•vVif-’J 
VOL. L. NO. 21 83 
NEW YORK NOVEMBER 28, i89i 
PRICE, FIVE CENTS 
$2.00 PER YEAR 
“BEEF TYPE” AND “MILK TYPE.” 
"BLOCKY” AND “RANGY” CATTLE. 
Best steers to feed; Is a general-purpose animal possible? 
Does milk making hurt meat making ? Are there any 
differences besides color and shape between breeds? 
Is it possible for steers of dairy breeds to make 
economical beef ? 
Last spring we gave the results of quite a remarkable 
cattle feeding experiment which was conducted at the 
Michigan Agricultural College. We have secured pictures 
of the animals and of the beef from the different breeds— 
publication of these pictures begins in this issue. The 
animal. The individual variation is great, often, if not 
always, easy to foresee, but impossible to estimate. Hence 
the benefit of selection, and every feeder knows that as 
much depends upon the selection of the bunch of feeders 
as upon their after care. The question has arisen in the 
minds of men whether or not by the various standards of 
selection employed in the establishment of breeds any im¬ 
portant differences have resulted ; and whether or not, 
properly speaking, there are such things as breed differ¬ 
ences aside from form, color, etc., and, if so, what are 
their character and extent ? Are they sufficient to dis¬ 
tinguish one breed above another f” 
The experiment also serves to make clear the difference 
The statistics about these four animals aie as follows : 
Walton, Holstein, Fig. 297, consumed 5,530 pounds ot 
grain, 3 214 of hay, 1 775 of roots and 3,427 of ensilage, and 
gained 790 pounds. 
Nick, Holstein, Fig. 298, consumed 5,678 pounds of grain, 
3,144 of hay, 1,775 of roots, and 3 344 ot ensilage, and 
gained 897 pounds. 
Boy, Hereford, Fig. 299, consumed 4.134% pounds of 
grain, 2.191 of hay, 1,255 of roots and 2,853 of ensilage, 
and gained 905 pounds. 
Milton, Hereford, Fig. 300, consumed 5,120 pounds of 
grain, 3,028 of hay, 1.775 of roots and 3,151 of ensilage, 
and gained 790 pounds. 
iwi 
M 
mm 
mmm 
HEREFORD STEER MILTON. “Milk Type.” Fltf. 3*0. 
HEREFORD STEER BOY. “Beef Type.” Fig. 299. 
HOLSTEIN STEER WALTON. “Milk Type. 
Fig. 297 
HOLSTEIN STEER NICK. “Beef-Milk Type.” Fig. 298. 
object of the experiment was to test the feeding qualities 
of the different meat breeds. Typical specimens of each 
breed were selected and fed for two years, the food given 
each animal being carefully measured and accurate rec¬ 
ords being kept of their weight and condition. This was 
started as a breed test; it being understood that if a 
representative of any one breed proved the most econom¬ 
ical feeder, It would show that breed to be the best from 
which to select feeding steers. But the figures of the test 
seem to show that the breed question had little or nothing 
to do with the results—the test seems to have been mainly 
a contest between well shaped and poorly shaped steers. 
In fact, when presenting the records and results Prof. 
Davenport considered the matter independently of the 
breed question. As he says: 
“It has long been known that other influences than 
food operated decidedly to affect the gains pf a feeding 
in type which all breeders have noticed. As to the 
animals pictured here Prof. Davenport says: 
“ Clearly the two most expensive feeders were Walton, 
Holstein, and Milton, Hereford. They were also the two 
oldest, and age will help to explain much of the differ¬ 
ence; but Milton, the elder of the two, made the better 
record and the difference against Walton must be ex¬ 
plained on some other basis. His food consumption shows 
him to have been a hearty eater and as regular a feeder as 
the rest. I am forced to believe it is due to the fact that 
he was clearly of the milk type, large and bony. If he 
had been a cow he would without doubt have been a good 
one. His companion, Nick, was of the beef-milk type and 
made a better record. Of the two Here fords the speci¬ 
mens were of the two extremes in types of that breed. Boy 
was short in body and limb, a great feeder and early to ma¬ 
ture. He would never have fed as old as his companion.” 
In concluding his remarks on the test, Prof. Davenport, 
says: “Kaowing these animals as.I did, I think I may 
safely say that as they, iirespective of breed, approach!d 
a certain stocky, blocky form the t we designate as the 
4 meat type ’ in the same degree they proved good feeders 
and economical consumers of food, within a reasonable 
age. On the other hand, as they approached the coarser or 
more loosely built organization, betraying a circulation 
more largely internal and less diffused, in about the same 
proportions were they less profitable consumers of food 
for meat purposes and turned out a le> s desirable carcass 
for the block. If this be true, as I believe it Is, it is a ques¬ 
tion of type rather than of breed, and that breed which 
affords the largest proportion in members of this type is, 
all things considered, the best, if any one thinks he knows 
which breed or breeds that may be.” 
These remarks were to The R. N.-Y. very suggestive. 
