ANTMAL PRODUCTTOlSr. 265 



Considering both tests the dry matter eat(>n per pound of gain ranged from 

 2.0n lbs. witli iiastnred pigs fed skim milk or whoy alone to 4.45 lbs. with pigs 

 fed grain alone. In general, the lots fed skim milk and grain made larger 

 gains than those on skim milk alone or grain alone and those fed in pons more 

 than similar lots in pastnre. 



The feeding was continued for 1<; days with 4 of the lots used in the second 

 test to secure data regarding the intiuenco of previous methods of feeding on 

 subsequent gains. All the lots were fed a full-grain ration with skim milk and 

 whe.v. The lot previously fed a half-grain ration on pasture made the most 

 rapid gain. 2.00 lbs. per day, "and made the gains at a smaller cost in grain 

 for each pound of gain." The lot previously fed skim milk alone on pasturage 

 made the smallest gain, 1.77 lbs. per head per day, and made the gains least 

 economically. 



" Skim milk alone would appear not to be so good a preliminary feed for 

 fattening hogs, as the gains were not so rapid nor so economical in any of the 

 stages of fattening as when the hogs were fed a half-grain ration on pasture." 



To test the value of whole milk 3 young pigs averaging 41 lbs. each were 

 fed this material for .50 days, some grain being given the last week of the 

 period. The average gain was 0.867 11). each, 13.25 lbs. of milk and 0.18 lb. of 

 grain being required per pound of gain. After an interval of 13 days on pas- 

 lure the feeding was resumed and the pigs were given milk and grain 3 : 1 for 

 30 days. The average daily gain was 1.89 lbs. each, 5.12 lbs of milk and 1.71 

 lbs of grain being required per pound of gain. The author calculates that 

 when fed with grain whole milk has twice as great a vahie as when fed alone. 



" Compared with trials with skim milk, 100 lbs. of whole milk displaces on 

 the average about twice as much grain as 100 lbs. of skim milk, or, in other 

 words, 50 lbs. of whole milk is equal to 100 lbs. of skim milk as a feed for hogs 

 when both are fed with grain as a part of the ration. 



" The above is, of course, the result of but one trial and may be modified 

 by future tests." 



The general conclusions regarding skim milk, which were drawn from the 

 station experiments as a whole, follow : 



" For the most rapid gains, and therefore the greatest economy in time and 

 labor, a ration of grain and skim milk in the proportion of 1 lb. of grain to 5 

 of skim milk for young animals and 1 to 3 for older animals has given us 

 the best results. When the animals were fed in pens we got the most rapid 

 gains, but when on pasture slightly the most economic gains. Thus whether 

 to feed in pasture or in pens is a matter to be determined more by the circum- 

 stances of the feeder than liy any great advantage in either method. 



" When the price of grain is higli, slower but more economical gains iire made 

 by feeding a small quantity of .grain and giving all the milk the hogs will eat. 

 When so fed considerably better results are obtained by feeding on pasture than 

 in pens. 



" Hogs will gain fairly well on a ration of skim milk alone, but we have found 

 it difficult to keep them in good health when so fed in pens. When this ration 

 is fed on pasture the hogs keep in better health, gain a little more rapidlj% 

 and make more economical gains. Such a ration is not to be recommended 

 when grain can be obtained at a reasonal)le price." 



As regards the value of different grains, tlie conclusion drawn from the 

 Utah work is that wheat has proved the most effective as regards both rapid- 

 ity and economy of gain. Corn meal and barley have proved to have much 

 the same value, barley being somewhat suiierior on the basis of weight of the 

 pigs. It also appears that the best results were obtained, as regards both the 

 rapidity and economy of gain, when pigs were given grass, or allowed to run 



