1492 



riGS 



the pasture was not hurdled. Comparison of the two groups proves that 

 52 lbs or approximately 17 per cent less grain was required for 100 lbs 

 gain when the pea pasture was hurdled. One acre of hurdled pasture sav- 

 ed 1897 lbs. of grain , whilst one acre of the pasture not hurdled saved 

 1340 lbs. At the close of the pasture experiment Groups I and II were 

 brought in and placed on a full grain ration, similar to the mixture they 

 had been receiving, for 56 days. The results will be found in Table II. 

 It will be seen at once that both pasture groups made considerably better 

 gains than did Group III which had been fed on dry feed continuously. 

 This more rapid developmeijt and the lesser consumption of grain for 

 100 lbs. gain should be credited to the residual effect of the pasture. 

 Therefore taking the two experimental periods together, one acre of 

 pasture, hurdled, saved 2086 lbs of grain, and one acre of pasture not 

 hurdled saved 1568 lbs of grain, compared with an exclusivel 3'grain feed- 

 ing. Thus pea pasture is certainly a valuable aid in the production of 

 cheap pork. 



Comparison of the pure-bred and grade animals in the different groups 

 shows that their gains of live weight were practically equal. 



Tabi,E I. — Pea Pasture, hurdled or not hurdled, for Pigs. 



Alfalfa Tea for growing pigs. — A feeding experiment lasting 168 days 

 was made on two groups of pigs, of four each. The grain ration consisted of 

 equal parts of corn meal and middUngs and of this mixture 3.3 lbs. were given 

 per head per day both to the first group and to the second. For Group I 

 this ration was mixed with water before feeding, whilst for Group II the 



