ECONOMIC USE OF FORAGES IN LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION 37 
by increasing the proportion of forage in the ration fed a particular 
class of livestock. In fact, dairy cows that were fed only forages 
showed somewhat less variation in returns per $100 of all costs than 
cows that were fed the high-grain ration. Yearling steers that were 
fed the high-forage ration had only slightly more variable returns 
than those that were fed the other two rations. The feeding systems 
for each class of livestock that showed the greatest variation in re- 
turns showed no greater chance of loss but a slightly greater chance 
of high returns. The difference in variability in returns among al- 
ternative feeding systems for any one kind of livestock was not great 
enough to be important. Thus the information in these tables sug- 
gests that the uncertainty associated with a livestock system is not 
appreciably affected by the substitution of forage for grain in the 
ration. Hence it appears that consideration of risk or uncertainty 
is not involved in the choice of a feeding system for a particular kind 
of livestock. 
VARIABILITY OF RETURNS IN RELATION TO KIND OF LIVESTOCK 
In dealing with the problem of feed utilization it is also useful to 
compare the variability of returns from alternative kinds of livestock. 
The data in tables 15, 16, and 17 indicate considerable differences in 
the variation in returns among the various classes of livestock. First, 
consider the variation in returns per $100 of all costs (table 15). The 
degree of variation was clearly less for dairy cattle than for hogs or 
feeder cattle. However, the frequency of losses (returns less than 
$100 per $100 of costs) was less and maximum losses were only a little 
greater for hogs than for dairy cows. High returns were much more 
frequent with hogs. That is, the chances of loss were no greater for 
hogs than for dairy cattle, and the opportunity for large gains was 
considerably greater for hogs. 
A comparison between hogs and feeder cattle shows less variation 
in returns from hogs. The chances of heavy losses were greater with 
feeder cattle. Opportunities for large gains were about equal for 
the two classes of livestock. A comparison between dairy cows and 
feeder cattle shows that the chances of both heavy losses and large 
gains are much greater for feeder cattle. If the objective is primarily 
one of minimizing the chance of loss, hogs are apparently the de- 
sirable livestock to raise. Feeder cattle are least desirable from this 
standpoint. 
The variability of returns per $100 of feed and labor is somewhat 
larger for all livestock systems than when all costs are considered 
(table 16). The pattern of the variation is very much the same, 
however—there still appears to be no relationship between variability 
of returns and substitution of forage for grain in the livestock ration. 
The relative variability of returns per $100 of feed and labor costs 
for the different livestock classes is similar to the situation in which 
the variabilities of returns per $100 of all costs are compared. 
A comparison of the variability of returns from different livestock 
systems on the basis of cost of feed only is made in table 17. On this 
basis, the risk of losing money with dairy cattle is much less than 
with either feeder cattle or hogs. Even in the poorest years, dairy 
cows returned more than $120 per $100 worth of feed fed. Feeder 
