FEEDING SHEEP AND GOATS ! 331 
hay, 1.1 pounds oats or emmer, and 1 pound corn, wheat, barley, or 
screenings, to equal one feed unit; 2 pounds hay (alfalfa) in the 
western trials were assumed to be equal to one feed unit. 
Feeding Various Grains to Fattening Lambs * 
Num- | Average ration |} Aver- | Feed per 100 | Num- 
Concentrate ber of | ————— || Fe? peEnes gaan ber of 
trials | Grain | Ha pend : feed 
v gain | Grain | Hay | units 
Indian corn f.......0.60. 000s 4 1.4 1.0 29 506 350 646 
Indian corn }.......... rec asbianard 4 13 5 31 429 478 668 
Wheat, whole............... 5 1.2 1.4 25 475 583 708 
Oats, wholes ccs cena we cave « 3 1.0 1.7 24 423 744 683 
Barley, whole........06.0005 5 11 1.9 30 390 639 646 
Emme r, whole............64- 4 1.3 1.8 25 537 691 764 
Wheat screenings, whole...... 4 1.3 1.4 26 488 567 715 
-* Condensed from summary tables in Henry’s ‘‘ Feeds and Feeding.” 
f Eastern stations. t Western stations. 
We note that there was but little difference in the nutritive 
effect of the corn and barley, the average daily gains made by the 
lambs on these grains being 0.3 pound; the other grains produced 
a gain of about one-fourth pound per head daily. Considering the 
feed requirements for the production of 100 pounds of gain, there 
were only slight differences between corn, barley, and oats, while 
whole wheat, screenings, and emmer gave the lowest returns per 
100 pounds feed units. 
Self-feeders similar to those used in the case of self-fed steers 
are employed by some sheep farmers in feeding fattening lambs, 
a supply of grain feeds sufficient for about a week or less being 
placed in the feeder. The lambs are able to take all the grain they 
want as it comes out at the bottom of the feed trough. As in the 
case of steer feeding, the experience of farmers with self-fed sheep 
has been both favorable and unfavorable, although the evidence 
seems, on the whole, more unfavorable than with self-fed steers. 
According to results obtained at the Michigan station,’* “ Fatten- 
ing lambs by means of a self-feeder is an expensive practice, and 
economy of production requires more attention to the variation 
in the appetites of the animals than can be given by this method.” 
J. E. Wing, a noted authority, states? that not only is the death- 
rate much heavier where self-feeders are used, but the cost of gain 
is also much greater. It is evident, therefore, that the use of self- 
feeders for sheep cannot be recommended, except under conditions 
2 Bulletin 128, 
“Sheep Farming in America”; see also Michigan Bulletin 113, 
Minnesota Bulletin 144, Colorado Bulletin 151. 
