10 HARRIS ON THE PIG. 



hundred pounds of live weight, is : ox, 3 Ibs. ; sheep, 3 to 

 4 Ibs. ; fat pig, 0.66 Ibs. In other words, in proportion to 

 live weight, the stomach of an ox, or sheep, is about five 

 times as great as that of a pig. 



It is quite evident, from these facts, that the pig is not 

 so well adapted to feed on grass or hay as the ox or sheep. 



This is a strong argument against the hog as an eco- 

 nomical farm animal. 



In proportion to the nutriment they contain, the con- 

 centrated foods are more costly than those of greater 

 bulk. Not only is their market price usually higher, but 

 it costs more to produce them. Elaboration is an expen- 

 sive process. The common white turnip, containing from 

 92 to 94 per cent of water, can be grown with less labor 

 and manure, and in a shorter period, than the Swedish 

 turnip, containing from 88 to 90 per cent of water, and 

 this less than the Mangel Wurzel, containing only 86 per 

 cent of water. Carrots, which are still more nutritious, 

 are even more costly, in proportion to the nutriment they 

 contain. This is probably a general law. 



As the ox can subsist and fatten on less cencentrated 

 and less costly food than the pig, it follows, therefore, that 

 a pound of beef ought to be produced at less cost than a 

 pound of pork. 



There are, however, several circumstances which modify 

 this conclusion. Pigs will eat food which, but for them, 

 would be wasted. Where grain or oil-cake is fed to cattle, 

 a certain number of pigs can be kept at a merely nominal 

 cost. We can in no other way utilize the refuse from the 

 house and the dairy so advantageously as by feeding it 

 to swine. On grain farms, pigs will obtain a good living 

 for several weeks after harvest, on the stubbles, and in 

 some sections, they find a considerable amount of food in 

 the woods. 



Even where we have none of these advantages, the dif- 

 ference in the cost of producing a pound of beef and a 



