318 IOWA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



argument in opposition to the silo, counting that with good alfalfa hay, 

 they did not need corn ensilage. This I wish to use as a argument for the 

 silo. If a man has alfalfa hay in abundance, then he certainly needs 

 corn ensilage, for as the engine needs coal, it also needs water. In the 

 past, the expensive part of a stock ration was digestible protein and all 

 rations were figured on this basis, when accounting for their cost and 

 value. With alfalfa hay in abundance, the protein side of the ration is 

 well taken care of and the next consideration is to find a cheap succulent 

 form of carbohydrates. Here is where corn ensilage is unexcelled. By 

 combining these two great food stuffs, alfalfa hay and corn ensilage, we 

 have the cheapest and best source of economic stock feeding. 



The silo will be instrumental in promoting winter dairying and by win- 

 ter dairying, the profits in the dairy business will be doubled. I was in- 

 formed recently by a creamery man operating in Nebraska, that his butter 

 output during the three months of the summer was equal, in volume, to 

 the other nine months of the year. This necessitates, naturally, a great 

 waste of equipment and labor on the part of the creamery, and as far as 

 the producer is concerned, it is useless to mention the wastefullness of such 

 a method. 



The silo will also, to much extent, save labor in feeding and caring for 

 the stock. To have a large supply of succulent forage close at hand, always 

 in good condition, in all kinds of weather, is no small item for the feeder. 

 Those who prefer corn fodder or stover to silage, will admit that their 

 system is very disagreeable during the winter months when the snow and 

 ice have covered the forage and often rendered it totally unfit for stock 

 food. The present custom of allowing the stalks to remain in the field, 

 where they are for a few weeks gleaned by the animals and the balance of 

 the winter, wave as scare-crows in the chilly winds, certainly should be 

 discontinued, for while it is evident this system will be in practice for 

 many years to come, it cannot be profitable to the stock farmer. 



It is needless for me in this presentation of the subject to discuss the 

 merits of corn ensilage as a ration for stock. Sufficient experiments have 

 been carried on by hundreds of practical feeders and many Experiment 

 Stations during the past twenty-five years to well establish the fact that 

 corn ensilage is a good succulent ration and one which in many respects, 

 takes the place of pasture. I wish to devote my time principally to the 

 dollars and cents side of the question. In casting about for good reasons 

 why more farmers and stock breeders do not have silos, I have found a few 

 arguments which I will here attempt to answer. One of the first and most 

 frequently heard is that the silo is an expensive equipment and only those 

 who are well-to-do can afford to maintain one, in other words, they feel 

 too poor to build a silo. Another reason why they do not have a silo is 

 because they claim they have plenty of other feed, in fact they have feed 

 to sell. In answering the first, I will offer a table, which I have compiled 

 from various reports and which is an attempt to give liberal valuations as 

 to the cost and conservative estimates as to yield. 



As (orn rilage is not sold on the market and has no qrotations. its 

 value must he found by carefully ascertaining the cost. To find the cost of 

 producing corn ensilage, much averaging is necessary for no two farms re- 



