﻿SHRINKAGE OF WEIGHT OF BEEF CATTLE IN TRANSIT. 59 



ing day without anything to eat or drink. They had neither feed nor 

 water for 48 hours before being loaded. They naturally looked very 

 bad, almost like shadows, when loaded, and weighed up light. There 

 was 150 pounds of hay put in the racks of each car at Dickinson, and 

 the cattle stayed on feed and water 16| hours at Staples, Minn., where 

 they took an enormous fill. The weights at Staples were not secured, 

 as the cattle were supposed to run into St. Paul without being 

 unloaded. 



These cattle, instead of showing a shrinkage in transit weighed 

 from 2 to 5 pounds heavier after taking a fill at market than at Dick- 

 inson, X. Dak. This was without doubt due to the abnormal condi- 

 tion they were in when loaded. This method of handling cattle is 

 to be condemned, as it is cruel to the animals in the first place- and 

 unprofitable for the shipper as well. Cattle shipped under such con- 

 ditions look bad when they arrive at market and show the large fill 

 to such an extent that their selling price is much lower than for 

 animals with an average fill. This is an instance where the large fill 

 at market as undesirable. 



DETAILS OF WORK IN SOUTHWEST. 



The pastures throughout Texas had been very short during the 

 whole year of 1910. In fact, the grass was so scant in some parts that 

 many cattle would have died had there not been a fair crop of mes- 

 quite beans upon which to feed. Because of the drought very little 

 grass grew along the trails over which, cattle traveled to the loading 

 pens, and the cattle driven along these trails usually arrived at the 

 loading point with a very poor fill, and consequently weighed up 

 light at the point of origin. Some of these cattle W'ere so empty 

 when first weighed that the shrinkage in transit was very small, and 

 sometimes was completely overcome by the fill taken at the market. 

 A season of this kind is conducive to a small shrinkage. While the 

 results obtained from the shrinkage work of 1910-11 (shown in Part 

 I of this bulletin) are applicable to a dry or droughty year, they do 

 not represent the normal shrinkage under average conditions. For 

 this reason, it was decided to duplicate the work of 1910 in the 

 Southwest. 



During the winter of 1910-11 there were frequent rains, and the 

 grass in Texas was good the following summer. This grazing season 

 was about a normal one for Texas, and the results obtained from the 

 shrinkage work may be taken as an average. Most of the cattle 

 shipped in the. fall were either in good flesh or fat. There were a 

 few exceptions, of course, but taking the cattle that were weighed as 

 a whole, they were about the average of what go to market from 

 Texas during a normal or average year. 



