20 BULLETIN 752, U. S. DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE. 
The results summarized in Table XIII show the same general facts 
with reference to supplements for alfalfa pasture as those brought 
out where the different grain supplements were used separately, as 
shown in previous tables. The grain consumed per 100 pounds of 
gain increases with the size of the hogs as well as with the size of the 
grain ration. The character of the hogs and the pasture is, of course, 
very important also. It is of interest to note that lots 10 and 11, con- 
sisting of 41 pigs fed barley and tankage for 42 days, followed by 
barley, wheat, and tankage for 21 days, made a gain during the 63- 
day period of 3,711 pounds on 1 acre of pasture on the Uncompahgre 
project. These pigs were well bred, had good care, and the alfalfa 
pasture was in excellent condition. In addition to the alfalfa pas- 
ture, the pigs were fed 350 pounds of grain for each 100 pounds of 
gain. Contrasted with these results are those secured with lots 12 
and 13 at the Truckee-Carson Experiment Farm on an inferior stand 
of alfalfa. In this instance, the gain per acre in 10£ days was only 
1.114 pounds, and the grain requirement 376 pounds for each 100 
pounds of gain. 
COMPARISONS OF VARIOUS SUPPLEMENTARY FEEDS FOR ALFALFA PASTURE. 
The preceding tables and discussions have been concerned chiefly 
with showing something of the results which have been secured with 
various supplementary feeds for alfalfa pasture, without attempting 
to make comparisons of the values of these supplements. Many of the 
data which have been obtained in these feeding enterprises are such 
that direct comparisons can not be made from them. There are, how- 
ever, a few instances which furnish bases for comparisons, and these 
will now be considered. 
Co?m and barley. — Perhaps the most extensive information at pres- 
ent available regarding the comparative value of gram supplements 
for alfalfa pasture under irrigation is that secured at the Scottsbluff 
Experiment Farm in 1911, 1915, and 1916 with corn and barley. The 
results of the comparative tests made during these three years are 
summarized in Table XIV. 
It will be seen from Table XIV that in four of the five compari- 
sons, somewhat less barley than corn was required for 100 pounds 
of gain. In the exceptional case, a higher ration of barley than of 
corn was fed, and the alfalfa pasture used by the barley-fed lot was 
seriously damaged by a sand storm during the pasture season. It is 
believed that these two factors account for the comparatively unfav- 
orable showing made by the barley in this instance. From these re- 
sults and from observations in other pasturing enterprises, it is 
believed that the choice between corn and barley can safely depend 
on the prices per pound of the two grains, where one or the other is to 
