NINETEENTH ANNUAL YEAR BOOK— PART VII 391 



These figures all go to show, therefore, a unanimous agreement as 

 to the value of linseel oil meal as compared to cottonseel meal under 

 these conditions. We have always been of the opinion that a mixture of 

 cottonseed and linseed oil meal would likely be better than either fed 

 alone, and still think this is the way to feed these supplements, but have 

 no figures to back up the suggestion. 



We have found at the Iowa station, however, that for calves linseed 

 oil meal is much better than cottonseed meal, and we would not hesitate? 

 to pay 20 per cent more for this product if the roughage was corn fodder 

 or hay with a large proportion of timothy and so on. One year, I remem- 

 ber well, that with cottonseed meal costing $30, the linseel meal was 

 worth $47, but the linseed oil meal calves in this test sold for 25 cents a 

 hundred pounds more than the cottonseed meal fed ones, which spread 

 made a big difference when applied entirely to the supplement. The 

 roughage used in that experiment was a poor grade of clover hay. 



The Indiana station has been doing some work on limitd grain feed- 

 ing, but their results do not show as favorably to the limited feeding fs 

 the Missouri and Iowa figures. 



The whole question resolves itself down to a question of selling 

 values of cattle, and if the differences on the final selling market are not 

 sufficient to justify the extra grain feeding, then the limited grain allow- 

 ance is economically in order. Genei'ally speaking, one Is pretty safe in 

 saying that if the differences are not more than 50 to 65 cents per cwt., 

 that limited grain feeding should be most seriously considered. 



In one test last year at the Indiana station, where cattle were full-fed 

 as compared to where no grain at all was allowed, there was a difference 

 in the selling value of the cattle in favor of the full-feeding of 80 cents, 

 thus making the profits greater for the full-fed cattle. 



The Iowa results in 1915-16 showed that the full-fed cattle would 

 have to have sold at the end of 120 days for 63 cents more per cwt. 

 than those receiving one-fourth of a grain ration, in order to make the 

 same profit per head. In 1917, the full-fed cattle would have to have sold 

 for slightly over 50 cents more per cwt. than those receiving one-fourth 

 of a grain ration, in order to make the same profit per head. 



In the Missouri results, first test, the full coi'n-fed cattle receiving 

 linseed oil meal, as compared to those receiving no corn, but with twice 

 the allowance of linseed oil meal along with silage and hay, would have 

 to have sold for approximately 50 cents more per cwt. In the second test, 

 with the same supplement, the difference should have been approximately 

 $1.10 in order to have played even with the cattle showing a lesser finish. 



All these figures then, tend to substantiate the fact that if the full- 

 fed cattle do not sell for from 50 to 65 cents more per cwt. than the limited 

 fed cattle, that the question of full-feeding is cast in serious doubt. 



At best, cattle feeding is a complicated proposition, and what to do 

 tomorrow or the next day is dependent upon a large number of factors 

 that may have been altered, figuratively speaking, over night. In short, 

 steer finishing is quite a complicate proposition, requiring much skill in 



