ANIMAL PRODUCTION. 



905 



value of field peas and of different rations of alfalfa, roots, and grain was Btudied with 

 4 lots of 60 and one of 59 lambs, about one-third of the animals in each lot heing 

 small and the remainder large. 



The lambs fed held peas were burdled on small areas, being kept in each place 

 until the crop was eaten as closely as possible without causing lack of feed. The 11.6 

 acres of peas did not make a full crop, the total yield being 1,380.5 His. vines and 7:;7 

 lbs. seed per acre. The author states that although many of the peas were shelled 

 by tramping over them, yet the hulk were eaten, as the sheep would pick up a large 

 proportion of them. 



In the 100 days covered by the test the smallest gain, Is. 7 lbs. per head, was made 

 by the lot fed alfalfa, turnips, and oil meal, and the greatest gain, 27.2 lbs. per head, 

 by the lot fed alfalfa, turnips, corn, and oil meal, this being, the author states, the 

 best ration which he could devise. The next greatest gain, 24.9 lbs. per head, was 

 made on the field peas. In the case of peas, 16.48 lbs. was required per pound of 

 gain, and with the ration containing alfalfa and corn 4.52 lbs. alfalfa, 1.79 lbs. tur- 

 nips, and 2.36 lbs. corn were required per pound of gain. 



The author calculates that the smallest amounts of both protein and carbohy- 

 drates plus fat were required per pound of gain with the alfalfa and coin ration, and 

 the greatest amounts with the field peas. On the whole the results were favorable 

 to feeding field peas. 



''A mistake which is often made in pasturing lambs on peas in the West is that 

 they are allowed to run over the whole field, tramping out and destroying a large 

 part of the feed. This condition puts before the lambs a maximum amount of feed 

 at the first part of the feeding period, when they should be started with a limited 

 supply, and causes them to have the poorest amount of feed and take the most effort 

 to get it in the finishing feeding period, when the food condition should be the best. 

 To prevent this general reversal of the correct order, it is necessary to divide the 

 field by fencing off small portions and turn the lambs into new sections as required." 



Market classes and grades of swine, W. Dietrich (Illinois Sta. Bui. 97, pp. 

 419-463, figs. 41)- — A thorough understanding of the market classification of pigs, in 

 the author's opinion, is essential; anil as a result of investigations in Chicago and 

 other markets in the United States and Canada the following has been prepared: 



Classes, subclasses, and grades of hog*. 



Prime heavy hogs (350-500 lbs.) — Prime. 

 Butcher hogs: 



Heavy (280-350 lbs.)— Prime and 



gooi 1 . 

 Medium (220-280 lbs. )— Prime, 



good, and common. 

 Light (180-220 lbs.)— Prime, good, 

 and common. 

 Packing hogs: 



Heavy (300-500 lbs.)— Good, com- 

 mon, and inferior. 

 Medium (250-300 lbs.)— Good, com- 

 mon, and inferior. 

 Mixed (200-280 lbs.)— Good, com- 

 mon, and inferior. 

 Light hogs: 

 Bacon — 



English (160-220 lbs. )— Choice, 



Light hogs — Continued. 

 Bacon — Continued. 



United States (155-195 lbs.)— 

 Choice, good, and common. 

 Light mixed (150-220 lbs.)— Good, 



common, and inferior. 

 Light light (125-150 lbs.)— Good, 

 common, and inferior. 

 Pigs (60-125 lbs.)— Choice, good, and 



common. 

 Roughs. 

 Stags. 

 B< >ars. 



Roasting pigs (15-30 lbs.). 

 Feeders. 

 Governments. 

 Pen holders. 

 Dead hogs. 



light, and fat. 

 The author groups the last 5 classes under the heading " Miscellaneous." 



