102 
Bl BEAT] OF AMM \L inm - \\:\ . 
adjoining^ The pens were well bedded with straw. Water was given 
in abundance and occasionally coal and ashes. The following table 
viiow ^ i be results: 
Ground wheat and barley compared with shelled corn for pigs. 
L 
- 
y. 
- . 
bf M 
'. — 
< 
d 
1 
e 
- 
< 
! 
9 
K 
- E 
M 
► 
amotu 
per 100 
DOtmdt 
s 
- = 
a 
si 
D 
Katinll. 
ami 
Corn. 
and 
barley. 
•- a 
I 
( 'crn 
4 
1 
Lb*. 
94.5 
Lb*. 
3 1 . 26 
liil 
Lfc». 
640 
Wheal and barley. 
KM 
LIS 
This experimenl shows a mixture of wheal and barley to be much 
more valuable than corn alone for pig feeding. It also speaks very 
well for the econony of pork production in those States where corn 
is not a staple crop. Buffum and Griffith state that it is a com- 
mon practice in the neighborhood of Fort Collins for farmers to 
exchange barley or wheal for corn on even terms, and even when 
corn is high in price and wheat and barley cheaper, they will sell the 
cheaper home-grown grains and buy the expensive one. They give 
the average price for ten years of these -rains in Colorado as 
cents per LOO pounds for corn, '.•'. , .") cents per LOO pounds for wheat, 
and 55,3 cents per LOO pounds for barley. They ask, very pertinently, 
whether Colorado feeders have not the solution of the problem of a 
supply of concentrates for pork production when home-grown grains 
sell on the farm for less money per 100 pounds than corn can be 
purchased in town, and especially when either wheat or barley is 
equal to corn tor this purpose and in combination are superior to it. 
Oats compared with corn. — Grisdale a reports a comparison of <>ats 
and corn. The grain was fed whole and was soaked fifty-four hours 
before feeding. Both Lots received skim milk in addition. The 
results were as follows: 
Oats compared with corn for pigs. 
■* ^Lt^ A stasrfeh^ 
P*«* nut ■**•»■ ' «5S *"»■ 
Feed per HKtiM.uiuls 
gain. 
Corn 
Pound*. 
91 
Pound*. 
170 
190 
Pound*. 
lis 
Pound*. 
L90 
Pound*. Pound*. 
1.11 •»!-. 
P.ul. No. 88, Central Expt. Farm. 
