 

 in both lots. When the grass became so hard that those having no grain 

 would eat no more than tho ones having grain, the grain fed lot forged 

 ahead in milk and butter production. But in neither period was the 

 grain fed at a profit." 



Lot 1 (pasturage) produced during the entire experiment 32.05 pounds 

 of butter fat per cow, and lot 2 (pasturage and grain) 47.G8 pounds. 

 "That is, there was received in the whole experiment not quite 47 

 pounds of butter fat [and the increased value of the manurej to show 

 for a consumption of 963 pounds of grain, but the grain-fed lot were 

 giving a little more than a pound of butter fat per cow per week at the 

 beginning, wbich alone in the five weeks would account for 15 pounds 

 of this dift'erence. Perliaps the most marked effect in this trial was the 

 way in which the grain-fed cows (lot 4) maintained their flow of milk as 

 the grass grew harder. This is the more noticeable from the fact that 

 all the cows were far advanced in calf aud close upon the time when 

 they might be expected to rapidly decrease in milk yield." 



