Silos and Silage in Colorado. 
53 
no trouble to push this cart in front of the cows. We enter the silos 
by means of an extension ladder. The cow barn has been extended 
over the silos so they are all under the same roof. 
Cost .—Cost of material of two silos built in 1912 is as follows: 
38 sacks cement . 
Crane and tub for hoisting dirt. 
Ensilage cart . 
. 8 00 
Windlass attached to crane. 
. 2.00 
Total cost of material.... 
Labor at $2.25 per day for man 
for man and team . 
Total . 
labor and $3.00 per day 
The combined capacity of these two silos is eighty tons. 
The cost of the two silos completed in 1913-1914 is as follows: 
Cost of material ..$ 51.10 
Cost of labor at $1.25 and $1.50 per day for man labor, 
and $2.00 per day for man and team. 125.96 
Total _•.$177.06 
Total capacity of these two silos is 120 tons. These figures in¬ 
clude foundation and adobe walls of extension of cow barn to cover 
silos, but does not include roof. 
There has been a number of silos put down in this vicinity the 
past year that have cost much less than the ones here described. As 
we have said before, these silos were made as cheaply as we con¬ 
sider was consistent with efficiency, durability and safety. By omit¬ 
ting the concrete ring at the top of the ground and the adobe walls 
above the ground and by giving only a skim coat of plaster, the cost 
for material would be reduced, and by taking less care in digging 
to keep the walls true, the time required to make silos would be re¬ 
duced, but we do not believe this would 'be economy. 
Efficiency .—The first silos have been filled and emptied the 
second time. The ensilage has kept perfectly. The plaster has not 
cracked nor peeled off nor has it showed any indication that the 
acids of the ensilage has affected it in any way, so for keeping the 
ensilage it must be conceded that silos built in this way are as good 
as can be built. The first cost of silos of this type will not exceed 
but one-third that of high silos of similar dimensions. The cost of 
cutter is reduced one-third, as a blower is not required. The power 
required is reduced one-half, as it is estimated that it requires as 
much power to operate a blower as is required to cut feed. With the 
equipment we have, the additional labor required to feed twelve or 
