4 AL An “Vy Ate 
ARERR OC CE 
{ ’ ae Nad bisy'd 
‘ 
364 REPoRT OF THE FARM SUPERINTENDENT OF THE — 
When these animals were turned off the Buffalo market for good © 
to choice “stockers” (the class into which such stock would go) — 
was two dollars and sixty cents per hundred weight. They were — 
readily sold for breeding at the higher figures given in the table — 
on the reputations of their dams. The steer, Budd, sold March — 
twelve for twelve dollars, was worth for small second quality — 
animals, as per Buffalo market, three dollars per hundred weight, — 
or fourteen dollars and fifty-two cents. He was not of a type — 
suited to beef production, but was quite equal to many animals — 
which are kept and fed thus at a loss. q 
At the prices given for food these animals were raised at a con- — 
siderable loss when offered in the common market. They were © 
still a loss at the prices sold, if the coarse feed could have been — 
sold at the prices charged. With a large amount of coarse forage 
on hand a moderate price may thus be realized for it, and most of © 
the ash and nitrogen retained on the farm as pay for the feeding _ 
and care of the stock. Where the excrements are well cared for, — 
2. eé. not allowed to be leached out and lost in drainage, or to be © 
burned off by fire-fanging, this method of selling forage can be 
made a source of profitable crop production. But how much better © 
it would be, if, in the first place, such stock be selected as will — 
with good feeding bring a profit of itself, besides leaving quite as — 
munch fertility to pay for the labor. 4 
The reader’s attention is called to the cost of live weight per — 
pound for food consumed ; to the increase of this item and how ~ 
soon it became greater than the market price. 4 
This is a strong argument against feeding late maturing animals ~ 
or those which do not consume food enough above that needed for 
support to make a profitable growth. q 
COMPARISON OF ROOTS AND ENSILAGE. 
In this comparison made with two cows it will be noted that — 
the first trial was on a ration containining roots. The second — 
trial was made with the same grain and hay but with silage sub- 
stituted for the roots. Si 
In the third trial the grain was increased from what was fed 
during the two preceding trials and the silage was continued. 
For the fourth trial the increase of grain was maintained, while 
the silage of the second and third trials was replaced with roots. 
