3613 



TPxE FARMER'S MAGAZINE. 



Lot 4. 



103 at 303., December 3rd 15 1 10 



Artificial food, at Ijd. per week, 



onl03 10 18 101-165 8 10^ 



101 at 483, April 2l3t 242 8 



2 casualties , 2 6 6—244 14 6 



Leaving for 17 weeks' keeping, &c 79 5 7^ 



From these figures it will appear that the whole 377 lambs 



were valued into the yards at .. 618 14 

 and that they cost for artificial food 37 15 H 



making a total cost of ■ 656 9 1^ 



and, further, that the 364 put to 



grass were valued at 891 12 



and that the 13 casualties realized 9 16 3 



making a total of 901 8 3 



which shows a profit on the whole 



of 244 19 H 



which I dispose of as follows, viz.: 



hay, straw, attendance, at 3s. per head, for 377 56 11 



15 acres mangolds, allowing 25 sheep to the 

 acre, at £12 lis. 2id. per acre 188 8 H 



or, if you take two acres more mangolds, and call the total 

 quantity 17 acres, it will then give you £11 la. 8d. per acre 

 for them, within a fraction ; but I regard the former as the 

 more correct cilculation. As I previously stated, I suffered 

 last year — as indeed I had done for three or four years — from 

 lung disease with my bullocks, and sustained some rather 

 serious losses. The lot of Scots, to which I have referred in 

 an earlier part of this paper, as having last year been afflicted 

 with this terrible disorder, were bought on the 12th of March, 

 1859, and cost just £8 3s. 4d. per head when they reached my 

 farm. They were put upon a very good (for our country) field 

 of grass, and made considerable progress, and on the 1st of 

 July of the same year, when taking stock, with a view to 

 closing and balancing my year's accounts, I valued them at £1 1 

 per head. On the 29th of October they were put into yards, 

 and I then valued them at il2 lOs. per head. But before 

 that time— during September I believe— two of them were 

 seized with lung disease, and, after some two or three weeks' 

 doctoring and dosing, had to be killed. There were therefore 

 only 24 left for the yards; and by the 3rd of December these 

 were reduced to 18. Some of the best bullocks fell, and I 

 found the better plan was to dispose of them at once, before 

 they sustained any serious harm. Two were therefore sold 

 on the 11th of November for £14 l/s.; two on the 18th for 

 £17 178.; one on the 29th, which realized £6 39., and one on 

 the 3rd of December, which realized £6 17s. After the 3rd of 

 December no more disease appeared, and I kept the eighteeen 

 until the 2nd of February, 1860, when they left me in good 

 health; but went to a bad market, keep being very short 

 last spring, and they brought home, clear of expenses, only 

 £12 lis. 6d. per head, or just Is. 6d. per head more than they 

 were worth on the 29th of the previous October. During the 

 time they were in the yards they consumed chafif— half hay 

 and half straw — and 3 lbs. of the best decorticated cotton seed 

 cake each per day. They had no mangolds, as they were at 

 a farm where none were grown that year. The cost per head 

 forcakewa3£l ls.6d. The six that fell with lung disease made 

 £29 6s. less than they were valued at when they went into the 

 yards, and the eighteen that did not suGFer lost £1 per head 

 on the cake account, besides all the hay, straw, and attend- 

 ance — rather a costly yard of manure ! I have given these 

 particulars to show the relative merits of bullocks and sheep, 

 as manufacturers of manure during the Winter of 1859-60, as 

 indicated by my own experience, and to inquire — being influ' 

 enced by these facta— how far sheep can be advantageously 



substituted for bullocks in the manufacture of manure under 

 certain specified circumstances. The reply to this inquiry, if 

 guided by the foregoing facts, will assuredly be in favour of the 

 adoption of sheep in preference to bullocks for this important 

 work. But perhaps the last year's test could scarcely be 

 taken as a guide for our future action. The lung disease ap- 

 pearing amongst the bullocks occasioned a loss, which might 

 not occur again. And the last Spring too would hardly be 

 regarded as aft'ordirtg a fair criterion from which to judge of 

 the usual profit for wintering growing cattle. The shortness 

 of keeping was so severely felt, that animals could only be trans- 

 ferred to new owners at a wretchedly.^bad price— i, e., if sold, 

 as mine were, before the grass season arrived. But inde- 

 pently of these specialities and drawbacks, the argument is 

 in favour of the uee of sheep. Although the loss from lung 

 disease last year may appear excessive, no man can secure an 

 immunity from its ravages another. He may fortunately 

 escape, or he may not. But take the most favourable view of 

 the case, and suppose bis cattle are all healthy, and are bought 

 well, according to their value at the time •, let them thrive 

 satisfactorily during the Winter months, and go in the Spring 

 to a good market, the prices then corresponding to the prices 

 paid in the Autumn— given all these favourable circumstances, 

 then, as it respects the bullocks (which, by the bye, must not 

 always be expected to be realized), I would still choose the 

 sheep. Let us look at the case a little further. It has rarely 

 been my lot to make more than from 203. to 30s. per head 

 beyond the cost for artificial food for wintering bullocks. 

 When this has been done, we have been wont to denominate 

 it a good year. I am anxious now to compare, not merely 

 an average, but a decidedly good bullock year with last year's 

 sheep. We have seen how a bad bullock-year compares with 

 them ; let us try a good one, and see how that will work out. 

 Take a case, then, where 303. per head has been realized for the 

 natural food consumed during the months that cattle have 

 been in the yards. For treading down straw I have said that 

 six sheep are equal to one bullock. Let us now for a moment 

 consider what six sheep will consume, as compared with one 

 bullock. According to my own mode of management— and I 

 am now arguing from my own practice — one bullock would 

 consume as much hay as twenty sheep. From observation 

 I find a rather light crop of hay will yield sufficient for forty 

 sheep per acre, and I usually, with bullocks, calculate half an 

 acre per head, which tallies exactly with what I have just 

 stated, viz , one bullock to twenty sheep. An acre of man- 

 golds will carry twenty-five sheep during the time they are in 

 the yards, as I have previously observed ; and the same quan- 

 tity would supply six bullocks for the same number of weeks 

 as nearly as I can eatim-ite it. In round numbers, then, it 

 will appear that one bullock will consume rather over two- 

 thirds more hay than six sheep will, and that six sheep will 

 consume one-third more mangolds than one bullock will. 

 Without further minute details and calculations, and to avoid 

 being tedious, we will assume, then, that the cost for natural 

 food for six sheep and one bullock is precisely the same. How 

 then does the matter stand ? And I again remind you that I 

 am supposing a good year for bullocks, where there is not 

 only general thriftiness, but also exemption from disease and 

 death. It will be seen, then, that in such a year, where the 

 very uncommon profit of 303. per head is secured for the 

 natural food consumed, that one bullock will return as much 

 profit as two-anda-half sheep, or a trifle over, and will yet 

 have cost as much keeping as six sheep. The figures will 



