739 



In this summary the same prices for feeds are used as noted on 

 page 727 and oat straw is valued at $8.00 per ton. The method of 

 handling the hogs and of figuring profits were the same as employed 

 in Part I noted on page 729. 



The table shows that when corn silage was fed once daily, the 

 substitution of oat straw (Lot 5) for clover hay (Lot i) reduced 

 the consumption of feed and the rate of gain but also reduced the 

 cost of gain. Lot 5 could have sold for $7.05 per cwt. and made 

 the same returns per steer as those in Lot I if they had sold at $.7.47 

 per cwt. Lot 5 sold for $8.10 per cwt. thereby returning a profit of 

 $13.73 P er steer while Lot i sold for $8.25 per cwt. and returned a 

 profit of $10.51 or $3.22 per steer less than Lot 5 fed oat straw. 

 When the pork produced from the droppings is considered, the lot 

 fed oat straw returned a profit of $19.86 per head while the one fed 

 clover hay made a profit of $17.09 per steer or- a difference of $2.77. 

 It should be borne in mind, however, that both rations contained 

 cottonseed meal to furnish protein which would otherwise be lack- 

 ing and especially so in the ration of oat straw, corn silage and 

 shelled corn. When silage was fed twice daily, the substitution of 

 straw for clover hay did not greatly affect the consumption of feed 

 or the rate of gain but decreased the cost of gain $.90 per cwt. The 

 cattle fed oat straw could have sold for 22 cents per cwt. less than 

 those fed clover hay and have made the same financial returns. Since 

 the selling value was 15 cents per cwt. greater when oat straw was 

 fed, the profit was $5.24 per head greater than in the clover hay 

 fed lot. Had both lots of cattle sold for the same price there would 

 have been more than $3.00 per head greater profit in the lot of cattle 

 fed oat straw. When pork from the droppings is considered, Lot 6 

 fed oat straw returned a profit of $24.54 per head while Lot 4 fed 

 clover hay returned only $19.43 profit per head. 



PART III 

 LONG VS. SHORT FEEDING 



In the business of cattle feeding one of the greatest problems is 

 one of when to market the cattle. While it is impossible to predict 

 with certainty what the market will be at any time of year, there are 

 often indications that point to a certain part of the year as being a 

 better time to market cattle than other times. It is sometimes de- 

 sirable to withhold grain from the cattle in order to find a later mar- 

 ket without having the cattle on full feed for a long time. It is for 

 the purpose of obtaining information on the value of corn silage 

 and other roughage without grain for the early part of the feeding 

 period that a series of trials were begun in which the cattle were fed 

 no corn for sixty days after the experiment was started. The trial 

 here reported is the second 1 conducted on this plan. 



The cattle used in this experiment were choice feeders a full 

 description of which is found on page 717. An effort was made to 

 have the cattle of both lots equal in all respects when the trial began. 



1 First trial, Bulletin No. 153 



