The experiments cited do not include alf_The Book of Alfalfa: History, Cultivation and Merits Its Uses as a Forage and Fertilizer

crops would indicate that the percentage of protein in alfalfa hay may

be less where the crop is grown by irrigation than where it is grown by

dry-land farming. The composition of the hay, however, will depend upon

the quantity of water supplied to the crop and not upon the method; that

is, alfalfa which receives as much natural rainfall as other alfalfa

would receive by irrigation, would be similarly affected in composition,

and from the experiments with grains reported in the bulletin noted, it

would appear that with the application of large quantities of water the

percentage of protein is decreased; yet, the yield is increased, and

although the feeding value of the crop may be a little less, the

quantity may be greater, due to large applications of water.

WIDE VARIATIONS IN CONTENT

Professor Ten Eyck compiled from their station bulletins the following

figures on the composition of alfalfa hay in four different states:

----------+--------+----------+----------+----------+---------

----------+--------+----------+----------+----------+---------

New Jersey| 148 | 15.84 | 38.97 | 3.82 | 2

Colorado | 39 | 17.36 | 36.71 | 1.65 | 9

Utah | 61 | 9.22 | 43.25 | .97 | 29

Kansas | 114 | 11.89 | 41.03 | .66 | 3

----------+--------+----------+----------+----------+---------

On this showing he remarks:

“Although it was not definitely stated, I take it that the Colorado and

Utah hay were grown by irrigation, while the New Jersey and Kansas hay

received no irrigation. It will be observed that while the percentages

of protein and fat in the Utah samples are low, the percentage of

carbohydrates is high; yet the Colorado samples grown under irrigation

show a larger percentage of protein and fat than the Kansas samples

grown without irrigation. The crude protein often varies in quantity

according to the stage of maturity of the alfalfa when it is cut for

hay, as shown by experiments at the Kansas station, and described in

Bulletin No. 114.

“The general conclusion may be that the protein content of alfalfa hay

will decrease to some extent, according as the supply of water furnished

the crop is increased; that is, by supplying the right quantity of

water, a better quality of hay may be grown by irrigation than is often

grown in humid climates in soil which receives only the natural

rainfall. From what I know of the Colorado and Utah stations, I would

judge that the quantity of water supplied at the Utah station was much

larger than that supplied at the Colorado station. At the Colorado

station the supply of irrigation water is often limited, and hence, the

larger percentage of protein and fat which appears in the samples of hay

grown and analyzed at that station.”

The annual report of the secretary of agriculture (1904) says that at

the Utah station a series of co-operative experiments is in progress to

determine the water necessary, and the most favorable method of

application, to insure a maximum yield of alfalfa, and also experiments

to determine the minimum application of water required to secure a crop.

“It has been found that abundant irrigation throughout the season, 61

inches of water being applied, gave a yield of 6.2 tons per acre, while

four irrigations in the early part of the season with only 25 inches

gave five tons per acre, showing that beyond a certain supply the excess

is wasted.”

A. S. Hitchcock, in United States Farmers’ Bulletin No. 215, speaking of

the Utah experiment just mentioned, says that where the supply of water

is limited a much less quantity than is ordinarily used will produce

paying crops. The minimum quantity to produce a crop of alfalfa, and the

time at which the water should be applied, depends upon the soil and

climatic conditions. Below are results of experiments in 1903, by the

Utah station:

WATER REQUIRED BY ALFALFA; QUANTITY AND DATE OF APPLICATION

-------------------------------------------------------------+-------

Date of each irrigation and quantity of water applied | Total

--------------+--------------+--------------+----------------+ Water

First | Second | Third | Fourth |applied

-------+------+-------+------+-------+------+-------+--------+-------

| _in._| | _in._| | _in._| | _in._ |_in._

June 16| 3.360|July 29| 3.359| .... | .... | .... | .... | 6.719

June 29| 5.970|July 29| 3.359|Aug. 19| 3.359| .... | .... |12.688

June 16| 5.070|July 8 | 5.036|Aug. 6 | 5.003| .... | .... |15.109

June 29| 7.020|July 8 | 5.036|Aug. 19| 5.002| .... | .... |17.058

June 15| 5.030|July 3 | 5.100|Aug. 1 | 5.036|Aug. 24| 5.002|20.168

June 20| 6.774|July 8 | 6.694|Aug. 19| 6.682| .... | .... |20.150

July 8|12.490|Aug. 9 |12.506| .... | .... | .... | .... |25.002

June 20| 8.303|July 6 | 8.352|Aug. 19| 8.362| .... | .... |25.017

June 15| 6.320|July 6 | 6.248|Aug. 1 | 6.248|Aug. 29| 6.250|25.066

June 16| 6.250|June 23| 4.280|June 30| 5.705|July 7 |[4]5.230|61.465

June 23| 6.250|July 7 | 6.220|Aug. 15| 6.250|Aug. 31| 6.250|24.970

June 16| 6.250|July 7 | 6.220|Aug. 6 | 6.750|Aug. 31| 6.250|25.470

June 23| 6.610|July 7 | 3.720|Aug. 15| 3.250|Aug. 31| 3.750|17.330

June 16| 3.980|July 7 | 3.720|Aug. 6 | 3.750|Aug. 31| 3.750|15.200

-------+------+-------+------+-------+------+-------+--------+-------

[4] This plat was given 5 inches of water on each of the following

dates: July 14, July 22, July 28, August 4, August 17, August 25,

August 31, September 8.

DATE OF HARVEST AND YIELD OF HAY

--------------------------------------------------+--------+----------

Date of harvest and yield of hay at each cutting | Total |Calculated

----------------+----------------+----------------+ yield | yield

First | Second | Third | of plat| per acre

-------+--------+-------+--------+-------+--------+--------+----------

June 26| 264 |Aug. 12| 50¹⁄₂| .... | .... | 314¹⁄₂| 3.145

June 26| 177 |Aug. 12| 101 | .... | .... | 278 | 2.780

June 26| 261 |Aug. 12| 68¹⁄₂| .... | .... | 329¹⁄₂| 3.205

June 26| 204 |Aug. 12| 108¹⁄₂| .... | .... | 312¹⁄₂| 3.125

June 26| 191 |Aug. 12| 85¹⁄₂| .... | .... | 276¹⁄₂| 2.765

June 26| 175 |Aug. 12| 74 | .... | .... | 249 | 2.490

June 26| 93 |Aug. 12| 62 | .... | .... | 155 | 1.550

June 26| 99 |Aug. 12| 44 | .... | .... | 143 | 1.430

June 26| 224 |Aug. 12| 140 | .... | .... | 364 | 3.640

June 18| 176¹⁄₂|Aug. 10| 177¹⁄₄|Oct. 16| 120¹⁄₂| 474¹⁄₄| 6.243

June 18| 170¹⁄₂|Aug. 10| 136¹⁄₂|Oct. 16| 73³⁄₄| 380³⁄₄| 5.017

June 18| 147 |Aug. 10| 141 |Oct. 16| 61 | 349 | 4.598

June 18| 105 |Aug. 10| 112¹⁄₄|Oct. 16| 46 | 263¹⁄₄| 3.468

June 18| 112¹⁄₂|Aug. 10| 106 |Oct. 16| 35 | 253¹⁄₂| 3.340

-------+--------+-------+--------+-------+--------+--------+----------

“It will be observed that the maximum crop was produced by applying

plenty of water throughout the growing season. However, it is also to be

noted that a much less quantity of water, when applied at intervals of

three or four weeks, produced a fair crop. Fifteen and 17 inches of

water applied in this way produced more than half as much as 61 inches

applied at frequent intervals. Furthermore, three irrigations of 15 to

17 inches produced about the same results as the same amount applied at

four irrigations. In applying irrigation water to fields it is necessary

to saturate the soil to a reasonable depth. All the water that drains

off beyond the amount required for use is lost to the crop. It is not

necessary to apply water again until the crop has removed a large part

of the available supply.”

[Illustration: Gathering Alfalfa Hay in Windrows with a Side-delivery

Horserake]

[Illustration: Cutting a Fine Field of Alfalfa]

_CHAPTER VII._

Harvesting

CALLS FOR INTELLIGENCE AND PAINSTAKING

Considerable space in this volume is devoted to the discussion of soil

and seeding, but their importance cannot well be over-estimated. Really

the whole subject of alfalfa might well be treated under the two heads,

“Seeding” and “Harvesting,” so very inclusive are these two phases of

the subject. Without careful seeding one cannot have a crop to harvest,

and without careful harvesting he might almost as well not have a crop.

Both call for intelligence and painstaking farming, and much patience

and hard work. But the rewards of these virtues and labors are heavy

yields from the most valuable forage plant. If it is worth nine times as

much as timothy, it can well demand a little more time and labor than

the average crop.

GREAT VALUE OF LEAVES

The first point to accentuate as we approach the subject of harvesting

is the preeminent value of the leaves. These contain from seventy-five

to eighty per cent of the protein of the whole plant, that valuable

compound that goes to produce milk and meat. It has been estimated that

a ton of properly cured alfalfa leaves is equal in protein to 2800

pounds of wheat bran; and when it is also estimated by careful observers

that the loss of leaves in harvesting, even under favoring

circumstances, ranges from fifteen to thirty or more per cent it is

readily seen that the harvesting is an important part in alfalfa

haymaking.

WHEN TO CUT

For the best hay the cutting should begin when the alfalfa is about

one-tenth in bloom. Of course, if the acreage is small, calling for but

one or two days’ cutting, it might stand without particular harm until a

fifth or fourth was in bloom. Cutting should be completed, if possible,

by the time one-half is in bloom, as after that it is cut at a loss of

leaves. As they have more experience the tendency among farmers is to

cut alfalfa earlier than had before been believed at all desirable, and

some experienced growers and feeders now insist upon cutting just before

the blossoming stage is reached.

Experiments seem to show that horses like the hay that has been cut when

at least half in bloom, or later, better than do other stock. For sake

of the after effects on the plant, it is highly important that the first

cutting be made in the early bloom, as, if it is delayed, the second

crop starts more slowly and gives a lighter yield. Frequently a short

delay in cutting the first crop means that the field will produce but

two crops instead of three or four. So important is this that Prof. H.

M. Cottrell declares that he has found it profitable to cut the first

crop of a season in earliest bloom even if it were to be injured by

being rained upon, or in fact entirely lost.

MOST PROTEIN IN EARLY CUTTINGS

The Utah experiment station found by a feeding test that the early cut

alfalfa was worth far more than any later cutting. It reported:

------------------------------+----------+-----------

|Hay worth,| Beef, lbs.

Stage of Growth | per ton | produced

------------------------------+----------+-----------

When ¹⁄₁₀ in bloom | $5.35 | 706

When in full bloom | 4.90 | 562

When ¹⁄₂ of blooms have fallen| 4.35 | 490

------------------------------+----------+-----------

The Kansas station found the protein content to be:

Stage of Growth Protein content

When ¹⁄₁₀ in bloom 18.5 per cent.

When ¹⁄₂ in bloom 17.2 „ „

When in full bloom 14.4 „ „

CONSTANT WATCHFULNESS DEMANDED

In humid regions, the alfalfa farmer at the time of the first cutting

often finds himself in a trying position. The value of the leaves

demands early cutting, and this may be just when it is likely to rain

with great frequency. He knows that a wetting will injure his hay, and

that this results in more or less loss of some of its most valuable

parts from the hour of cutting until it is thoroughly cured. The

Colorado station reports that alfalfa hay left out for fifteen days

after cutting and rained on twice, lost 26.1 per cent of its feeding

value. Hay left out for seven days and having only one light rain, lost

10 per cent. Another lot left out three days, without rain, lost 5 per

cent. Wetting delays the curing, and by the washing the hay loses much

sugar, dextrin and other soluble matters, and also develops fungi.

However, the only thing to do is to cut, exercising good judgment of

course as to the amount each day.

LOSSES IN CURING

Headden found, at the Colorado station, that in an average alfalfa plant

the stems amounted to forty to fifty per cent of the weight, while with

very leafy, small-stemmed plants the leaves sometimes form more than

sixty per cent of the entire weight. The leaves were readily lost if the

hay was not handled carefully. He concluded that the minimum loss from

the falling off of the leaves and stems in careful haymaking amounts to

from fifteen to twenty per cent; and in cases where conditions have been

unfavorable, as much as sixty or even sixty-six per cent of the entire

dry crop is lost. Stated in another way, with the best of conditions,

and with great care, for every 1,700 pounds of hay taken off the field,

at least 300 pounds of leaves and stems are left scattered on the

ground, “and, in very bad cases, as much as 1,200 pounds may be left for

each 800 pounds taken.” A study of these facts should induce the careful

haymaker to use all possible skill in curing alfalfa, and they show that

it will be profitable to expend more than the usual amount of labor in

saving the leaves, considering that they are worth, pound for pound,

nearly four times as much as the stems.

HARVESTING IN HUMID REGIONS

Ordinarily, it is not well to cut alfalfa immediately after a heavy

rain, because the wet ground will operate against proper curing. Begin

cutting in the morning, when the dew is well off. If the weather is

fair, the tedder ought to follow about two hours behind the mower. It is

a mistake to think that the sun is the great curing agent. Too long

exposure to the sun makes the curing all the more unsatisfactory,

besides drying the leaves in such a way that they crumble and drop off.

As long as alfalfa remains “alive” water will be exhaled from the

surface of the leaves and be pumped constantly from the stalks in a

natural way much as though they were still standing. On the other hand,

if newly cut alfalfa is spread too long in hot sunshine, the leaves are

scorched to such an extent that transpiration of moisture from pores

becomes impossible. Hence, that in the stalks can only escape by simple

evaporation, which is very slow. By this means much undesirable, in fact

harmful, moisture in the hay is brought to the barn or stack, although

the leaves of the hay are dry and crisp.

As J. E. Wing has well said in his bulletin (Bul. No. 129 prepared for

the Pennsylvania department of agriculture), “there is a principle to be

observed in making alfalfa hay that applies to making hay from all

clovers. If it can be so managed that the leaves are not at once burned

and dried to powder, the moisture from the stems is the more easily

removed. Leaves are natural evaporators of sap; stems are not.

Therefore, while the leaf has yet pliancy and some semblance of its

natural condition, it is most efficiently carrying away the sap of the

stem, but when it is dried up it no longer aids in drying the plant at

all. Therefore, the best hay in all respects is made partly in the

shade, in loosely turned windrows, or in narrow cocks.”

Two or three hours behind the tedder start the rake and keep it going

regardless of the noon hour, and unless the hay is very heavy it may be

put into small cocks, this to be completed before the dew forms. In

humid regions, hay is cured best and with greatest safety by the use of

hay-caps, and these should be put on the cocks also before the dew

forms, and removed each morning. The hay may be left in these cocks for

four or five days, as found necessary, and then stacked or stored in the

barn. This may not follow, however, unless the weather is favorable.

Many prefer to leave the hay in the windrows until the second morning,

turning them by hand or otherwise before noon and putting into cocks in

the afternoon, letting these stand for two or three days. If it is left

in the cocks over three days, they should be moved or the plants under

them will be smothered. All agree that alfalfa should not lie in the

swath over two or three hours. Most who have ever used a tedder like it

if the alfalfa is less than half in bloom. If half or more in bloom, the

tedder may cause the breaking off and loss of many leaves. Most

experiment stations recommend that the hay be put into small cocks on

the day of the cutting, if the weather is at all fair, not risking it in

the windrows over night. It is a fact that cocked green alfalfa, even

without caps, will shed much rain, while when fairly well-cured it will

not do so.

A Colorado farmer reported that he started the mower one morning as soon

as the dew was off, followed it with the tedder one hour later, and with

the rake one hour behind the tedder; he kept a force of men only two

hours behind the rake putting the alfalfa, yet quite green, into small

cocks. These stood through two days of heavy rain. Later the cocks were

opened and found to be unharmed, and after one day the hay was put into

stacks in excellent condition. This was a somewhat unusual circumstance,

surely, and might not often occur in a climate less dry than that in

some parts of Colorado.

A grower in southern Kansas, however, who harvests about one thousand

tons of alfalfa per year, and is working with it nearly every day from

the second week in May until November 10, insists that alfalfa, under

the same conditions of rainfall, is much easier to save in fair feeding

condition than red clover. He finds the side-delivery rake especially

excellent for turning over the green or wet windrows to the sun and air

with the least loss of leaves, and cured thus, after being wet, the

natural color is better preserved. “That alfalfa hay has a higher

feeding value than almost any other, even when saved under the most

unfavorable circumstances, should be impressed upon the inexperienced.”

THE USE OF HAY-CAPS

Any man who goes into the business of raising alfalfa anywhere in the

rain belt cannot well afford to ignore hay-caps as a part of his

equipment. Comparatively the cost is slight and the trouble of using

them small considered in the light of their great utility, although the

expense, and the use and care of them may at first blush appear to be

quite formidable. American haymakers do not seem to appreciate the bad

effect of dew upon the color and aroma of all kinds of hay. Prof. F. H.

Storer in his “Agriculture” (Vol. III, p. 559) says: “One advantage

gained by the use of hay-caps to protect the cocks during the night, is

that they hold in the raked-up warmth, and keep the hay from cooling

off. Thus it happens that the hay not only improves a little as to

dryness during the night, but is all ready to dry rapidly when the cocks

are again exposed to the air and sunshine, on being uncovered in the

morning. All this as a normal and constant benefit, to say nothing of

the advantages derived from the caps in case light rains, or even heavy

rains, should fall before the cocks are again opened. The caps keep dew

from settling upon the hay, moreover, and thus prevent the loss of

aromatic matters that would result if the dew were to dry off from the

hay.”

“With regard to the exclusion of dew, it is not alone its power to carry

off aroma that should be considered. When dew ‘falls’ it must tend to

carry with it any particles of solid matter that may happen to be in the

air from which it is deposited, and, in this way the spores of fungi,

such as would cause the hay to mold, are put upon it. It can scarcely be

questioned that many of the organisms deposited with the dew are likely

to promote hurtful decomposition, especially in case the hay should

remain or become damp, and the less of these organisms that infest the

hay the better it will be.”

When the farmer considers that a ton of well-cured alfalfa hay is worth

about as much as a ton of wheat bran, he ought to see that it is

profitable to protect it from the rain and the dew. He would scarcely

hesitate to provide suitable covering if he had several tons of bran in

the field exposed to the elements. Hay-caps will soon pay for

themselves by the finer quality of the hay they assure, aside from the

larger quantity of the best grade that their protection guarantees.

Storer further says, “there can be no question as to the very great

merit of hay-caps when properly used. They are simply pieces of stout,

cotton cloth of suitable size, say 40 to 45 inches square as a minimum,

(60 inches square would be far better--Author) which are thrown over the

cocks when rain is imminent, or at nightfall. These cloths may have

wooden pegs or some sort of weight attached to each corner to hold them

in place; the pegs can be driven into the ground or pushed under the

hay, as seems most suitable to the size of the cock or conditions of the

weather. The porosity of the cotton cloth hinders dampness from

collecting beneath it at the top of the cock which it covers.”

Curing alfalfa in dry regions where the problems and dangers of rainfall

do not need any large consideration, is attended with few of the

difficulties which confront the grower in a region of much humidity. In

western Kansas and Nebraska, and in Texas and other states where summer

rains are somewhat infrequent, the mowers start at the beginning and do

not stop until the field or fields of alfalfa are all in the swath. The

rakes follow close behind, frequently the side-delivery rake, and then

the gathering implement, usually designated as a “go-devil,” keep only

about a half-day behind, dragging the cured hay to the stack or rick

where the horse-fork lifts and carries it to the center of the stack, to

be distributed and placed by men with pitchforks. The market and feeding

value of hay so cured and gathered, is deemed by some authorities as

not the highest. Curing in the windrow alone is likely to be a mere

drying (perhaps too rapid drying) of one side of the exposed portions.

Alfalfa should cure successively in the swath, windrow, cock and stack

or mow, to develop its greatest value. The man who has so many acres

that he cannot cure it in this way might do better with fewer acres for

hay, and pasture hogs on the remainder, or use the land for other crops.

Still it is true that alfalfa even poorly cured has no inconsiderable

feeding value. Many farmers in the West and Middle West claim to secure

very good hay by early following the mower with the tedder, this with

the rake, and then the “buncher,” letting the hay remain in bunches over

night and dragging it to the stack the next day. Others take from the

windrow to wagons by a hay-loader, preferably one operated by a belt.

After all is said and done, and regardless of thrift and yield, it is

unquestionable that the grower of alfalfa in humid regions meets with

difficulties in the matter of satisfactory curing that in some years are

almost or quite disheartening, and of a character to which his brother

in arid territory is virtually a total stranger. Curing in the two

regions presents different problems, with advantage all the time

favoring the man in the country of little rainfall.

Second and later cuttings are not so much endangered by rains as is the

first, and, hence, these are usually cured in better condition.

Notwithstanding this, virtually all tests point out that the first

cutting has more feeding value and is better relished by all kinds of

stock. Most farmers are agreed that it pays to cut every time the

alfalfa blooms, up to the last of September in the North, and possibly a

month later in the more southern latitudes. A few have reported that

they prefer to make but two cuttings a year, claiming to realize a

greater feeding value by so doing; but it seems that the loss in leaves

and protein, together with the fact that live stock has less relish for

the more mature cuttings, makes frequent cutting by far the most

profitable.

To sum up, the points to be emphasized in cutting alfalfa for hay, and

its treatment immediately after, are:

_Cut in early bloom._

_Handle as little as possible._

_Prevent its being wet after cutting._

_Cure if possible partly in the swath, in the windrow, in the cock and

in the stack or mow._

_Cut as often as it blooms, which will range from twice in New England

to nine times a year in southern Oklahoma, southern California, Texas

and Louisiana._

_In a region of frequent rains protect with hay-caps._

HARVESTING FOR SEED

The first cutting should not be used for seed for three reasons: First,

if that cutting is delayed until the seed has ripened, the second and

third cuttings will be very light, and in the extreme northern alfalfa

territory there may not be even a second. A stronger reason is that at

the time of the first cutting, favorable weather is likely to be much

less certain and rains will interfere with the stacking of the seed

crop, which, to insure its best value, must be put in the stack or mow

without wetting. Another is that the seed pods at that season are not

usually so well filled and the proportion of fertile seeds is less

because the bees and other insects have not so early in the season had

time and opportunity to aid in the pollenation.

Cutting should be done when the greater proportion of the seeds are

hard, but not sufficiently ripe to shell. At this stage a majority of

the pods are turned a dark-brown color and the seeds are fully

developed. Frequently the cutting can be raked into windrows after two

hours if the weather is drying, and in two or three hours more put into

cocks and let stand for twenty-four to forty-eight hours, as the weather

may justify. It should, however, be well cured and thoroughly dry when

put in the stack, or there is danger of heating, and stack-heating

seriously injures the vitality of the seed. It is not uncommon, if

extremely ripe, to leave the cutting in the swath only an hour or a

half-hour, then stack, and let stand for autumn or later threshing. If

allowed to stand in the stack for about thirty days, the entire mass

goes through a sweating and curing process which makes the threshing

easier, while less of the seed is left in the straw than would be if it

had not stack-cured. In western Kansas many seed raisers cut their seed

crop with a self-binder, put the sheaves in shocks the same day and

thresh in about ten days, or put it into a stack to await a convenient

threshing time. They claim to secure 20 per cent more of the seed in

this way than if they cut with the ordinary mower. Others cut with a

mower having a dropper attachment which leaves the alfalfa in small

bunches at the will of the driver, in the center of the swath, and

these are “straddled” by the team and the wheels of the mower in the

subsequent rounds. These bunches are left for two or three days and then

stacked. There is little, if any, danger from mold or spontaneous

combustion in stacks of alfalfa cut for seed, but there is danger of the

seed heating in the stack if stacked when damp. If bright, clean seed is

expected, the stacks must be well topped with slough grass, or covered

with tarpaulins or boards, or given other protection. It is better still

to put the alfalfa intended for seed into a barn.

One Kansas farmer in the western part of the state reports that he used

a self-binding harvester, shocked the sheaves like those of grain, let

them stand ten days and then put in a mow, with no bad results.

YIELDS OF SEED

The yield of seed ranges all the way from two to thirteen bushels per

acre, the normal yield in the seed regions being four to eight bushels.

It is threshed with ordinary grain separators with seed attachments,

although the clover-huller is usually preferred. No threshing machine

cleans the seed satisfactorily or sufficiently, and a careful recleaning

is necessary. Fanning mills or seed-cleaners are now made that will

remove most weed seeds, seeds of dodder, and all light-weight and

probably infertile alfalfa seeds. However, no raiser should by rights

thresh, to say nothing of marketing, the seeds of the dodder or any

other weed with his alfalfa; these should be cut out of the field with

scythe, sickle or knife a month before the alfalfa is cut.

The threshed alfalfa straw is worth only about half as much as the hay,

yet it makes excellent feed for horses, colts and calves. Or, if put

into stacks of alfalfa of the third cutting, in alternate layers, it may

be fed to any stock to good advantage, as it is relished quite as well

as ordinary third cuttings, notwithstanding its lower feeding value.

THE THIRD CUTTING FOR SEED

Seed raisers in some instances, especially in Kansas, use the third

cutting for seed, claiming that the pods are more uniformly filled and

the seeds more generally fertile, due to the assistance of the bees in

pollenation. They claim, too, that this cutting has fewer weeds and weed

seeds than its predecessors; also that they are thus sure of two good

hay crops, while often if they use the second crop for seed, the third

crop is hardly worth more than the cutting. The only point left in favor

of using the second cutting for seed, where the farmer is confident of a

third, is that the protein value of the second is the lowest, and hence

its hay can better be spared than that from any other cutting.

The raising of seed in the more humid eastern states should not,

generally, be attempted, as it will not only interfere with obtaining

full value in the hay crop, but the less fertile soil will not produce

as vigorous seed as will the newer and richer lands west of the Missouri

river. At present the best seed for general use is produced between that

river and the Rocky mountains. Utah produces a hardy seed, but much if

not most of it is raised under irrigation, and, hence, at least

theoretically, not deemed best adapted for regions dependent entirely

upon soil moisture from rains.

[Illustration: =Gathering an Alfalfa Crop in Page County, Iowa=

Photograph by courtesy of Henry Field]

[Illustration: =Alfalfa Harvesting Scene in Yellowstone County,

Montana]=

[Illustration: =Mast and Boom Stacker, with Six-Tined Jackson Fork=

The mast is held in place by guy ropes from the top. Leading to the

right may be seen the rope to which is attached a team of horses. The

base of the derrick is in the form of sled runners, so that the whole

may be drawn along the stack by attaching a team]

[Illustration: =A Derrick Stacker=

with six-tined Jackson or California fork. The derrick is substantial,

and guy ropes are not necessary. Stakes driven into the ground around

the base hold the derrick in place]

_CHAPTER VIII._

Storing

CARE IN CURING

After all possible care has been taken in seeding, cultivating and

harvesting alfalfa, its feeding value may be greatly impaired or quite

lost by ignorance or carelessness in storing; that is, by stacking or

putting it into sheds or barns, or by baling it for market when in an

unsuitable condition.

The only path to safety in stacking or storing in shed or mow is having

the hay in proper condition for completing its own curing. The true

medium for its curing is air, not sun; the sun has done possibly more

than its share already. But good hay is not completely and properly

cured in swath, windrow and cock. If cured in the windrow, the exposed

parts are liable to be much injured by the sun. Therefore the principle

stands, “Handle alfalfa green.” It must be cut green, teddered, raked

and cocked or bunched while comparatively green, and must not then be

allowed to dry and parch to brittleness. True, it must not be put into a

stack so long as it is possible to wring water out of the stalks. A

constant study should be to find the best method of getting the hay into

storage without loss of its natural color. The method that will safely

store it greenest will be the best to follow. Handled green the leaves

are saved, and these constitute from 50 to 75 per cent of the whole

value.

PUTTING INTO WINTER QUARTERS

When (in regions of much humidity) the hay is safely in cock, covered

with hay-caps, and has had a few days of curing, it is ready for

permanent quarters. Remembering that the hay after its drying has begun

should be handled as little as possible, the cocks have been made small

enough so that two men may lift them bodily onto a wagon, if a wagon is

used in the stacking. From the wagon, the hay is lifted by a hayfork to

the stack. Or, more careful still, the farmer will use three slings to

each wagon, which are lifted by a hook to the stack or mow. A sling is a

heavy sheet the size of the wagon hayrack. One is spread on the bottom

of the rack, another on top of the first one-third of the load, and the

other on top of the second third. These slings are banded at the ends;

the ends are drawn together and a third of the load lifted to the stack

or mow, thus saving in some instances a third more leaves than any other

method.

In arid and semi-arid territory, cocking and loading on or off wagons

are dispensed with by dragging the rapidly dried hay directly to stacks

built in the fields, where the lifting into place is done with great

expedition by horse implements. A wheel-rake or “go-devil” is used to

take at once several cocks, bunches or a part of a windrow to a nearby

stack. Others use a rope to drag one or more large cocks to the stack;

or, if the hay is to be taken from windrows, it may be put upon wagons

with a loader. The loader is an excellent implement for handling

timothy and clover, but is apt to shake off a good many leaves of

alfalfa if the hay is very dry. The more common sling now on the market

is made of ropes, four ropes the length of the hayrack and with ropes

across like a rope ladder, and used to handle one-third or one-fourth of

a load. Others are made like the carriers of a threshing machine with

slats and ropes.

STORING IN THE BARN

The barn is the best place for alfalfa if all conditions are right.

Cases of spontaneous combustion in stack and mow make farmers fearful of

using the barn, especially for the first cutting, which is always most

difficult to cure. There are certain conditions that must be observed if

this hay is to complete its curing properly and safely in the mow. The

bottom of the mow should be elevated at least a foot from the ground,

floored with poles or joists, and they should be about two-thirds

covered with boards or other material in such a way as to provide

numerous openings or air spaces of considerable size. If the mow already

has a tight floor, a part of the flooring should be removed before the

hay is put in. Then a box or barrel should be placed in the center of

the space and lifted up as the filling proceeds. If the mow is over

thirty feet long, a second barrel should be used; that is, an air shaft

should be left in about each fifteen to twenty feet. A layer of dry hay

or straw sandwiched in about every four of five feet, as the mow fills,

can be used to much advantage. If the mow is large enough in length and

width, an excellent, safe plan is to spread the first cutting over the

entire bottom, filling up to a height of four or five feet. The second

cutting may be placed over this, on top of a layer of straw, and the

third cutting over this. There is virtually no danger from spontaneous

combustion or from mold if this is done, and the hay will be as bright

and green and almost as rich in protein in January as when harvested.

J. W. Berry of Jewell county, Kansas, member of the board of regents of

the state agricultural college, uses this method and bales his hay in

October for the city markets, finding it in perfect condition. He puts

his hay into the mow green but not wet, direct from the cocks, or

windrows the day it is cut, in layers about four feet deep, with the

slightest possible loss of leaves, no bleaching and no injury by dew. In

1905 he cut his alfalfa four times and stored the fourth cutting on top

of the three preceding. He says that having an open floor and plenty of

air from the outside, the hay can be put in the barn as described; that

it should not be tramped, and it will settle and cure perfectly. The

bottom layer or first cutting may show some dust when taken out if

handled loose, but the color will be good and it will bale in with the

other cuttings and all grade well. Hay cured in this way in 1904 graded

“choice” in the St. Louis market.

Spontaneous combustion does not occur very often, but it is a

possibility, and it is well to bear in mind that hay may be put in the

barn too green. Observation teaches that it never takes place unless the

hay has been put in the barn while containing a large amount of

moisture, and piled too deep. Alfalfa and other clover hays may safely

be put in the barn when they contain not to exceed 30 per cent of water.

If, however, they contain much more than this there is considerable

danger, especially where large quantities are put together, as is the

case in large, deep mows and sometimes in large stacks. A practical test

which may be safely followed is to take a handful of hay, twist it as

hard as possible, and if no juice can be wrung out of its stems, it is

dry enough to be put in the mow. Bunches of wet hay mixed with dry hay

have often caused combustion. Such should always be discarded. It is

poor policy to haul clover hays into a barn after sundown, as at that

time it absorbs moisture from the atmosphere very rapidly.

It is a good plan for the haymaker to go into his mow every morning

while the hay is curing and observe the conditions, but he should not,

however, become alarmed if he finds that the top of his hay is very

damp. This will always be the case, even if it was comparatively dry

when put in; considerable heat develops during the night, which in turn

evaporates moisture. The following morning, when the air is cool, a

large percentage of this, especially if the mow is not well ventilated,

is condensed and settles back on the hay. If the moisture, however, is

excessive, it is a good plan to scatter a load of dry straw over the

top. This will absorb the moisture in part, after which filling may be

continued. In case a load has been put in the barn too wet, it should be

spread to the outer edges, as there is much less danger of combustion at

these places than in the center. In fact, the greatest heat is always

developed in the center, where the so-called craters form, and from

which moisture and gases are given off as a result of heating and

oxidation below.

From the fact that spontaneous combustion cannot take place until the

water has all been evaporated, there is no danger until three to four

weeks after the hay has been stored. During the first week or so, if the

hay heats to such an extent that there is danger of combustion, it is

well to open up the center as much as possible and allow some of the

heat to escape. If, however, the heating has continued much longer, it

is dangerous practice to open the hay at all, because all that is

needed, after the water has been evaporated, is air, or oxygen to

support combustion, and the mass will at once burst into flames.

Sometimes combustion takes place without flames, in which case the

center of the mow gradually chars, leaving the hay there as black as

charcoal, and without value.

Professor Cottrell, discussing spontaneous combustion (Kansas Bul. No.

114), says that all cases observed by him have occurred in hay of the

season’s first cutting--cut at a time when the growth was rank and the

curing most difficult. A period of wet, muggy weather in July or August

increases the danger, which in dry weather seems much less. On account

of previous trouble from heating in the barn, he had four years prior to

writing stacked the first cutting out of doors and put only the later

cuttings in the barn.

LOSSES FROM STACKING

The Colorado station found that the loss in feeding value from the hour

of cocking to the hour of taking from the stack was 12.4 per cent,

while the loss in hay stored in the barn was about 2.5 per cent. If we

add to this the stacked hay lost by exposure, it will easily reach more

than 20 per cent under average conditions while in many cases it would

reach 40 per cent. This certainly represents an enormous waste, and by

preventing it a man with any considerable area of alfalfa could soon

save enough to pay for a barn.

THE HAY SHED

After a barn the next best place for storing hay is a shed with an

adjustable or lifting roof. The ground dimensions should be ample to

allow the first cutting to cover its floor and not be over five or

possibly six feet deep when first put in. The bottom of the mow should

be raised at least one foot from the ground, and the floor should have

at least a twelve-inch air space about every three feet. Poles or joists

covered with dry straw or old hay make a good floor. Spread the hay over

the entire floor surface, on a layer of straw or other dry material. Use

barrels or boxes as recommended for ventilation in the barn, and lower

the roof until the second cutting. For such a roof the covering should

be of some such material as ruberoid, and the rafters need not be heavy,

except about every sixteen feet. Strong iron clamps can be easily

adjusted to the supports. When the second cutting is ready, raise the

roof, which should be in sections, and put the second crop on top of the

first. Follow this plan for all other cuttings. If a shed with a

stationary roof is used, dry straw, or hay, or corn stover should be

put on top of each cutting to protect the alfalfa from rain. Almost any

kind of a shed or covered structure is preferable to a stack.

CONDITIONS FOR STACKING

If the hay is to be stacked, there are also special conditions that the

experienced insist should be observed. This is not to say that alfalfa

hay stacked under conditions quite different may not give fair results,

and much depends on the locality and the climate. However, the result

desired is palatable and nutritious hay and not such as is moldy,

stack-burned or dusty. Stacking the hay directly on the ground is sure

to mean a loss of some portion of it. Elevate the bottom of the stack

with poles, timbers or other like material; put straw at the bottom and,

preferably, build a rick rather than a round stack. Start the bottom

sixteen or eighteen feet wide and build straight up instead of tapering

or slanting the sides, as alfalfa hay will not shed rain or snow water.

If there is much moisture and it is convenient to do so, use a layer of

straw or dry hay of some kind every five or six feet. Keep the stack

full in the middle, or a little higher than the sides, and well tramped

all the time. When the stack has reached the desired height, top it out

with slough grass, or dry timothy or prairie hay, or very green alfalfa,

or protect with tarpaulins or boards; the boards may be nailed and

chained together, lapped and weighted at the corners, making a very

satisfactory roof. If these directions are followed, the losses will be

kept at a minimum. The Kansas experiment station authorities say that in

an experiment made there an application of salt to the hay when being

stored seemed to decrease, if anything, rather than increase its feeding

value. Lime applied in stacking is claimed to have a beneficial effect

in preventing mold.

The raised bottom and layers of straw are useful accessories for the

stack, shed or mow, while the barrel or other ventilating contrivances

should not be overlooked in either sheds or mows.

STORING AS SILAGE

As land values increase and farmers and dairymen come to more fully

appreciate the worth of green feed in winter, the silo grows in

estimation. Eastern farmers who keep cows or young stock of any kind use

the silo more or less, to conserve for winter the value of both green

grass and corn. Alfalfa makes an excellent silage, but its peculiar

quality of retaining its green food value, as hay, when properly cured,

makes its ensiling much less a necessity. Alfalfa hay taken from the mow

in February, green, appetizing and nutritious, falls little, if any,

short of serving the purposes of silage.

OFTEN PROFITABLE TO ENSILE THE FIRST CUTTING

However, it is not infrequently found that the first cutting of alfalfa

may be ensiled directly from the field at a season when rains would

prevent its proper curing for hay. If this is done, it is important that

the rakes and wagons follow very closely after the mower, as even two

hours of sun exposure in the swath lessens its value for silage. Men who

have cut alfalfa during a light rain and raked and hauled it directly

to the silo have reported satisfactory results. Others report having cut

it in the late afternoon and, the next morning, after a heavy rain,

raked and hauled it to the silo while dripping wet. Therefore the farmer

in the eastern and southern states, in the Pacific Northwest, or even in

the central states may, on occasion, plan for the ensiling of his first

cutting, in the faith that it will come out in fine condition if his

silo is properly constructed.

SUGGESTIONS FOR SILOING

The Kansas and Colorado experiment stations recommend that alfalfa for

silage should be cut into lengths of, say, two inches. Long alfalfa does

not pack sufficiently close in the silo, and when so stored the loss is

much more than if in short lengths. It should always be heavily weighted

and great care taken to pack it well at the outer edges. Round silos are

most approved because their contents are more readily compacted. The

points urged by Professor Ten Eyck, of the Kansas experiment station,

are, (a) getting the alfalfa to the silo quickly after mowing, allowing

little, if any, curing; (b) cutting the alfalfa into short lengths

rather than storing it whole; (c) packing it tightly, and weighting

heavily when all in. He says, however, that if the weather will permit

proper curing of the alfalfa, it will make more valuable winter feed as

hay than as silage.

BALING

The increasing general demand for alfalfa hay in the city markets of the

United States, away from the distinct alfalfa regions, has made finding

a method of preparing it for economic shipment of much importance. The

compressing of timothy and prairie hay has become so general that

alfalfa raisers and shippers are also following this method. The problem

of saving the leaves, and, at the same time, being able to market

alfalfa green, has been hard to solve. Baling it uncured meant mold, and

baling it when very dry meant loss of leaves and, hence, loss in feeding

and selling value. The Kansas station a few years ago carried on a

series of experiments extending over several years from which the

conclusion was that the only safe procedure is to cure carefully in the

field, put in the stack or mow, and bale after the final sweating--say

thirty days. Most of the hay cured and baled in the field was moldy or

brown. It is possible, however, that a more careful curing, the use of

hay-caps, letting it stand for several days in cock, baling, and then

storing in an open shed, the bales stacked on edge and separated about

every third layer by poles, rails or rafters, might result in securing

high-grade hay direct from the field without stacking. Seemingly it will

never be safe, away from the semi-arid regions, to bale the first

cutting from the field; but the secret may yet be found of so baling the

second and third cuttings and obtaining prime hay. Its doing is not

likely to prove satisfactory, however, except in the drier portions of

the alfalfa district where large cocks of, say, 500 pounds may be made

and left standing for several days before baling. But baling is not

likely to be largely followed except in territory where extensive areas

are devoted to alfalfa. When practically every farmer in the United

States has his field of alfalfa as he now has of corn, cotton or clover,

the greater part of the product will be fed on the farm and the surplus

hauled direct to the local markets. Western Kansas and Nebraska alfalfa

raisers are having this problem solved for them by the growing practice

of stockmen shipping cattle and sheep from the mountain ranges to be fed

or fattened where the hay is raised, and hauled directly from the stack

to the feed lots.

POOR STUFF

Hay dealers report that much of the baled alfalfa shipped is poor stuff.

They advise small bales, weighing about sixty to eighty pounds; about 27

to 36 inches long, 14 or 15 inches thick and 18 inches high when laid on

edge. They also recommend that in loading a car the bales be placed on

their edges instead of on the sides, as they are less liable to heat.

The problem of the city hay dealer is to sell what he has received, with

satisfaction to the purchaser and profit to himself and to his client.

If he receives moldy, dead hay, with little protein value, he is not

able to please his customer, not able to secure a good price, and hence,

not able to please either shipper or buyer. The farmer who raises and

ships hay and receives two dollars less per ton for it than his

neighbor, should learn by such money losses the necessity of harvesting

and storing his product properly.

A. S. Hitchcock says in Farmers’ Bulletin No. 215, of the United States

Department of Agriculture, that the baled hay for export to Alaska,

Hawaii, and other trans-oceanic points is compressed by the process

known as double compression, done with baling machines operated by

electricity or hydraulic power. The hay obtained by loosening the

ordinary bale is compressed into square or cylindrical packages of

smaller and more compact form than the ordinary bale. The hydraulic

presses used for making the round bales are similar to those used for

the cylindrical bales of cotton. The measurements of the different types

of double-compressed bales are about as follows: Square, 15 by 18 by 38

inches, weight 160 pounds; square bale for Alaskan trade, 14 by 18 by 26

inches, weight 100 pounds; round bale, 2 feet in diameter, 24 inches

long, weight 145 pounds, or 36 inches long, weight 260 pounds. The

saving of space in transit may best be understood by comparing the

weight and cubic contents of baled and compressed hay. The ordinary bale

occupies 140 to 160 cubic feet per ton, and round bales 55 feet per ton.

The most essential point in loading new hay into a car is to see that it

is not loaded flat, that is, with the flat sides of the bale up. When

loaded in this way, with the smooth sides of the bales together, no

space is left for air and as a consequence the hay not infrequently

heats. A properly loaded car has the edges or rough sides of the bales

together. This allows air space between the bales and always prevents

danger of heating.

A new machine is being introduced which makes (from the windrow if

desired) a cylindrical bale, with a hollow space lengthwise through its

middle. This open space must undoubtedly facilitate the curing of hay

baled before sufficiently dry. The machine has a capacity of four to six

tons per hour, makes a bale thirty-six inches long and twenty inches or

less in diameter, as desired, bound with twine, and the hay can be eaten

from the bale, with a minimum of waste, without unfastening. This

baler, if it justifies the claims of its inventors, should be very

useful to those who grow alfalfa for marketing away from the farm.

GRADING AND GRADES OF ALFALFA HAY

On account of the increasing demands for alfalfa hay, and growth in the

business of selling it in cities, dealers have found that the

establishment of some uniform and generally accepted method of grading

the different qualities was a business necessity. As a result of this

its consideration was taken up by the National Hay Association’s

committee on grades and upon the committee’s recommendation the

association in 1905 adopted the following classification:

Choice Alfalfa--Shall be reasonably fine, leafy alfalfa, of bright green

color, properly cured, sound, sweet and well baled.

No. 1 Alfalfa--Shall be coarse alfalfa of bright, green color, or

reasonably fine, leafy, of good color, and may contain five per cent of

foreign grasses; must be well baled, sound and sweet.

No. 2 Alfalfa--Shall include alfalfa somewhat bleached, but of fair

color, reasonably leafy, not more than one-eighth foreign grasses, sound

and well baled.

No. 3 Alfalfa--Shall include bleached alfalfa, or alfalfa mixed with not

to exceed one-fourth foreign grasses, but when mixed must be of fair

color, sound and well baled.

No Grade Alfalfa--Shall include all alfalfa not good enough for other

grades, caked, musty, grassy, or threshed.

[Illustration: Lattice Rack for Feeding Alfalfa to Cattle]

[Illustration: Box Rack for Feeding Alfalfa to Sheep]

[Illustration: Lattice Rack for Feeding Alfalfa to Sheep]

[Illustration: Box Rack for Feeding Alfalfa to Cattle]

_CHAPTER IX._

Pasturing and Soiling

PASTURING NOT ALWAYS ECONOMY

Its perennial nature and the reports of its wonderfully productive and

nutritive qualities might naturally lead the farmer, without better

acquaintance, to suppose that with alfalfa he has perpetual pasture;

that he will open the gate to his live stock in the spring, send for the

butcher or buyer in October, and then winter in luxurious leisure. But

he finds that the easiest is not always the most profitable way.

Pasturing with any stock is an expensive and extravagant method of

gathering a valuable crop from high-priced land. Where land is cheap and

pasture is wild, stock are not expensive help in gathering a cheap crop;

but it is easily demonstrated that when land values are high and a crop

value is in a like altitude, man with machinery can do the harvesting

more economically than can a cow, a steer or even a sheep.

ALFALFA A TENDER PLANT

In some respects alfalfa does not seem to be a natural pasture plant.

The stems are delicate, it will not thrive in a hard, trampled soil, and

the crowns when broken off will not revive; if some of the plants bloom

and drop their flowers early in the season, they lose vigor and many of

them die. These peculiarities would at least indicate that it should

not be pastured at all until it has become established, has its crowns

well spread, has abundant stems and its roots have a strong start on

their underground career. Not an animal should be turned on an alfalfa

field until the second or third year if it is desired that the stand

endure for several years, nor should it be pastured too early in the

spring or too late in the fall. There should be something of a growth

left for winter protection. Careful alfalfa raisers are known who

pasture their older fields, but never put on a full quota of stock until

they have cut over the field when the plants are first coming into

bloom. They insist that this cutting invigorates and gives the plants

new life. They then pasture quite closely until some time in September,

after which there is time for some final growth for winter protection.

A GOOD SWINE PASTURE

A chief exception that most farmers insist on is that it is an excellent

pasture for pigs and, if it is not stocked too heavily, its use for

grazing young swine will not largely decrease the yield of hay. Its

marked protein property seems to give to the pigs a superior growth of

frame and flesh. Farmers claim that pigs a few weeks old turned into an

alfalfa field derive almost their entire living from it and leave the

sows two weeks earlier than other pigs, coming in September with a gain

of from 100 to 125 pounds, while the field has yielded its three

cuttings of hay. Of course, if too many pigs are grazed, the hay yield

will be less. But even here the question of labor _versus_ hay must be

considered.

DANGERS TO CATTLE AND SHEEP

The greatest objection to pasturing alfalfa is its bloating cattle and

sheep. Hogs and horses do not suffer, although a Texas farmer writes

that he lost some pigs from something similar to bloat that he

attributed to the alfalfa. But this may be considered questionable, as

thousands have regularly pastured hogs and horses on alfalfa with no

symptoms of bloat. From hundreds of inquiries sent out by the experiment

stations, it is determined that over ninety per cent of those who have

pastured cattle or sheep on alfalfa have lost one or more animals by

doing so, yet many report having pastured the same kind of stock on

alfalfa for years, regularly every season, without loss. Careful

investigations have been made with the purpose of finding out why some

have been immune while others suffered. Since, in the cases of loss,

only a small proportion of the animals pastured are affected, it may be

inferred that much depends upon the nature and condition of the

individual animal. Practically every western station has carefully

experimented, following the directions of men who have been free from

loss, yet it has cost each station valuable animals.

Horse stock of all ages find alfalfa pasturage conducive to growth,

fattening, and their general health. If the foliage is short and scant,

horses are severe on the fields used in winter because they are able to

crop close, and not infrequently paw loose dirt away from the plants,

biting off the crowns a fourth or even half inch below the surface of

the ground. It is easy to understand the loss of the bud or growing

point may be detrimental to the growth and usefulness of the plants,

causing many to die, resulting in bare spots later to be overgrown by

noxious weeds and grasses. After the damage is done there remains no

remedy but to plow up the field and reseed, or to disk thoroughly and

then reseed the bare spots. If the field has not deteriorated too much,

the latter is much to be preferred. By diligence and careful treatment,

or prompt action closely following any encroachments upon the life of

the plants, the quality and yield may be maintained and the profits

relatively enhanced. Alfalfa has wonderful recuperative powers, but

continuous nipping of the crowns will do most serious harm and

eventually decrease the yield not a little.

EXPERIENCES WITH CATTLE

One man reports turning eighty steers into one alfalfa field where there

was running water, and a second herd into another field without running

water, but water ran through a wild grass meadow adjoining, into which

this herd was driven every afternoon and turned back into the alfalfa

the next morning. The first herd suffered no loss, while five valuable

animals died in the second field on the second day, before they could be

removed. When all were put into the first field there was no more bloat.

Another reported turning cows into a small field where there was a

trough full of water all the time. Here, as in the case of the steers, a

full feed was given before the cows were turned on the alfalfa. Before

noon one cow had to be relieved by a trocar, and another by being driven

rapidly about the field. The wherefores of such occurrences present a

problem yet to be solved. Certainly there is more danger in pasturing

cows and sheep on alfalfa than most people care to risk. Aside from the

financial loss, there is, also, the humane side of the question.

A very fair statement, representative of those made by parties who

pasture cattle on alfalfa without losses from bloat, is the following,

given to the author by Mr. S. C. Hanna, an extensive and reputable

breeder of Shorthorns, in Elk county, (southern) Kansas, who says:

“I have been pasturing alfalfa successfully without bloating my cattle

for a number of years; in fact, I have never lost an animal from alfalfa

bloat. As I am raising high priced, pure bred Shorthorns and graze them

on my meadows more or less at all times of year, I always sow a good

mixture of English blue-grass (_Festuca elatior_) and orchard grass

(_Dactylis glomerata_) with it, making alfalfa the base and principal

seeding. I am very partial to orchard grass in this mixture because it

makes considerable hay, and springs up so quickly after each mowing. In

this section orchard grass is a stayer, and will hold its own against

all comers.

“I always am cautious when we first turn the cattle on alfalfa, seeing

to it that they have a good fill on something else beforehand, and hold

them at first on some part of the field where the mixed grasses are the

thickest, so they can graze there first. In twenty minutes they will be

safe to go where they wish, and may be allowed to run at will

thereafter. I find, however, that on the clear alfalfa meadows there is

almost no danger from bloat after the plants have begun to bloom. I

usually have some hay stacked in the pastures, that the cattle may run

to. I have, however, pastured alfalfa in all stages where there would be

perhaps twenty acres of alfalfa in one place, and some prairie grass

and also tame grasses in the same enclosure, and had no bloat. This has

been, too, sometimes in May and June, when showers were frequent and the

alfalfa most succulent. It would seem that the cattle will take care of

themselves if they have a good chance. I usually superintend these

changes personally, and see that all conditions are right.

“I find we get almost as much hay from the mixed fields as from the

exclusively alfalfa meadows, and the fall aftermath is much better. The

theory that alfalfa will not flourish with the other grasses is wrong.

My favorite meadows contain a mixture of this kind, including some red

clover, and I have cut four good crops of hay from them this season,

after pasturing moderately from March 15 to May 1. I always get the

stock horses and mules on pasture by March 15, and the cattle about

April 1, and move them to wild grass prairie pasture about May 1, except

a few that we will keep on the meadows all season. These we change from

one field to another when the alfalfa becomes tall enough to be trampled

down or damaged.

“If my object was only to raise hay for market, I would sow the alfalfa

alone and keep the stock off altogether, but for my purpose I prefer a

mixture. By doing my way I never miss a good stand, and the mixture

keeps down the foxtail and crab grass. I have been sowing this mixture

for about fifteen years, and have over 300 acres.”

Mr. J. F. Stodder of Cowley county, Kansas, a prominent breeder of pure

bred cattle, makes this statement to the author, which is simply further

testimony that a mixture of other grasses with alfalfa intended for

grazing greatly diminishes, if it does not entirely eliminate, the risk

and dangers of bloat:

“I have several fields of mixed grasses. These contain enough alfalfa so

that we cut them for hay at regular times, and the proportion of grasses

and alfalfa is largely in favor of the latter. In such fields as these I

pasture cattle at will, and have never seen any evidence of bloat

therefrom. But my experience with the straight alfalfa fields leads me

to be very cautious. I find that I can pasture them at times without

danger, and at other times a large proportion of the cattle will bloat.

It is possible that I have made the statement that I never lost cattle

by pasturing alfalfa, which is true, because we have always been lucky

enough to discover the ailing animals in time to give them relief.”

Mr. F. S. Kirk of Oklahoma, mentioned in Chapter III, pastures his

cattle on alfalfa in fall and spring, but does not give them access to

his meadows in the morning until the dew has dried off, and for only

twenty or thirty minutes the first day or two; then for an hour or two

for a few days, and after that they are left in the pastures until

sundown.

GENERALLY DANGEROUS TO SHEEP

Experiments with sheep seem to be even more disastrous than with cattle.

In an investigation conducted by the Colorado station, losses were

reported by nearly every man who had pastured sheep on alfalfa. Some

lost but one or two, while others lost forty or fifty. A few reported

that each spring they lost a few sheep the first day they were on the

pasture, and then no more, and that the losses of old sheep were of less

importance than the growth of the lambs, these being seldom affected by

bloat. Most, however, advised that the old should not be turned on

alfalfa under any circumstances, but that lambs, if well fed in the

morning, let on the alfalfa after the dew was off and then kept there

night and day would do well, and the loss be smaller than that in a

normal season from other causes. J. E. Wing states that his loss from

pasturing lambs on alfalfa in Ohio is less than it formerly was from one

or two parasitic diseases that never trouble alfalfa-pastured lambs. He

gives his lambs a full feed in the morning, turns them on the alfalfa

field about ten o’clock, and leaves them there continuously until

September. He begins the pasturing just before the seasons first growth

of the alfalfa blooms.

While by no means without risk, pasturing sheep on alfalfa is not always

necessarily fatal and the following, related in the _Breeder’s Gazette_

by Mr. C. H. Williams of Powell county, Montana, is interesting:

“We have been pasturing sheep in large numbers on alfalfa for the past

eight years. We have lost from bloat as many as 26 in one day from a

flock of 1600, but we seldom lose one now. We find they are much more

apt to bloat on windy days; more especially if the wind blows from the

south and is soft and balmy. This may seem strange, but we believe it a

fact. We have in our employ a shepherd who has during the greater part

of his life herded sheep on alfalfa in the vicinity of Pau and d’Oloron,

France. The day we lost 26 ewes from bloat this man was several miles

from the home ranch. When visited by the camptender he remarked: ‘This

will be a bad day for the old ewes on the alfalfa.’ Why so? ‘Because the

wind is soft and warm,’ said he. That afternoon we found 26 dead.

“Our French shepherd has a simple and never failing remedy for bloat

from alfalfa or clover. It is simply a half-pint of sweet milk

administered to the animal when found bloated. I saved a fine ram lamb

the other day. He was fearfully bloated, unable to walk and scarcely

able to breathe. I found an old can in the road, hastened to the

pasture, milked a half pint of milk from a cow, set the lamb on his rump

and poured the milk down his throat. In a half hour he was all right and

following the flock. Milk from a ewe will answer just as well. We have

adopted the following rules: Never allow the sheep to go on alfalfa

pasture when very hungry; if possible get a little dry feed in their

stomachs in the morning before going to the alfalfa; watch them closely

on windy days, and have the herders carry a bottle of sweet milk.”

A POSSIBLE EXPLANATION

The most of the losses reported were of animals which had been taken off

the pasture at night and turned back the second morning when hungry and

eager to graze. Yet there are reports of severe losses the first day,

even after a full feed. Possibly it will be found that the animals that

suffer from bloat are not in good physical condition, and are more

nervous and greedy in their habit of eating than those not affected. It

may be that an intelligent sorting of the animals to be turned on the

pasture might save loss. It is also quite generally believed that

alfalfa growing on uplands is less liable to cause bloat than that

raised on bottom lands.

RULES FOR PASTURING

The most generally approved rules in regard to pasturing are:

At the beginning of the pasturing season give animals a heavy feeding in

the morning before turning upon the alfalfa.

Have water in the pasture all the time.

Keep the animals in the pasture night and day, after they have become

accustomed to it, until removed permanently.

Use upland in preference to bottom fields for pasture.

Watch the stock closely the first few days and remove permanently

animals that show symptoms of bloat.

Sow blue-grass, brome grass, or meadow fescue with alfalfa in fields

intended for permanent pasture.

The following valuable information upon bloat (_tympanitis_) and its

treatment was prepared by Nelson S. Mayo, formerly professor of

veterinary science at the Kansas agricultural college:

“Bloating, in all cases, is accumulation of gas in the stomach or

intestines, or both, but more particularly in the paunch (rumen). This

gas is produced by a fermentation, similar to that observed when cider

is ‘working’ and the gas escapes in bubbles. There is usually a small

quantity of gas given off from the food during normal, healthy

digestion, but so small that it causes no trouble, and passes off

readily through the intestines, though sometimes from the stomach, up

the esophagus, and out of the nose or mouth--‘belched up,’ as it is

commonly expressed. These gases which cause an animal to bloat are

generated in considerable quantities if a large amount of juicy, green

food is eaten. Alfalfa, clover and frozen roots are very liable to

produce bloating.

“It is well known that only part of the animals in a herd pasturing upon

clover or alfalfa bloat; so the blame cannot be laid entirely upon the

food, but is probably the result of a slight derangement of the

digestive organs, not ordinarily noticed, but easily aggravated by

certain foods which ferment easily. Animals that are ailing are very

liable to bloat when turned on alfalfa pastures. Alfalfa and clover are

much more liable to produce bloating if wet with rain or dew, and

especially hoar frost, and animals are more apt to bloat if turned into

the pastures when very hungry, as they gorge themselves, and the food is

not properly masticated. Hence, cattle should not be allowed to go

hungry to the pastures.

“It is generally believed by those who have had considerable experience

in pasturing clover or alfalfa, that cattle and sheep are less liable to

bloat if they have free access to dry food, such as hay or straw. Common

bloating, or hoove, occurs in animals having a compound stomach and that

chew the cud--ruminants, as they are called. Of our common domestic

animals, cattle and sheep belong to this order.

“One of the first symptoms noticed is that the animal stops feeding, and

remains lagging behind or stands by itself. Rumination, or chewing of

the cud, is suspended; the animal appears dull and listless, the back

slightly arched; the whole abdomen or belly is distended with a

prominent swelling on the left side just forward of the point of the

hip. If the swelling is tapped lightly with the fingers there is a

hollow, drum-like sound; hence the technical name, _tympanitis_.

“The rumen being distended with gas not only makes the animal appear

much fuller than usual, but it presses forward on the diaphragm, or

‘midriff,’ and this presses against the lungs, and interferes seriously

with the animal’s breathing. The breath is short and rapid. The animal

often grunts, or moans, with each breath. The animal’s nose protrudes,

and there is a driveling of saliva from the mouth. Sometimes there are

quite severe colicky pains, shown by the animal’s kicking at its belly

and stepping about uneasily. Sometimes, also, the pressure is so great

as to cause eversion or bulging out of the rectum. The symptoms of

bloating are so prominent, especially when the history of the case is

taken into account, as to make this disease very easy to recognize, even

by an ordinary observer.

“When animals die from bloating, death usually takes place in the

following manner: The diaphragm is pressed against the lungs so hard

that the animal cannot breathe, and it dies of suffocation. Animals

usually remain standing until near the end, when they gradually lose

consciousness, stagger, and fall, and in falling rupture some of the

vital organs.

“Treatment must depend somewhat upon the condition of the animal. If the

animal is badly bloated, with labored breathing and staggering gait,

energetic measures must be resorted to at once. The best and most

satisfactory treatment for bad cases is tapping. This consists in making

a hole through the skin and muscles, over the prominent swelling on the

left side, into the rumen or ‘paunch,’ thus allowing the gas to escape

at once, relieving the animal.

“The best method of tapping is by means of an instrument called a

_trocar_ and _cannula_. A trocar is a sharp-pointed instrument, five or

six inches long, and about the size of a lead pencil, with a handle at

one end. Over the point of the trocar slips a tube, called a cannula,

not quite as long as the trocar, with a wide flange around the upper end

of the tube, as shown in the illustration herewith.

TROCAR AND CANNULA

“To use a trocar and cannula, proceed as follows: Tie the animal so it

cannot get away. With a sharp knife, make a small incision through the

skin over the prominent part of the swelling on the left side. This

incision should be made about half way between the point of the hip and

the last rib, and should be large enough to admit the trocar and cannula

readily. The incision should be made quickly; then the animal will not

notice it. After the incision is made the trocar and cannula are pushed

quickly in and directed downward, inward, and forward; push the trocar

in until the flange of the cannula rests against the skin. Withdraw the

trocar and the gas will rush out; that is, it usually does so;

occasionally, however, the end of the cannula is plugged up with green

food. This can usually be remedied by pulling out the cannula part way,

or pushing the trocar in again and withdrawing it. If this doesn’t work,

tap the stomach again in another place, using the same hole through the

skin. The escape of gas is usually accompanied by a small quantity of

green food.

[Illustration: Trocar and Cannula]

“If a trocar and cannula are not available in an urgent case, a knife

can be used very successfully--a good-sized pocket knife blade, pushed

quickly through the skin and muscles, in the same manner as described

for the trocar and cannula. Care must be taken that the sharp edge of

the blade is not turned towards the animal’s tail, as it sometimes jumps

forward, and a much larger hole is cut than was originally intended.

“A careful and observing stockman of Colorado, who has had a large

experience with alfalfa bloating, informs me that he prefers a

moderately small, sharp butcher knife to either a trocar and cannula or

a pocket knife. It gives relief quicker and with no bad effects.

Sometimes, if the opening through the skin is small, made by a small

knife, a quill or small tube is fastened in to keep the incision open,

so the gas can escape. It is usually necessary to keep the incision open

for several hours. The only bad result of tapping is that occasionally

green food gets outside of the rumen into the abdominal cavity in

sufficient quantities to cause inflammation and death; but if the

operation is intelligently performed, these bad results are extremely

rare--probably not more than one case in 100. If the weather is warm,

care should be taken that flies do not bother the wound in the skin.

“If the case is not severe enough to warrant tapping, the following

remedies will be found useful: A gag made by winding a good-sized rope

back of the horns and through the mouth, or a bit, made of a piece of

wood the size of a fork handle, can be tied in the animal’s mouth. The

bit should be smooth, to prevent injuring the mouth. Then a small

handful of salt should be thrown well back on the roots of the tongue.

This causes the animal to work its tongue, increases the flow of saliva,

and thus favors the regurgitation, or gulping up, of the gas. The salt

and saliva swallowed help to stop fermentation.

“Blankets wrung out of cold water and wrapped around the abdomen or

belly, or cold water dashed on with a bucket, often give relief.

Turpentine given as a drench, in milk sufficient that it will not

irritate the animal, is good, two ounces of turpentine for adult cattle

and one-half ounce for sheep being a dose. Hyposulphite of soda,

dissolved in water and given as a drench, is good; one ounce for cattle

and two drachms for sheep. This can be repeated every half hour for two

or three doses. Aqua ammonia, two ounces for cattle and one-half ounce

for sheep, well diluted with water; carbolic acid, cattle 30 drops,

sheep 8 to 10 drops in sufficient water; common soda, in half-ounce

doses for cattle and one-half drachm for sheep, can be given. In giving

medicine as drenches, they should be well diluted with water or other

substances until they will not burn when touched to the tongue. In

giving drenches, be careful and not choke the animal. If the animal

coughs or struggles violently, stop at once until it recovers somewhat.

Give drenches slowly.

“Drenches are mostly administered from a long-necked, thick, glass

bottle, or drenching horn. Take hold of the nose with the left hand, by

putting the thumb and finger in the nostrils, while an assistant takes

hold of the horns, and tips the head back. Standing on the right side of

the animal, with the right hand put the neck of the bottle in the right

corner of the mouth, and pour the medicine in slowly. After the bloating

has been relieved, it is a good plan to give the animal a purgative--one

pound of Epsom salts, with one-half pound common salt, for cattle; and

for a sheep, six ounces of Epsom salts and three ounces of common salt,

dissolved in plenty of warm water, and given as a drench. The animals

should also be dieted until their digestive organs regain their normal

condition. By dieting, I do not mean starving, but plenty of easily

digested and nutritious food. An animal that bloats once is very liable

to bloat again. By judicious handling and feeding, by watching animals

closely, and treating them in time, few will be lost by alfalfa

bloating.”

ALFALFA AS A SOILING CROP

Alfalfa may be cut for soiling just when it contains the highest per

cent of protein, while if pastured some is eaten before its best period,

the most of it after that point is reached, and probably a large portion

of the leaves is lost entirely. Cut for soiling and fed daily, when

wilted, there is less danger from bloat, as in this way animals will eat

stalks as well as leaves: the entire product is used and there is no

loss from trampling the fields nor by plants being covered and smothered

with animal droppings.

SOME COMPARISONS

The Nebraska station reports that in an experiment there it required .71

of an acre to keep a cow for a given time by soiling, while by pasturing

it required 3.63 acres; also that the cows kept on pasture during the

experiment actually consumed more grain than those that were soiled.

This report further states that while the pastured cows gave more milk

each day, the cost of production was greater. By another experiment with

cows for a single year it was indicated (Bul. No. 69) “that about twice

as much feed was secured from the land when the alfalfa was soiled as

when it was pastured. The average daily production of milk and of

butterfat was markedly greater when the crop was pastured than when

soiled. In one test this amounted to one-third more, but in the other

test the difference was not so great. The profits from soiling as

compared with pasturing will depend largely on two factors--the price of

labor and the value of the land.”

A western Kansas farmer writes that one acre of alfalfa cut daily for

soiling maintained as many cows as he was able to keep on a five-acre

field used as pasture.

The Kansas station reported that in an experiment, lasting 144 days, the

cows on alfalfa pasture returned an income, less cost of grain fed, of

$4.23, while cows soiled on alfalfa cut and fed green returned an

income, less the grain fed, of $18.08. This station also reported that a

neighboring dairyman maintained ten milch cows for a whole summer,

without any grain, on two acres of alfalfa, cut and fed to them fresh

three times a day.

A METHOD FOR THE SMALL FARMER

In the Central West where labor is scarce and land comparatively low in

price, farmers are not likely to adopt the soiling system while such

conditions exist; but east of the Mississippi river, and especially in

New York, Pennsylvania and New England, where land is high and labor

scarce, alfalfa offers great possibilities as a soiling crop. The small

farmer who now cannot afford to raise many pigs, because he does not

raise enough corn to fatten them, will find that by soiling alfalfa he

can maintain from May to September from five acres as many as ten cows

and fifty pigs; and that these pigs, with some grain from the first of

August, while being fed green alfalfa, may by the middle of November be

made ready for market. If he has another five acres of alfalfa for hay,

it will yield enough in three cuttings to go far toward wintering his

cows, a team of horses, and his sows. His ten acres will be growing

richer every year, and at the end of five years be in prime condition to

yield him big returns in corn, wheat, or potatoes and other vegetables.

Alfalfa is distinctly a crop adapted to the small farmer, everywhere;

there is, as a rule, little question that this method of utilizing it

brings much greater returns per acre than if it were used as pasturage

or hay.

Green alfalfa when pastured, (barring bloat), or cut and fed daily is

peculiarly valuable for all such young stock as colts, lambs, calves and

pigs. It tends to develop strength of bone and hastens the growth of

muscle.

[Illustration: =Alfalfa Field in Central New York=

Showing growth August 22, 1907, seven days after third cutting]

[Illustration: =Fourth Cutting of Alfalfa in Shawnee County, Kansas=

Photo taken in September]

[Illustration: =A Second Cutting of Alfalfa (July 28) in Shawnee County,

Eastern Kansas=

This was sown on the last half of the preceding September. Four cuttings

probable with an aggregate yield of four tons per acre]

_CHAPTER X._

Alfalfa as a Feed Stuff

AS AN APPETIZER

The feeding value of alfalfa is largely in its chemical compound known

as protein; its extreme digestibility is another desirable quality to be

considered, and not least is its appetizing character. Not only do all

animals like it, but when given in moderate quantities it seems to

increase the general appetite for more fat-making feeds. Steers

beginning to “fall off” on a heavy diet of corn will come to their

appetites after being fed only a few pounds of alfalfa daily, and will

eat and assimilate more corn than before.

Alfalfa alone is not a fat-making feed. Animals fed upon it grow in

weight, but the weight is principally of bone, blood and muscle. It is

without a sufficiency of fat and carbohydrates, and these should be

added in such foods as corn, corn meal, Kafir corn, or Kafir corn meal;

or to a limited degree even in corn stover, sorghum or millet. When

alfalfa is fed alone all the protein cannot be digested, and, therefore,

it is always economical to add some carbonaceous foods, if animals are

fattening for market.

For several years feeders have been deploring the fact that fattening

mainly with corn was becoming less and less profitable. When they began

to figure the exact cost of each pound of gain on a steer or hog, they

saw clearly that corn alone made the pound of gain cost too much;

sometimes as much as it was worth in the market, leaving neither profit

nor interest on the investment. The problem then became how to produce

the pound of meat more economically.

Such a condition has prompted the state stations to make tests to

determine the feeding value of various articles, and especially the

value of alfalfa as a balance to the more carbonaceous foods. The tables

here appended are worth studying:

FOOD VALUE OF SEVERAL FODDER CROPS

(From New York experiment station Bul. No. 118.)

------------------+----------+--------+----------+----------

| | | Total |

| Yield per| Dry |digestible|

| acre of | matter | matter |Digestible

|total crop|per acre| per acre | protein

------------------+----------+--------+----------+----------

| _Pounds_ |_Pounds_| _Pounds_ | _Pounds_

Alfalfa | 34,100 | 8,000 | 5,280 | 875

Corn, entire plant| 28,000 | 5,800 | 3,800 | 300

Red clover | 18,000 | 5,220 | 3,200 | 491

Oats and peas | 13,000 | 3,120 | 2,521 | 350

Timothy | 10,000 | 3,500 | 2,000 | 228

Rutabagas | 31,700 | 3,400 | 3,000 | 279

Mangels | 25,000 | 3,500 | 2,750 | 232

Sugar beets | 17,800 | 2,500 | 1,800 | 213

------------------+----------+--------+----------+----------

ANALYSES OF FEEDSTUFFS

The following table gives the analyses of a number of feedstuffs,

showing the percentage of digestible nutrients and fertilizing

constituents in each:

(From Texas experiment station Bul. No. 66)

------------------+------+--------------------+--------------------

| | Digestible | Fertilizer con-

| | nutrients | stituents in 1000

| Dry | in 100 pounds | pounds

|matter+------+------+------+------+------+------

| 100 | Pro- | hy- | Ex- |Nitro-|phoric|

------------------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------

Alfalfa | 91.6 | 11.0 | 39.6 | 1.2 | 21.9 | 5.1 | 16.8

Cowpea | 89.3 | 10.8 | 38.6 | 1.1 | 19.5 | 5.2 | 14.7

Oat hay | 91.1 | 4.3 | 46.4 | 1.5 | .... | .... | ....

Fodder corn | 57.8 | 2.5 | 34.6 | 1.2 | 17.6 | 5.4 | 8.9

Sorghum | 82.04| 2.4 | 40.6 | 1.2 | .... | .... | ....

Cottonseed hulls| 88.9 | .3 | 33.1 | 1.7 | 6.9 | 2.5 | 10.2

Alfalfa | 28.2 | 3.9 | 12.7 | .5 | 7.2 | 1.3 | 5.6

Cowpea | 16.4 | 1.8 | 8.7 | .2 | 2.7 | 1.0 | 3.1

Oat fodder | 37.8 | 1.6 | 18.9 | 1.0 | 4.9 | 1.3 | 3.8

Corn silage | 20.9 | .9 | 11.3 | .7 | 2.8 | 1.1 | 3.7

Sorghum | 82.4 | 2.4 | 4.1 | 1.2 | .... | .... | ....

Rape | 14.0 | 1.5 | 8.1 | .2 | 4.5 | 1.5 | 3.6

Wheat bran | 88.1 | 12.2 | 39.2 | 2.7 | 26.7 | 28.9 | 16.1

Cottonseed meal | 91.8 | 37.2 | 16.9 | 12.2 | 67.9 | 28.8 | 8.7

Corn | 89.1 | 7.9 | 66.7 | 4.3 | 18.2 | 7.0 | 4.0

Cowpea | 85.2 | 18.3 | 54.2 | 1.1 | 33.3 | .... | ....

Cotton seed | 89.7 | 12.5 | 30.0 | 17.3 | 31.3 | 12.7 | 11.7

------------------+------+------+------+------+------+------+------

From the above table we find that five tons of alfalfa hay contains

1,100 pounds of protein, equal to this food element in

Cotton seed meal 2,956 pounds

Linseed meal 3,754 pounds

Wheat bran 9,016 pounds

Cowpea hay 10,185 pounds

Red clover hay 16,176 pounds

Timothy hay 39,285 pounds

RELATIVE VALUES OF DIFFERENT CUTTINGS

The most interesting experiments comprehending tests of the comparative

yield, composition and digestibility of early, medium and late cuttings

of alfalfa, of the first, second and third crops; the relative feeding

value of the various cuttings, and of the different crops, have been

made at the Utah station, details of which are recorded in the station’s

bulletins Nos. 31, 44 and 61. These tests and investigations extended

continuously through a period of five years, and following are the more

important facts developed and the conclusions that may be legitimately

drawn from them, as summarized (Bul. No. 61) by Profs. Luther Foster and

L. A. Merrill who supervised the work:

1. The largest annual yield of hay per acre is obtained by the method of

early cutting and the lowest by the late, the average result standing as

follows: early cutting, 100; medium, 92; and late, 85.

2. The early cut alfalfa contains the highest per cent of protein and

fat, the most valuable food constituents, and the lowest per cent of

crude fiber, the most indigestible portion. The former decrease

constantly while the latter increases rapidly from early bloom to the

full maturity of the plant.

3. The proportionate amount of leaves to stems is greater at early bloom

that at any subsequent time, and both leaves and stems contain a greater

per cent of protein and a less per cent of crude fiber at this time than

at any later period in the growth of the plant. The relative proportion

of leaves to stems in the different cuttings is as follows: early, 42 to

58; medium, 40 to 60; and late, 33 to 67.

4. Alfalfa leaves as compared with stems are very much richer in

protein, fat and nitrogen-free extract, and they contain a much smaller

proportion of crude fiber. The per cent of the protein and fat grows

constantly less, and that of the crude fiber greater, from the time of

early bloom to maturity. The average composition of all cuttings and

crops shows the leaves to contain 150 per cent more protein than the

stems, 300 per cent more fat, 35 per cent more nitrogen-free extract,

and 256 per cent less crude fiber.

5. The more important nutrients, protein and fat, have the highest per

cent of digestibility in the early cuttings and it grows less and less

with the age of the plant.

6. In the feeding tests, the highest gains were made from the early

cuttings and the lowest from the late, the results standing

proportionately as follows: early cutting, 100; medium, 85; and late,

75.

7. The variation in the amount of the different cuttings eaten per day

was very slight, being the highest for the early cutting and the lowest

for the late, but the quantity of dry matter and also of digestible

matter required for a pound of gain was decidedly lowest for the early

cutting and highest for the late, the relative amounts of dry matter

standing as follows: early cutting, 100; medium, 131; and late, 166.

8. The annual beef product per acre was largest from the early cuttings,

not only in the general average but in each separate season’s test, and

that from the late cuttings was smallest, the proportional products

standing as follows: early cutting, 100; medium, 79¹⁄₂; and late, 69¹⁄₂.

9. Taking all points of comparison into consideration, both separately

and collectively, including everything that pertains to the largest

yield and the highest feeding value, the tests favor cutting alfalfa for

cattle feeding when the first blooms appear.

CROP COMPARISONS

10. The first crop gave the largest yield in each of the five tests and

in fourteen out of the fifteen cuttings, while the third crop gave the

lowest for every test and in every cutting but one. The average acre

yields for the five years, including all cuttings, stand in the

following relation: first crop, 100; second, 78; and third, 39; for the

early cuttings alone, first crop, 100; second, 83; and third, 66.

11. In the average composition of all cuttings for three years, the

nutrients of the three crops vary but little. The second has slightly

the highest per cent of protein and fiber; and the third the most fat

and nitrogen-free extract.

12. The third crop has the largest proportion of leaves to stems; but

the per cent of protein in the leaves is highest in the second crop; and

next highest in the first. The leaves of the first crop contain the most

fat and of the second, the least.

13. The third crop produced a higher average rate of gain in the feeding

tests than the first or second and also higher than any of the separate

cuttings. The amount eaten daily was also highest of all, but the dry

matter and digestible matter for a pound of gain were the lowest. In a

pound per pound comparison the gains stood as follows: first crop, 100;

second, 81; and third, 126; dry matter for a pound of gain, first crop,

100; second, 115; and third, 69.

14. The beef product per acre, taking the average result of all cuttings

for the five years, was very much the highest for the first crop and

decidedly the lowest for the third, standing as follows: first crop,

100; second, 61; and third, 45. But taking the early cuttings alone they

stand, first crop, 100; second, 80; and third, 69.

15. Pound for pound, taken as a whole, the results show the highest

feeding value for the third crop and the lowest for the second.

16. The average annual beef product from early cut alfalfa was 705.61

pounds per acre; it required 9575 pounds of timothy to produce an equal

weight; 11,967 pounds of red clover, and 10,083 pounds of shredded corn

fodder.

Prof. John A. Widtsoe at the Utah station (Bul. No. 48) made a study of

the nutrients of the alfalfa crop, and some of the facts gathered are

given in the following table:

--------------------------------------------------------------------

FIRST CUTTING

------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------

------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------

May 4. Height, 6¹⁄₂ in | .... | 607 | 168 | 40 | 167

June 1. Height, 18 in | 697 | 1,247 | 618 | 103 | 369

July 7. Full flower | 745 | 2,278 | 2,108 | 118 | 431

leaves dry | 644 | 2,298 | 2,531 | 116 | 423

Aug. 24. Still drier | 428 | 1,776 | 2,544 | 94 | 311

------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------

SECOND CUTTING

------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------

July 7. Budding | 334 | 657 | 357 | 50 | 197

July 20. Medium bloom | 519 | 1,140 | 1,031 | 78 | 314

Aug. 3. Full flower | 551 | 1,529 | 1,316 | 81 | 323

Aug. 24. Leaves dry | 388 | 1,484 | 1,329 | 81 | 333

------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------

THIRD CUTTING

------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------

Aug. 17 | 138 | 317 | 155 | 17 | 85

Aug. 31 | 322 | 757 | 634 | 33 | 211

Sept. 14 | 298 | 934 | 818 | 43 | 214

------------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------+-------

COMPARATIVE CROP AND FEEDING VALUES

The following is another table showing the average yield of alfalfa as

compared with some of the more common fodder crops and hays, as found in

New Jersey station Bulletin No. 148.

-------------------+------------+--------+--------

| Total Yield| Dry | Total

|Green Forage| Matter | Protein

| per acre |per acre|per acre

-------------------+------------+--------+--------

| _Pounds_ |_Pounds_|_Pounds_

Alfalfa | 36,540 | 8,258 | 2,214

Corn (entire plant)| 24,000 | 5,040 | 408

Red clover | 14,000 | 4,088 | 616

Barnyard millet | 16,000 | 4,000 | 384

Crimson clover | 14,000 | 2,674 | 434

Cowpeas | 16,000 | 2,624 | 384

Oats and peas | 14,000 | 2,107 | 363

-------------------+------------+--------+--------

| Dry | Total

| Matter | Protein

--------------------------------+--------+--------

|_Pounds_|_Pounds_

1 ton alfalfa hay contains | 1,809 | 265

1 „ red clover hay contains | 1,694 | 246

1 „ oats and peas contains | 1,375 | 175

1 „ timothy contains | 1,736 | 118

1 „ wheat bran contains | 1,762 | 308

1 „ wheat middlings contains | 1,758 | 312

1 „ rye bran contains | 1,768 | 294

1 „ oats contains | 1,780 | 236

1 „ rice meal contains | 1,796 | 240

1 „ buckwheat bran contains | 1,790 | 248

--------------------------------+--------+--------

At the Colorado station (Bul. No. 26) Prof. W. W. Cooke compared an acre

of dent (Golden Beauty) corn, planted May 16 and harvested September 21,

with returns from an acre of alfalfa on an adjoining plat, three years

seeded. The corn crop was a fair one, and including ears and stalks

weighed 15,500 pounds, containing 35.62 per cent or 5539 pounds of dry

matter. The alfalfa yielded three cuttings of hay weighing respectively

4600, 3350 and 3250 pounds, or 5.6 tons, containing 10,304 pounds of dry

matter. But, as Professor Cooke says, this is not quite a fair

comparison, for a pound of dry matter from the corn crop is more

digestible and has a higher feeding value than an equal amount from the

alfalfa. The corn crop contained 3605 pounds of digestible feeding

material, while the alfalfa crop contained 5611 pounds, or a little more

than half as much again. The corn crop per acre in feeding value was

equivalent to three and a half tons of alfalfa hay.

The total digestible nutrients of the two crops are presented in the

following table:

-------------------+-----------------+-----------------

| TOTAL | DIGESTIBLE

+--------+--------+--------+--------

| Corn |Alfalfa | Corn |Alfalfa

-------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------

|_Pounds_|_Pounds_|_Pounds_|_Pounds_

Dry matter | 5,539 | 10,304 | 3,605 | 5,611

Albuminoids | 405 | 1,602 | 296 | 1,198

Starch, sugar, etc.| 3,263 | 4,782 | 2,186 | 3,114

Fiber | 1,472 | 2,800 | 1,060 | 1,198

Fat (ether extract)| 84 | 246 | 63 | 101

Ash | 315 | 829 | .... | ....

-------------------+--------+--------+--------+--------

COMPARATIVE VALUES OF ALFALFA HAY AND OTHER FEED STUFFS FOR PROTEIN

-------------------------------+------------------------------

|Value per ton when prairie hay

| is worth per ton--

Feedstuff | $2.00 | $3.00 | $4.00

-------------------------------+---------+---------+----------

Alfalfa hay (average) | $6.05 | $9.08 | $12.11

Red clover hay | 3.88 | 5.82 | 7.77

Orchard-grass hay | 2.74 | 4.11 | 5.48

Millet hay | 2.57 | 3.85 | 5.14

Timothy hay | 1.65 | 2.48 | 3.31

Sorghum hay | 1.37 | 2.05 | 2.74

Corn-fodder (stover) | 1.14 | 1.71 | 2.28

Oat straw | .91 | 1.37 | 1.82

Wheat straw | .45 | .68 | .91

Sugar beets | .62 | .94 | 1.25

Mangel-wurzels | .57 | .85 | 1.14

Alfalfa hay containing 12.9 per| | |

cent digestible protein | 7.36 | 11.05 | 14.73

Wheat bran | 7.02 | 10.53 | 14.04

-------------------------------+---------+---------+----------

It is seen that the alfalfa yielded nearly twice as many pounds of dry

matter as the corn, with the digestible nutrients far in the lead, and

the protein of the alfalfa was three times that of the corn.

THE BALANCED RATION

No feeder can learn to use alfalfa, or in fact any forage or grain, in

the most economical way until he understands somewhat the compounding of

a balanced ration. All foodstuffs for either man or beast are, as

already stated, made up of three classes of substances--namely, protein

or proteids, carbohydrates and fats. The animal’s digestive and

assimilative organs are so constructed that it cannot use these three

classes of substances interchangeably; in other words, an animal fed

wholly upon any one of these three would be in process of gradual

starvation. Given in the proportions needed to best supply the vital

organs of the body, these substances become the sustenance for animal

life and growth. The protein builds up the brain, nerves, muscles and

other tissues in which the life force is active, and without protein

there would be no life.

To balance a ration for domestic animals is to so adjust the quantity of

digestible proteids, fats and carbohydrates it contains that the animal

economy may use each without waste. The balanced ration means an

economical ration, allowing the digestive organs to work at their

highest efficiency; an unbalanced ration is one in which one of the

three classes of food substances is in excess, or is deficient. Fed such

a ration, the animal retaliates upon its owner by failure to digest the

excess, which is worse than wasted; for the feeding of any class of

substances in excess adds to the labor of the digestive organs and

reduces their efficiency.

MAKING A BALANCED RATION

In Press Bulletin No. 12, from the Kansas station, the following is

given to illustrate somewhat how a balanced ration would differ from

others into which consideration of a proper balance had not entered:

“There are three important groups of substances in feeds--protein,

carbohydrates, and fat. Protein includes all materials in feeds which

contain nitrogen. It enters into the composition of milk, blood, muscle,

hair and the brain and nerves; is necessary in the formation of these,

and no other substance can take its place. Protein is also used in the

body in producing heat, energy and fat. Carbohydrates include the fiber

of feeds, the sugars, starch, and gums, and furnish heat, energy and fat

in the body. Carbohydrates and fat can take each other’s places, one

pound of fat being worth 2.2 pounds of carbohydrates for production of

heat in the body.

“Extended investigations have shown that to obtain the best results,

feed should be given which will furnish these materials in the following

proportions:

“Dairy cow--protein, 2¹⁄₂ pounds; carbohydrates, 12¹⁄₂ pounds; fat, ¹⁄₂

pound.

“Fattening steer--protein, 2¹⁄₂ to 3 pounds; carbohydrates, 15 pounds;

fat, ¹⁄₂ to ³⁄₄ pound.

“Growing cattle--protein, 4 pounds; carbohydrates, 13¹⁄₂ pounds; fat, 2

pounds.

“For a young animal (cattle) gradually decrease the proportion of

protein until at the age of two years the proportions are similar to

those for the fattening steer, but less in quantity. A pig two to three

months old needs feeds containing seven and one-half pounds of protein

to each thirty pounds of carbohydrates and fat, while a year-old pig

needs seven and one-half pounds of protein to each forty-eight pounds of

carbohydrates and fat. Feeds containing a greater proportion of protein

than called for by these standards can be fed, because protein can take

the place of the other materials. Carbohydrates and fat cannot take the

place of protein, however, and no matter in how large quantities they

may be fed, if protein is lacking, the growth or gain will be less.

“The weak point in feeding is that the average rations are greatly

deficient in protein, and have too much carbohydrates and fat. Every

feeder knows that good pasturage produces rapid growth, good gains, and

abundant milk yields. It furnishes nutriment in the proportion of three

pounds of protein, twelve pounds of carbohydrates, and one-half pound of

fat. The proportions in some of our feeds in pounds per 100 pounds of

feed, are as follows:

-----------+-------+--------+-----

| | Carbo- |

|Protein|hydrates| Fat

-----------+-------+--------+-----

Corn | 7.8 | 66.7 | 1.6

Kafir-corn | 7.8 | 57.1 | 2.7

Prairie hay| 3.5 | 41.8 | 1.4

Corn fodder| 2.0 | 33.2 | 0.6

Sorghum hay| 2.4 | 40.6 | 1.2

-----------+-------+--------+-----

“It will be seen that none of these contain a sufficient proportion of

protein to secure best results, and all combinations of these feeds will

have the same defect.

“Some feeds have too great a proportion of protein to be fed alone, as

shown below, the figures indicating pounds per 100 pounds of feed:

-----------------+-------+--------+------

| | Carbo- |

|Protein|hydrates| Fat

-----------------+-------+--------+------

Alfalfa hay | 10.6 | 37.3 | 1.4

Gluten-meal | 31.1 | 43.9 | 4.8

Linseed-oil meal | 28.8 | 32.8 | 7.1

Cottonseed-meal | 37.0 | 16.5 | 12.6

Soy-beans | 39.6 | 22.3 | 14.4

-----------------+-------+--------+------

“Making a balanced ration is combining the feeds deficient in protein

with those having an excess of it, to make a ration which will contain

the right proportions for the animals fed.”

VARIATIONS IN ANALYSIS

Variations in the foregoing tables would indicate that the analysis is

likely to vary with the product of different soils and different

cultivations. In spite of variations it may be readily seen that alfalfa

with its high protein value makes a very effective and economical

balance for corn for heavy feeding. When it is taken into consideration

that this forage so rich in protein can be raised at home, and that its

growing is at the same time enriching the soil, the conclusion is easy

that alfalfa hay may profitably constitute a part of all the fattening

operations; it is also clear that the economical way to market alfalfa

is through the farm’s live stock.

_CHAPTER XI._

Alfalfa in Beef-Making

The cattle feeder is not much given to sentiment and cares less for the

beauty of the purple flowers of the alfalfa than he does for the best

method of converting those purple flowers and the accompanying foliage

into marketable beef. An accepted but unwritten rule of cornfeeding is

that 1000 pounds of grain with ordinary forage will produce 100 pounds

of gain, under normal conditions.

SOME FEEDING TESTS

The Kansas station in a careful feeding test of 153 days produced 100

pounds of gain with 718 pounds of grain by using alfalfa hay for

roughness. This test also gave the following table of gain in values,

from the use of different feeds in the same given time:

Corn and alfalfa hay $109.74

Corn and prairie hay 56.96

Corn and sorghum hay 27.09

Corn and oat straw 43.28

Barley and alfalfa hay 57.16

The Utah station after a feeding test published the statement that to

produce 705.61 pounds of beef it required:

Of alfalfa hay 7,182 pounds

Of timothy hay 9,575 „

Of red clover hay 11,967 „

Of shredded corn fodder 10,083 „

[Illustration: =Kansas Farmer Viewing One of His Alfalfa Fields=

Showing ten days’ growth after first cutting in 1907]

[Illustration: Harvesting Alfalfa in Ohio]

At this station steers made a most rapid gain when fed upon early cut

alfalfa hay, either with or without an accompanying ration of grain. “By

early cut hay was meant hay cut just before bloom. The gain upon this

early cut alfalfa hay was one-third more than that upon hay cut when in

full bloom or later.”

The Utah station also reports a cattle feeding test (Bul. No. 61) in

which 100 pounds of gain from feeding alfalfa hay cost $3.76; from

timothy, $4.71, and from corn fodder, $6.21.

At the Nebraska station Prof. Howard R. Smith (Buls. 85 and 90) fed 50

yearling and 50 two-year-old grade steers in lots of ten for six months,

each lot of each fifty having rations different from the others, and the

table herewith shows the average cost per pound of gain made by each

steer of each lot of yearlings:

Lot fed corn and prairie hay 8.27 cents

„ „ corn 90 per cent, oil meal 10 per cent, and

prairie hay 6.82 „

„ „ corn 90 per cent, oil meal 10 per cent, and

corn stover 6.09 „

„ „ corn 90 per cent, oil meal 10 per cent, and

sorghum hay 7.00 „

„ „ corn and alfalfa hay 6.04 „

Below is shown the cost under similar conditions with the two-year-olds,

(the cost of the corn and oil meal fed them having been slightly greater

than that fed the yearlings):

Lot fed corn and prairie hay 8.23 cents

„ „ corn 90 per cent, oil meal 10 per cent, and

prairie hay 8.27 „

„ „ corn 90 per cent, oil meal 10 per cent, and

corn stover 6.49 „

„ „ corn 90 per cent, oil meal 10 per cent, and

sorghum hay 7.87 „

„ „ corn and alfalfa hay 6.89 „

Among the deductions from these experiments, Professor Smith records the

following, bearing upon the use of alfalfa:

“Alfalfa is much superior to prairie hay when the grain consists of corn

alone. It also proved to be a cheaper source of protein than oil meal.

The returns on the cattle fed alfalfa hay, were the alfalfa figured at

$11.14 per ton, would have been as great as the returns on prairie hay

at $6 per ton, with corn as the grain ration at 39 cents per bushel. In

comparison with prairie hay at $6 when oil meal worth $28 per ton was a

part of the grain ration, the alfalfa returned a value of $8.28 per ton.

(In these experiments the cost of all alfalfa hay and all prairie hay

was figured at the one price of $6 per ton.--Author.)

“Bright, well-cured corn stover fed with an equal weight of alfalfa, the

grain consisting of corn alone, gave slightly larger gains than corn and

alfalfa, and proved the most economical ration in the experiment. The

addition of corn stover may have improved, to some extent, the corn and

alfalfa ration by furnishing greater variety, and by its tendency to

check scours sometimes caused by alfalfa. The stover fed with alfalfa

returned a value of $4.57 per ton in comparison with alfalfa at $6 per

ton as the sole roughness.

“By feeding alfalfa hay, which is a protein-rich roughness, extremely

palatable and readily masticated, in place of prairie hay with corn

alone, 14 per cent less grain was required for each pound of gain on

two-year-olds and 27 per cent less on yearlings.

“Alfalfa hay, fed once per day in connection with corn and well-cured

cornstalks, furnished sufficient protein for two-year-olds to make the

three foods a combination producing heavy and very economical

gains--more economical than any other ration in the experiment.

“Alfalfa is pronouncedly superior to prairie hay for beef production,

and the more rapid the extension of the area of land devoted to the

production of alfalfa, supplanting the less valuable and lower yielding

native hay, the more rapid will be the production of wealth from our

soil.”

One authority who has made a study of such problems says, “steers can be

fattened on one-third less corn with alfalfa for roughness than

without.”

W. H. Jordan, director of the New York (Geneva) experiment station says:

“Probably no species of forage are known that are more economical

sources of high-class cattle food than alfalfa and corn, and if in the

realms of stock raising corn is king, alfalfa is queen.”

FEEDING TOO MUCH ALFALFA

Many feeders make the mistake of feeding too much alfalfa hay to young

steers grained heavily on corn. Careful tests seem to prove that cattle

on a heavy feed of corn, corn meal, Kafir-corn or Kafir-corn meal gain

as much with 15 or 20 pounds of alfalfa hay per day as by having 35

pounds, the very common quantity in feeding. It is also reported by

experienced feeders that steers over three years old may be fattened on

alfalfa with a moderate feed of corn, while for younger steers the heavy

feed should be corn with 15 to 25 pounds of alfalfa hay per day.

A Colorado feeder put a lot of steers nearly four years old on a daily

ration of ten pounds of corn chop and fifteen pounds of alfalfa hay for

100 days. The gain was surprising and the steers weighed on the Denver

market about 1430 pounds per head.

A feeder in Osborne county, Kansas, reported to the author the

following: “Began feeding 22 two-year-old steers on February 3rd,

averaging 941 pounds in weight. Gave them no feed but alfalfa hay until

March 4th. From March 4th until May 1st fed all the alfalfa they wanted

and 243 bushels of corn chop, when they weighed out at an average gain

of 259 pounds each in 86 days, or three pounds per day on a feed of 11

bushels of corn chop and plenty of alfalfa hay per steer.”

Western feeders generally claim to be able to put fat cattle on the

market from 20 to 30 per cent cheaper with alfalfa as the balance than

on corn alone, or with corn and bran or any purchased protein foods. The

cheapest beef-making in the West is the raising of calves on alfalfa,

and at 20 to 24 months fattening them by a heavy feeding of corn and

alfalfa hay for 100 days. Cattle carried to 1000 to 1200 pounds on

alfalfa, and then finished by strong feeding on corn with alfalfa hay

for fifty to sixty days, make beef of a choice quality at a low cost.

_CHAPTER XII._

Alfalfa and the Dairy

MAKING A MARGIN

The most enthusiastic advocates of alfalfa are dairymen. The market

price of milk is quite well fixed and the price of butterfat at the

creameries remains, in the different seasons, pretty much the same year

by year. Hence, the problem of increasing his financial returns must

depend upon the dairyman’s being able to increase the volume of his

product or to decrease the cost, or both. If he is selling butterfat at

a profit of five cents and he cannot force the price any higher, it is

the sensible thing to decrease the cost per pound and thereby enlarge

his profit.

The dairyman who buys all his feed has but little margin. To raise

enough clover calls for considerable land. Alfalfa will yield a large

bulk of excellent feed from a few acres of well treated land. For profit

he must raise more feedstuff and buy less. The Kansas station reported

that with common scrub cows fed on alfalfa hay and Kafir corn meal it

was possible to produce butterfat at a cost of seven cents a pound.

SOME MILKING TEST VALUATIONS

The New Jersey station as a result of a very painstaking milking test

reported: (1) In a ration where alfalfa hay was tested against wheat

bran and dried brewers’ grain the saving in the cost of milk was 12.7

cents per hundred, and 2.3 cents per pound of butter when alfalfa hay

was used. This saving means a great deal when it is considered that the

alfalfa is raised and not purchased. (2) That the milk value of one acre

of alfalfa was $74.

A Kansas dairyman is reported to have kept ten cows through one summer

on the alfalfa cut daily from a patch containing four square rods less

than two acres.

Some dairymen believe that there is a great saving in the alfalfa hay by

cutting it into two-inch lengths, and feeding it dry. It is also

believed that it will always be a matter of economy to feed with the

alfalfa, green or as hay, a small ration of carbonaceous food, even

corn-stover serving such a purpose.

Former Governor Hoard, editor of _Hoard’s Dairyman_, says that with

alfalfa hay at $10 and bran at $20 per ton there is a saving, by using

alfalfa, of $2.80 for every 100 pounds of butter made, and a saving of

19.8 cents for every 100 pounds of milk.

In a section of New York where alfalfa has been quite generally

introduced, dairymen claim an increase in their profits of 15 to 30 per

cent by its use, besides the enrichment of their farms for other crops.

Prof. D. H. Otis, telling of experiments with the dairy herd at the

Kansas agricultural college, states that, “it is usually recommended to

feed a cow all the rough feed she will eat, and then balance up the

ration with grain. The experience at the college indicates that much

rough feed is wasted in careless feeding. The cow will eat the best

first, and, if given too much, will pick the most desirable morsels,

leaving what might be called passably good, which too frequently is

treated as waste and thrown under foot. No more hay should be given an

animal than it will eat up clean. This refers to first-class quality,

however, as a cow could not be expected to eat poor hay clean.

“In feeding the rough feeds, the following table has been used by the

college as a guide:

-----------------------------------------------------------------

ROUGHNESS.--Value per ton when alfalfa is worth $1.00 per ton

---------------+-------+-------+-----------------+---------+-----

---------------+-------+-------+-----------------+-------+-------

Alfalfa | $1.00 | $1.00 | Alfalfa | $0.34 | $0.37

Corn-fodder | .32 | .19 | Corn silage | .13 | .12

Cowpeas | .97 | 1.02 | Fodder corn | .14 | .09

Fodder Corn | .40 | .24 | Pasture grasses| .03 | .24

Millet | .64 | .42 | Sorghum fodder | .12 | .06

Oat hay | .59 | .41 | Soy-beans | .28 | .30

Oat straw | .33 | .15 | | |

Orchard-grass| .60 | .45 |ROOTS AND TUBERS | |

Prairie hay | .51 | .33 | Mangels | .10 | .09

Red clover | .70 | .64 | Sugar-beets | .14 | .10

Sorghum | .43 | .23 | Turnips | .11 | .08

Soy-beans | .98 | 1.02 | | |

Mixed hay | .67 | .56 | | |

Timothy | .47 | .27 | | |

Wheat straw | .25 | .08 | | |

---------------+-------+-------+-----------------+-------+-------

“Students working with the dairy herd were anxious to have the cows make

the best possible yields, and were tempted to give all the good alfalfa

hay the cows would eat. When we discovered the alfalfa hay going too

rapidly we looked for the cause and found that the dairy cows had

consumed an average of forty-three pounds per head daily, besides

fifteen pounds of Kafir corn fodder. The quantity of alfalfa was reduced

to thirty-three pounds and the Kafir-corn fodder to three and one-half

pounds daily per cow, and we found that the daily yield of milk was

slightly increased. The quality of the hay was the same in both

instances. In the latter case it was eaten up clean, while in the former

considerable was hauled away and fed to dry cows. Later records show a

still greater reduction in the allowance of alfalfa without decreasing

the flow of milk. This experience shows some of the leaks that may take

place in feeding roughness, especially when those feeds are appetizing,

like alfalfa and red clover.

“For ease of calculation the roughness is figured on the basis of

alfalfa hay selling for one dollar per ton. When alfalfa is worth six

dollars per ton the other rough feeds are worth six times the amount

indicated in the table; when alfalfa is worth eight dollars per ton the

other feeds are worth eight times as much, and so on. Usually we find

that we can give practically all the rough feed that the cows can eat,

although, as indicated above, with a good quality of alfalfa or clover

hay more may be eaten than will be consumed at a profit. At this writing

alfalfa hay is selling in Manhattan at seven dollars per ton. This would

make the feeding values of the other rough feeds worth seven times the

amount indicated in the table. Red clover, for instance, would be worth

seven times seventy cents or $4.90 per ton; prairie hay would be worth

$3.57 per ton; and millet hay would be worth $4.48 per ton. If the

problem was to select the most economical roughness, we would select

alfalfa at seven dollars per ton, in preference to red clover at six

dollars per ton, or prairie hay at four dollars per ton, or millet at

five dollars per ton. Knowing the cost of these different rough feeds

and having this table before him, a feeder can tell which is the most

economical feed to use. It will be noticed that the table is divided

into two parts, the first part giving the value of the total nutrients,

and the second one the value of the protein nutrients. It frequently

happens that we have plenty of carbohydrates and fat, but that we are

lacking in protein. In this case we would consult the ‘protein

nutrients’ column in order to determine what feed to buy in order to

furnish the protein most economically. If it be carbohydrates and fat as

well as protein that is required, as was the condition in the dry year

of 1901, then we should take the total nutrients’ column. When it is

possible to get a rough feed containing a large amount of protein, we

find that in feeding a liberal allowance of roughness the grain can be

reduced. Hence, the importance of providing roughness rich in protein,

like alfalfa.”

SELLING FARM PRODUCTS THROUGH THE COW

The Book of Alfalfa: History, Cultivation and Merits Its Uses as a Forage and Fertilizer · 第 27 / 30 章

The experiments cited do not include alfalfa, yet the results with other