678 EXPERIMENT STATION RECORD. 



attach miicli sooner after liatcliiug than has hitherto been believed, and in that 

 case it must talce lontrer l)efore tliey have j^rown to be visible to the naked eye." 



DAIRY FARMING— DAIRYING— AGROTECHNY. 



Feeding- grain to milch co-ws at pasture, J. H. Stewart and H. Atwood 

 (West yivgUiia l^ta. Bui. 109, pp. lo). — To study the desirability of feeding 

 grain to cows on pasture, 12 cows "were divided into two lots as nearly similar 

 as possible in milk flow, in age, in length of time they had been in milk, and in 

 length of time until next calving. For periods of 2 weeks one lot of cows re- 

 ceived grain, and the other lot did not receive grain. Then the conditions were 

 reversed and the lot which had not been receiving grain was fed grain, and the 

 other lot no grain, and so on." 



Three consecutive tests, each continuing 28 days, were completed. One of the 

 proprietary dairy feeds was used for the grain ration. During the time covered 

 by the first test, in June and July, the i)asture remained fresh and green, and 

 there was plenty of grass available for the cows. In this test the cow^s produced 

 352.7.5 lbs., equivalent to about 1G4 qts., more milk when fed the grain in addi- 

 tion to the pasture than without the grain. The grain consumed cost $12.60, 

 making the cost of the extra milk production at the rate of 7.(> cts. per quart. 

 The cows also made larger gains in live weight during the period with grain. 

 than in that without it. 



During the second test the grass was short and affected both the yield of milk 

 and the weight of the cows. In this i)eriod the cows produced 3.32.5 lbs., or i»rac- 

 tically 155 qts., more milk with the grain than without it. but the increased milk 

 production cost S.l cts. per quart. The cows lost less weight while fed grahi 

 than without it. 



In the third test the grass in the pasture became so short that it was neces- 

 sary to supply additional forage. For this purpose cowpeas were used, being 

 cut as required. In this case the increased milk production amounted to 210 

 lbs., or OS qts., so that the extra milk cost nearly 13 cts. per quart to produce. 

 In this test, also, the grain had a favorable influence on the live weight of the 

 cows. 



In conclusion, from the results the authors state that " this experiment clearly 

 shows that there was no direct financial gain in feeding the grain to the cows 

 while at pasture. It is true that the cows which received grain were uniformly 

 in somewhat better flesh than those that did not receive grain, but as far as 

 the milk yield was concerned the increased flow was produced at an actual 

 loss. " Data obtained in similar experiments at other stations are summarized, 

 and from these in comparison with their own investigations the authors con- 

 clude " that unless dairy products are especially high in price it is not a profit- 

 able practice to feed grain to cows at pasture. It is true that more milk is ob- 

 tained and the cows hold up their yield better and remain in better flesh when 

 receiving the grain rations, but imder ordinary circumstances there is no direct 

 profit from the grain feetling, as the increased production usually costs more 

 than it can be sold for. " 



Record of the dairy herd, G. A. Billings {'New Jersey Stas. Rpt. IftOG, pp. 

 SO.l-SIO). — Individual records of yields of milk and butter fat are given for 

 2 years. The variation for different cows and for the same cows in different 

 years is very noticeable. The average return for two years from the 5 best 

 cows of the herd in value of milk produced was $G7, and that of butter $43, 

 greater than from the 5 poorest cows. 



Dairy herd record for ten years, A. L. Haecker (Nebraska Sta. Bill. 101, 

 pp. l-.il, figs. J). — Kecords are given for the yearly production of milk and 



