Thirty-Ninth Annual Report OF THE MISSOURI State Board of Agriculture A Record of the Work for the Year 1906. ALSO VALUABLE INFORMATION ON BREEDING AND FEEDING LIVE STOCK, IMPROVING THE FERTILITY OF THE SOIL, GROWING CROPS. DAIRYING, AGRICULTURE AND LIVE STOCK STATISTICS, ETC. PUBLISHED 1907. LIBRARY NEW YORK botanicau GARDEN. THE HUGH STEPHENS PRINTING COMPANY. JEFFERSON CITY. MO. V. 3 f IHi>le> Officers of State Board of Agriculture, 1907. President — S. W. Hudson, Buckner. Vice-President — Norman J. Colman, St. Louis. Secretary — Geo. B. Ellis, Columbia. Assistant Secretary — J. B. Rector, Columbia. Institute Clerk — S. M. Jordan, Stanberry. Treasurer — W. A. Bright, Columbia. State Veterinarian — Dr. D. F. Luckey, Columbia. State Highway Engineer — Curtis Hill, Columbia. EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE. S. W. Hudson, Buckner. W. C. Howell, Ulman. Norman J. Colman, St. Louis. W. C. Hutchison, Jamesport. H. J. Waters, Columbia. M. B. Greensf elder, Clayton. A. T. Nelson, Lebanon. EX-OFFICIO MEMBERS. Governor of Missouri — Jos. W. Folk. Superintendent of Schools — H. A. Gass. Dean Agricultural College — H. J. Waters. (2) CORPORATE MEMBERS. LIBRARY Cong. NEW YORK dist. Name. Residence. County. ,, ^'^^ oakoen. (Term expires July 20, 1907.) 6 . . . . John Deerwester Butler Bates. 9 .... J. A. Potts Mexico Audrain. 10 .... M. B. Greensfelder . . . .Clayton St. Louis. 11. . . .N. J. Colman St. Louis City.. Colonial Security Bldg. 12 W. R. Wilkinson St. Louis City..212 N. Main Street. (Term expires July 20, 1908.) 2. . . .W. C. Hutchison Jamesport. . . .Daviess. 3 . . . . Allen M. Thompson . . . Nashua Clay. 5 . . . . S. W. Hudson Buckner Jackson. 13. . . .E. E. Swink Farmington. . .St. Francois. 14. . . .Ferd J. Hess Charleston. . . .Mississippi. 16. . . .A. T. Nelson Lebanon Laclede. (Term expires July 20, 1909.) 1. . . .W. B. McRoberts Monticello. . . .Lewis. 4. . . .John L. Christian Rockport Atchison. 7 . . . . N. H. Gentry Sedalia Pettis. 8 Wm. C. Howell Ulman Miller. 15 John J. McNatt McNatt McDonald. (Hold-over.) •ci. OFFICERS OF STATE FAIR DIRECTORY. President — E. E. Swink, Farmington. Vice-President — A. M. Thompson, Nashua. Secretary — J. R. Rippey, Sedalia. Treasurer — Chas. E. Yeater, Sedalia. (3) EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE STATE FAIR DIRECTORY. E. E. Swink, Farmington. A. M. Thompson, Nashua. A. T. Nelson, Lebanon. W. B. McRoberts, Monticello. John Deerwester, Butler. N. H. Gentry, Sedalia. Norman J. Colman, St. Louis. S. W. Hudson, Buckner. STATE VETERINARIAN AND DEPUTIES. D. F. Luckey, State Veterinarian Columbia T. F. Arnold, Deputy State Veterinarian Lewistown Horace Bradley, Deputy State Veterinarian Windsor E. Brainerd, Deputy State Veterinarian Memphis W. L. Berry, Deputy State Veterinarian Joplin L. D. Brown, Deputy State Veterinarian Hamilton Henry Boettner, Deputy State Veterinarian Perryville James CuUison, Deputy State Veterinarian Charleston Chas. Doerrie, Deputy State Veterinarian Boonville H. V. Goode, Deputy State Veterinarian St. Joseph E. M. Hendy, Deputy State Veterinarian Jefferson City R. B. Love, Deputy State Veterinarian Springfield J. H. McElroy, Deputy State Veterinarian Grant City R. C. Moore, Deputy State Veterinarian Kansas City H. M. McConnell, Deputy State Veterinarian Marshall F. W. O'Brien, Deputy State Veterinarian Hannibal R. P. Poage, Deputy State Veterinarian Shelbina J. H. Slater, Deputy State Veterinarian Richmond Sam Sheldon, Deputy State Veterinarian Trenton Stanley Smith, Deputy State Veterinarian Columbia T. E. White, Deputy State Veterinarian Sedalia H. H. Wolf, Deputy State Veterinarian Maryville (4) Associate Organizations. IMPROVED LIVE STOCK BREEDERS' ASSOCIATION. President — R. W. Brown, CarroUton. Vice-President — Ed. Hall, Carthage. Vice-President — S. L. Brock, Macon. Vice-President — George Kitchen, Gower. Vice-President — Dr. Geo. C. Mosher, Kansas City. Vice-President — June K. King, Marshall. Vice-President — W. B. Cully, Bunceton. Vice-President — Ben. W. Harned, Beaman. Vice-President — J. W. Boles, Auxvasse. Vice-President — Ed. Wilson, Stanberry. Secretary — Geo. B. Ellis, Columbia. Treasurer — J. H. McCulloh, Creighton. Executive Committee — W. P. Harned, Vermont; Benton Gab- bert, Dearborn, and above officers. MISSOURI CORN GROWERS' ASSOCIATION. President — C. 0. Raine, Canton. Vice-President — Geo. H. Sly, Rockport. Vice-President — Wm. Wallace, Vandalia. Vice-President — R. S. Harriman, Pilot Grove. Vice-President — P. E. Crabtree, Hannon. Vice-President — T. P. Chandler, Farmington. Secretary-Treasurer — M. F. Miller, Columbia. MISSOURI STATE DAIRY ASSOCIATION. President — Dr. Geo. C. Mosher, Kansas City. First Vice-President — J. M. Smith, Brookfield. Second Vice-President — Thos. Shields, Eureka. Secretary: — R. M. Washburn, Columbia. Treasurer — D. B. Matthews, Kirksville. (5) MISSOURI SHEEP BREEDERS' ASSOCIATION. President — A. T. Grimes, Greenwood. Vice-President — J. W. Boles, Auxvasse. Secretary-Treasurer — M. V. Carroll, Sedalia. DIRECTORS. W. W. Waltmire, Raymore. S. C. Haseltine, Springfield. H. R. Brasfield, Unionville. W. F. Cooper, Windsor. L. V. Heuser, Deerfield. John A. Rankin, Tarkio. (6) LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. state Board of Agriculture, Office of the Secretary, > Columbia, Mo., June 18, 1907. i To Hon. Joseph W. Folk, Governor of Missouri : Sir — In compliance with the law, I have the honor to transmit herewith a report of the work of the State Board of Agriculture for the year 1906. Very respectfully, Geo. B. Ellis, Secretary. (7) TABLE OF CONTENTS. Pares, Annual Meeting 9-46 Secretary's report 18-23 Secretary's financial statement 24-35 Treasurer's report 36-37 Report State "Veterinarian 38-46 Farmers' Week 47-348 Missouri State Dairy Association 53-113 Improved Live Stock Breeders' Association 114-295 Corn Growers' Association ,296-348 Improvement of Missouri Herds 349-388 Missouri Crop Statistics 389-401 Tabulated Veterinary Reports 402-416 ANNUAL MEETING. MINUTES OF PROCEEDINGS. state Board of Agriculture, Office of the Secretary, t Columbia, Mo., Dec. 18, 1906. ( The forty-second annual meeting of the Board of Agriculture convened in the office of the Secretary, Columbia, Mo., December 18, 1906, at 1 :30 p. m. In absence of the President, Vice-Presi- dent Hudson called the Board to order. Roll call by the Secretary showed the following members present: S. W. Hudson, W. B. McRoberts, John L. Christian, N. H. Gentry, W. C. Howell, John Deerwester, M. B. Greensfelder, Norman J. Colman, W. R. Wil- kinson, W. C. Hutchison, Allen M. Thompson, E. E. Swink, A. T. Nelson, H. J. Waters and W. T. Carrington. The following members were absent: Governor Jos. W. Folk, J. A. Potts, F. J. Hess, J. J. McNatt. Upon motion of Mr. Waters, the rules were suspended and the reading of the minutes dispensed with, and the minutes adopted as printed in the 38th annual report. The Secretary read his report, and upon motion of Mr. Thomp- son, the report was approved and adopted, and ordered printed in the 39th annual report of the Board. The State Veterinarian made a verbal report, and asked for time to prepare a written report of the work of his department, which request was granted. Upon recommendation of State Veterinarian, Dr. J. H. Mc- Elroy of Grant City and Dr. T. F. Arnold of Lewistown were appointed deputy veterinarians. REPORT OP AGRICULTURAL COLLEGE COMMITTEE. Mr. President: We, your committee, appointed to examine into the affairs of the College of Agriculture and Experiment Station, have dis- charged that duty, and beg to submit the following report: (9) 10 Missouri Agricultural Report. We find the grounds, buildings and live stock well kept and in good condition. We are pleased to note the number of important improve- ments in the equipment of the College made during the past year, among which may be mentioned: The farm machinery laboratory, a substantial stone structure, commodious, and apparently well designed for its purpose. The hog house, which is now nearing completion, seems to be well adapted to the purposes for which it is designed. A much needed plant house for the Department of Botany is now in process of erection. It is with especial pleasure that we note the improvement in the number and character of the live stock used for instructional purposes on the farm. This includes additions to the Shorthorn and Hereford breeding herds, to the different breeds of hogs, the addition of a number of draft horses, and improvement in the flocks of sheep. While we are pleased to note these improvements, we strongly urge still larger expenditures along these lines. The character of the cattle and sheep used for experimental work now in progress could scarcely be improved upon. Soil Survey. — We especially desire to commend the progress made in the State Soil Survey. We find that the preliminary sur- vey has covered practically the whole of South Missouri, that more than 200 samples of soil have been collected, representing all the principal types in this portion of the State, nearly one-half of which have already been analyzed, including samples from the fol- lowing counties: Barry, Barton, Bates, Cape Girardeau, Cass, Cedar, Christian, Crawford, Dent, Dunklin, Franklin, Gasconade, Hickory, Jefferson, Johnson, Lawrence, McDonald, Maries, Morgan, Nodaway, Pemiscot, Phelps, Polk, Pulaski, Reynolds, Shannon, Texas, Vernon, Washington, Wright, We observe, further, that experimental fields for a more ex- tensive study of the crops best adapted to these different soils, their fertilizer requirements and the best crop rotations, have been established as follows: Monroe City, Monroe County; Unionville, Putnam county; Billings, Christian county; Purdy, Barry county; from all of which the College already has two years' results. One year's results have been obtained from experimental fields at La- mar, Barton county; Adrian, Bates county; Cuba, Crawford county; Dixon, Pulaski county, and Poplar Bluff, Butler countj^ It is of interest to note also that there have been established special experiments to determine the feasibility and profitableness Minutes of Proceedings. 11 of tile drainage for certain areas of the State. Such drainage fields have already been established at Lamar, Barton county, and at Monroe City, Monroe county, and arrangements are practically completed for similar experiments at Poplar Bluff, Butler county, Centralia, Boone county, and at Trenton, Grundy county. The importance of this work would amply justify the Legis- lature in supporting it much more liberally than in the past, in order that it may be greatly extended. Recommendations. — It is the opinion of your committee that Missouri's Agricultural College should not be conspicuous at the great international live stock shows by the absence of her stu- dents trained in stock and grain judging, nor by the absence of rep- resentatives of its herd and flocks fed and prepared by the stu- dents. It seems to us that the College can in no other way so ef- fectively impress the high character of its work and the import- ance of this sort of instruction upon the public as by joining the colleges of neighboring states in an active participation in these great international shows. This is particularly true of such shows as the American Royal Live Stock Show, held at Kansas City, and the International Live Stock Show, held at Chicago. It is strongly urged that the Board of Curators provide the College with suffi- cient funds and with all of the facilities for entering upon this en- terprise in a manner which will reflect creditably upon the stock breeders and feeders of the State. "We desire to renew our recommendation of last year, with reference to the dairy barn, which, as was then pointed out, is entirely inadequate and unsuited to the purpose. Scarcely any progressive, private dairyman in this State has so illy ventilated and poorly arranged a barn for his dairy herd. It is earnestly recommended that the Forty-fourth General Assembly make an ap- propriation for the erection of a model dairy barn in lieu of this one. Among the urgent needs of the College for which the forth- coming Legislature should make provision are the following: Additional teachers and assslstants Soil survey Experiments Animal husbandry, including purchase of pure bred stock Equipment in dairy husbandry, botany, domestic science, agronomy, horticulture veterinary science, and entomology Ref rigei'ating plant for dairy Poultry plant, including equipment and instructors. $8,000 15,000 20,0lX) ir),oo() 16, OIK) 3,000 10,000 12 Missouri Agricultural Report. Missouri is the leading poultry State in the Union. Our poul- try products are worth annually approximately $70,000,000, ex- ceeding in value our annual wheat and oat crop combined, and yet, aside from a week's lectures on this subject in the University, there is not a single dollar being expended in instruction or re- search in the entire State upon this important subject. Pure Food Law. — A law regulating the sale of feed stuffs for live stock, similar to that now on the statute books for the con- trol of the manufacture and sale of commercial fertilizers, should be enacted. Practically all of the states in the Mississippi Valley, except Missouri, have such a law, and the result is that Missouri is being made the dumping ground for all of the adulterated, spur- ious and worthless foods which have been driven out of our neigh- boring states by the enforcement of their laws. Our farmers, stockmen and citizens in towns and villages who keep horses and cattle are thus made to suffer the penalty of our neglect in this important matter. It is likewise true that the Missouri market is open for the foods and drugs intended for human consumption, which are so badly adulterated, misbranded and deleterious to public health as to have been excluded from the markets of our surrounding states. The control of this matter, as well as that of the stock foods, should be placed in the hands of the Experiment Station. BUILDINGS. Neiv Agricultural Building, $200,000. — The building now used by the College of Agriculture is the oldest owned by the University, was never adapted to the purposes, is entirely too small, is illy ventilated, and is not commensurate with the importance of agri- culture in the University. We would strongly recommend, there- fore, that the sum of $200,000 be appropriated for the erection of a new and suitable building, which would likewise serve as head- quarters for the Board of Agriculture. Veterinary Laboratory and Hospital, $50,000. — It should be borne in mind that Missouri is one of the leading live stock states in the Union. Necessarily, therefore, the loss from animal dis- eases is a heavy tax upon the stockman, and any instruction and investigations which will enable him to reduce this loss will add materially to the wealth of the State and be money wisely invested. The Forty-second General Assembly made an appropriation for this purpose, but it was against the collateral inheritance tax, and the money failed to come into the fund. The Forty-fourth General Minutes of Proceedings. " 13 Assembly is earnestly requested to repeat this appropriation. The Leading Agricultural College in the World. — In the heart of the greatest agricultural region in the world — the Mississippi Valley — will grow up in the near future the greatest agricultural college in the world. To it will be attracted students from every civilized country on the globe. It will furnish the citizens of its OAvn State with the best instruction of its kind to be had. Mis- souri, one of the richest of these states, with a more diversified agriculture than any other, and with the most central location, is peculiarly well suited to build such a college. The cost of an enterprise of this sort will necessarily be great, the time required for its building long. If Missouri is to have any part in this great progressive movement, and is to have an institution that is even creditable, much less distinguished, she must deal more liberally with it than in the past. Our neighboring states of Iowa, Illinois and Kansas have frequently, at a single session of their legislature, appropriated more money to their College of Agriculture than Missouri has given her's since it was established in 1870. Assured Support. — It will not be sufficient to appropriate large sums of money to the College of Agriculture against a fund like the collateral inheritance tax, which may or may not materialize. The support of this College should be placed against the General Revenue fund of the State. In order that a proper beginning may be miade in the improve- ment of the College of Agriculture, it is earnestly recommended to the Board of Curators and to the Forty-fourth General Assembly that the $87,000 required for betterments, and itemized in this report, be asked for out of the General Revenue fund, and that the veterinary hospital and laboratory be placed upon the same fund. The agricultural building should be one of the early ap- propriations to come out of the collateral inheritance tax. We approve of the suggestion to devote the $475,000 war fund to the erection on the University grounds of a memorial building to Missouri's soldiers in the late Civil war, this building to contain a great agricultural museum and convention hall for farmers' meetings, and to provide the headquarters for the Board of Agriculture until at least the new agricultural building shall have been completed. Respectfully submitted, E. E. SWINK, A. M. Thompson, W. C. Hutchison, Committee. 14 Missouri Agricultural Report Upon motion of Governor Colman, the report was adopted. Captain Joseph Frazier, commandant of University Cadets, was introduced by Mr. Greensfelder, and discussed a plan for the establishment of a larger military school. Mr. Waters moved to extend the Captain a vote of thanks for his remarks, which mo- tion was adopted. REPORT OF AUDITING COMMITTEE. The Auditing Committee submitted the following report: We, the undersigned committee, authorized to examine the books and accounts of the Secretary and Treasurer, beg leave to submit the following report: We have carefully examined the vouchers authorized by the Executive Committee and the corresponding warrants issued by the President and Secretary of the different funds of the Board, as follows : DISTRIBUTION ANNUAL REPORT FUND. We find that vouchers Nos. 125-134, inclusive, for a total amount of $807.61, have been approved and corresponding war- rants issued and paid, leaving no balance in said fund. MONTHLY CROP REPORT FUND. We find that vouchers Nos. 357-409, inclusive, for a total amount of $757.08, have been approved -and corresponding war- rants issued, leaving a balance unappropriated in this fund of $68.31. In this fund warrants Nos. 402, 404 and 406, total amount of $34.62, have not yet been presented to the Treasurer for pay- ment, leaving a balance in the hands of the Treasurer of $102.93. When these warrants shall have been paid and cancelled the bal- ance in the hands of the Treasurer will agree with the balance undrawn as shown by the Secretary's account. EXPENSE OF MEMBERS' FUND. We find that vouchers Nos. 613-668, inclusive, have been ap- proved to the amount of $518.98, and corresponding warrants is- sued, leaving a balance of $281.02 in the hands of the Treasurer of the Board. FARMERS' INSTITUTE FUND. We find that vouchers Nos. 693-829, inclusive, have been ap- proved for a total amount of $5,781.16, and corresponding war- Minutes of Proceedings. 15 rants issued, leaving a balance unappropriated of $1,518.84. In this fund the Treasurer's statement shows that warrants Nos. 798, 802, 803, 804, 806, 807, 813, 814, 815, 816, 824 and 828, for a total amount of $819.57, have not yet been presented for payment, leav- ing a balance in the hands of the Treasurer of $2,338.41. When these warrants shall have been paid there will be an exact agree- ment between the books of the Secretary and Treasurer. OFFICE EXPENSE FUND. We find that vouchers Nos. 575-640, inclusive, for a total amount of $517.09, have been approved and corresponding war- rants issued and paid by the Treasurer, leaving a balance of $82.91 in the hands of the Treasurer, which shows an exact agreement between the books of the Secretary and Treasurer. STATE VETERINARY FUND. We find that vouchers Nos. 1719-1886, inclusive, for a total amount of $8,668.11, have been approved and corresponding war- rants issued, leaving a balance unappropriated of $1,331.89. In this fund the Treasurer's statement shov\^s that warrants Nos. 1872, 1873 and 1880, for a total amount of $50.80, have not yet been pre- sented for payment, leaving a balance in the hands of the Treas- urer of $1,382.69. When these warrants shall have been paid and cancelled, the accounts of the Secretary and Treasurer will agree. We find that the following warrants, which had been drawn by the President and Secretary, but had not been presented for payment at the last annual settlement, have been paid and can- celled by the Treasurer : Warrants Nos. 684, 686, 688 and 689, for total amount of $297.05, in the farmers' institute fund; warrants Nos. 1712 and 1713, for the amount of $134.85, on State Veteri- nary Fund. The above statement shows an exact agreement as to expendi- tures and balances between the books of the Secretary and Treas- urer, except the unpaid warrants, as above noted. All of which is respectfully submitted. W. T. Carrington, A. T. Nelson, W. B. MCROBERTS, Committee. Upon motion of Mr. Colman, the report was adopted. 16 Missouri Agricultural Report. ELECTION OF OFFICERS. The election of officers was the next order taken up, and the following officers were elected. In each case the election was by unanimous ballot. President — S. W. Hudson. Vice-President — Norman J. Colman. Secretary — Geo. B. Ellis. Assistant Secretary — J. B. Rector. Treasurer — W. A. Bright. The following were elected members of the Executive Com- mittee : S. W. Hudson, N. J. Colman, H. J. Waters, W. C. Hutchison, W. C. Howell, A. T. Nelson, M. B. Greensfelder. It was moved by Mr. Gentry that all power vested in the Board of Agriculture be and is hereby delegated to the Executive Committee, and that the said committee is hereby authorized to act for the Board at all times when the full board is not in ses- sion. Motion adopted. It was moved by Mr. Waters that it is the sense of this Board that the salary of the Secretary should be increased to at least $2,500, and further that this recommendation be referred to a Legislative Committee, who shall present the matter to the next Legislature. Motion carried. It was moved by Mr. Carrington that a Legislative Committee, consisting of five members, of which President Hudson shall be chairman, be appointed, to whom all matters of legislation shall be entrusted. Motion carried. The Chair announced the Legislative Committee, as follows: Messrs. McRoberts, Swink, Thompson and Nelson. It was moved by Mr. Waters, that a committee of two be ap- pointed to advise with the State Veterinarian on proposed veteri- nary legislation. Motion carried. The Chair appointed Messrs. Gentry and Greensfelder on the committee. The Board next discussed the future needs of the office, and Minutes of Proceedings. 17 made the following recommendations to the State Auditor as to amounts required for the next biennial period : Salary of Secretary Clerical hire Printing and distributing annual report. Farmers' Institutes Office expense Expense of members Orop reports and bulletins Veterinary service $5,000 2,400 10,000 12,000 1,500 1,800 2,500 20,000 The report of the Secretary relating to good roads was called up by Mr. Carrington, and after a thorough discussion, in which the sentiments expressed were unanimously in favor of the recom- mendations, it was ordered that the Secretary and Mr. Carring- ton be appointed a committee to present the views of the Board to Governor Folk, and request that he embody same in his message to the Legislature. There being no further business, Mr. Waters moved that the Board adjourn to meet in the Secretary's office on January 8th, 1907, to attend the meetings held under the auspices of the Board. Geo. B. Ellis, Secretary. S. W. Hudson, President. A-2 18 Missouri Agricultural Report. Report of Secretary. It is pleasing to note in this, the 42nd annual report to the State Board of Agriculture, the favorable contrast in a prospective with a retrospective view of agricultural conditions and possibili- ties. Only a few weeks ago the president of one of our great rail- way systems declared that "the prosperity of the nation depends upon a scientific and permanent agriculture." The President of the United States, in his annual message to Congress, declares that "the welfare of the tiller of the soil is vital to the welfare of the nation," and he also states that "the farmer represents a pecu- liarly high type of American citizenship." When the great fin- anciers and those high in the councils of our country give expres- sion to such pronounced views it augurs well for the farming classes. The past year has been a reasonably prosperous one for Mis- souri farmers. We have just harvested a good corn crop, amount- ing to 233,209,625 bushels, which was worth at the average farm price 37 cents per bushel — $85,317,199. We produced this year 34,799,169 bushels of wheat, which brought the farmers $22,898,- 179. The drought which prevailed throughout the northern and central parts of the State during the spring and early summer greatly reduced the yield of hay and oats, and both these crops were lighter than since the drought year of 1901. The average yield of hay was .7 ton per acre, which is .3 ton below the aver- age yield for the previous year. The average yield of oats was only 21 . 1 bushels, compared with an average yield of 27 . 6 bushels per acre the year previous. The deficiency in these crops, how- ever, is largely made good by an increased acreage of other for- age crops, such as alfalfa, cowpeas, millet and sorghum. These temporary droughts may be blessings in disguise, by introducing such legumes as alfalfa and cowpeas, both of which crops are steadily increasing in both acreage and yield. The total farm value of all crops for the year 1906 is $152,711,634, as compared with $157,501,572 for 1905. Report of Secretary. 19 THE WORK OF THE BOARD. At the last annual meeting you instructed the Executive Com- niittee to employ a competent assistant for the State Veterinarian. In compliance with this order, Dr. R. L. Allen, a graduate veteri- narian, was appointed to the position of Deputy State Veterinarian, and he entered upon his duties February 15, 1906. During the year 144 official visits have been made by the State Veterinarian and the deputies, not including the inspection of sheep scabies in Laclede county, and the fever tick inspection in the southern part of the State. The most common of the contagious diseases investigated was glanders among horses and mules. The ailment in 118 of the total of 144 visits was diagnosed glanders, and 160 animals were affected. This is an increase over the pre- vious year of 48 horses and mules condemned on account of this disease. In Kansas City there were 79 animals, which was an in- crease of eleven, and in all of the rest of the State there was an in- crease over the previous year of 37 animals. Most all of this in- crease is due to the disease appearing in St. Louis, where horses have been condemned under State authority, and in an outbreak caused by infection, which western horses brought into Knox county. FARMERS' INSTITUTES. The interest in the farmers' institute work has equaled, if not exceeded, that of the years before, but on account of most of the meetings being held during the time of the political campaign, the attendance was somewhat reduced. A number of meetings, how- ever, had from 100 to 500 in attendance, with unusual interest. Perhaps the banner meeting for the year in attendance and en- thusiasm was at Pleasant Hope, Polk county, where it is estimated there were 2,000 people in attendance, but on account of lack of room, perhaps not more than 500 or 600 heard the lectures. The plan inaugurated last year, of holding meetings in rural school houses, has been continued, and forty such meetings have been held this year, and a number of other meetings are planned for during the winter. The plan is to hold a meeting in connection with the school; the parents are invited and one of the institute lecturers gives a lesson on some agricultural topic, which is, of course, adapted to the children, while the address of the other speaker is on some more practical subject. In the evening a farmers' meet- ing is held and, as a rule, the house is full of enthusiastic farmers. 20 Missouri Agricultural Report. While this plan is more expensive per individual instructed, I be- lieve it is profitable, because of the number of farmers who hear the lectures who otherwise would not when the meetings are held only in larger places. In this connection, I would recommend that an increased ap- propriation for institute work be asked for, and if it is secured, that an institute assistant be employed for the entire time. Dur- ing the institute season he can attend the meetings, and during the rest of the year he can assist in the organization of the work and attend occasional meetings that are asked for continually throughout the year. GOOD ROADS. The question for a better system for road construction and maintenance in this State has been given a prominent place in cur institute work. At most of the regular meetings the subject has been taken up, and in addition several road conventions have been held and are now arranged for. Early last spring Mr. G. H. Lawson of Livingston county, representing the business men and farmers of that county, proposed to the Board of Agriculture that they would furnish the necessary expense for paying premiums and advertising a good roads' convention, to be held under the auspices of the State Board of Agriculture, to be held in Chilli- cothe during the first week in September. This proposition was accepted and the convention was held, with an attendance of 200 regularly appointed delegates from other counties and a local at- tendance estimated at 4,000 to 5,000 people. During the conven- tion three miles of improved dirt road were constructed in com- petition for a prize of $200.00, One of these roads was built by the citizens of Livingston county, another mile by the Smith Manu- facturing Company, and the third by the Austin-Western Manu- facturing Company ; the first prize being awarded to a mile of road improved by the Austin- Western Company, which was over a clay gumbo bottom. For the best display of road machinery the award was a tie, and the premium divided between the Smith Manufac- turing Company and the Austin- Western Manufacturing Company. At the conclusion of the convention the following resolutions were unanimously adopted: First. We favor the creation by the next General Assembly of the office of State Highway Engineer, under the jurisdiction of the State Board of Agriculture, to co-operate with the local officers in the furtherance of good roads. Report of Treasurer. 21 Second. To provide an adequate number of trained men for the supervision of road construction in the various localities of this State, we recommend the immediate establishment of a course in road engineering and the equipment of a suitable laboratory for the testing of road materials at the State University at Colum- bia. Third. All the people of the State being interested in and benefitted by a better system of highways, State aid should be ex- tended to the various counties for the construction and improve- ments of the public roads, such State aid being provided from new sources of revenue other than those now existing or in the treas- ury. Fourth. Redress from the present distressing situation in road maintenance and construction can only come through judicial changes in our State Constitution, and such changes being possible more quickly and more surely by the adoption of a new Constitu- tion covering adequate sources of revenue than by any amendment to the present Constitution, we, therefore, strongly urge upon the Legislature the calling of a constitutional convention at the ear- liest possible moment. Fifth. We strongly endorse the drag as the most effective and practical method of maintaining dirts roads, and would suggest that some law be enacted whereby its more general employment for this purpose may be effected. Continuing this campaign, I have asked the co-operation of the commercial clubs and county courts with our Board in hold- ing district road conventions, and we have arranged for the follow- ing meetings under this co-operation : Maryville, December 19 ; Mo- berly, December 20; Kirksville, December 21; Mexico, Decembei 22; Lamar, December 26; Harrisonville, December 27, and Se dalia, December 28. We have also arranged to co-operate with the county court organizations of the State to hold a State good roads' convention January 15 and 16 in Jefferson City. It is hoped by this agitation to crystallize public sentiment in favoi of some broad, progressive system that will bring about better roads for the State, particularly to put road building and main- tenance in the hands of an organized department of trained men, and furthermore, to provide for State aid. CORN IMPROVEMENT AND SOIL FERTILITY. Two other subjects, which have been presented at practically all of our institute meetings, are corn improvement and soil fer- 22 Miaaouri Ayriculiural Report. tility. The great interest in the improvement of the corn crop — which represents practically 50 per cent of the value of all crops produced on the farm — I think, justifies the attention we have given this subject. This subject was first introduced in the State four years ago, and the great improvement in the quality of the corn exhibited at the local shows as well as at our State meetings has been marvelous. A leading seed com grower of Illinois stated at our State institute last year that no state had made greater pro- gress during the time than had Missouri. It is reasonable to sup- pose that the work is accomplishing something in the way of in- creasing the yield of corn. The statistics will show that during the last five years the State has produced a greater average yield per acre than for any five years during the history of the State. Of no less interest than the subject of corn improvement is the subject of soil fertility. The success of all our farm operations rests upon this important subject. Perhaps added interest has been given the subject because of the work recently taken up by the Agricultural College in inaugurating a soil survey of the State, and following this up with experiments in the use of fertilizers and in different rotations and the effects of drainage. I think it v/ill be well for the Board to make a very active effort in assist- ing the Department of Agronomy in the Agricultural College in obtaining an appropriation of not less than $25,000 to continue the soil survey work and experimental plots during the next two years. AGRICULTURAL EDUCATION. Looking to the future welfare of the State, and particularly to the welfare of the farmers, I wish to call your attention to what I consider a pressing need for the education of the farmer boys and girls. Let me ask, what are the present opportunities for the farmer boy to obtain an agricultural training? In this State, af- ter he graduates from the rural school, he must then leave home and parental oversight and go to some town or city for four years before he is qualified to enter the State Agricultural College; then four years more in Columbia before he graduates from the col- lege course — eight years away from the farm and away from the influence of home. However desirable it may be for the average farm boy to obtain a complete four years' agricultural course, the actual conditions prove to us that but a very small per cent of them avail themselves of the opportunity. If you will pardon me for referring again to the message of the President of the United Report of Secretary. 23 States to Congress, I will quote from his message as follows: "In all education we should widen our aims. It is a good thing to pro- duce a certain number of trained scholars and students; but the education superintended by the State must seek rather to pro- duce a hundred good citizens than merely one scholar, and it must be turned now and then from the class book to the study of the great book of nature itself." You will remember that I discussed this subject in my last annual report, and I think the importance of the question justifies mention of it now. We have in this State about 300,000 farm homes; from the best estimate I can make, there are around 60,000 young farmers between the ages of 18 and 22 years. If the State could provide schools, where a prac- tical farm course continuing through two or three years could be established, it would be of inestimable value to these young farm- ers and afford them an opportunity to obtain an education and training that would be invaluable in their farm work. The best way to establish these schools is a question for deep thought and consideration. I have suggested two plans: One — the establish- ing of country or district agricultural schools, and the other the establishing of a farm school in connection with the State Univer- sity. I believe the importance of this question would justify the appointment of a special committee to urge this matter upon the Board of Curators and upon the next Legislature. Respectfully, Geo. B. Ellis. Secretary. 24 Missouri Agricultural Report. SECRETARY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENT. To the Board of Agriculture : I beg leave to submit the following exhibit of the financial transactions of the Board for the year beginning December 20, 1905, and ending December 18, 1906, which shows the balances on hand at the beginning of the year, the requisitions drawn on the State Auditor, the warrants drawn on W. A. Bright, Treasurer of the Board, the balances in the Treasury of the Board, and the balances in the different funds remaining in the State Treasury : DISTRIBUTION OF ANNUAL REPORT FUND. Date. War. No. Name. Dr. Cr 1906 May 1 . . . July 2... Aug ^■ept. Dec. 2. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 17. 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 To requisition By S. H. Elkins S. H. Elkins American Express Co. . Pacific Express Co ... . S. H. Elkins M., K. &T. R. R. Co.. To requisition By American Express Co. Pacific Express Co. . . . S. H. Elkins M.. K. & T. R. R. Co. . To requisition To overdraft $300 00 300 00 207 51 10 $807 61 $10 00 140 00 63 33 106 73 168 00 65 58 83 87 141 30 21 69 7 11 $807 61 MONTHLY CROP REPORT FUND. Date. 1905. Dec. 20 . . " 20.. 1906. Jan. 12. . " 12.. Feb. Mar 3. 3. 3. 3. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. War. No. 357 358 359 359a 360 361 362 363 364 365 366 367 368 Name To balance By H. H. Banks. S. H. Elkins W, A. Bright, transfer of balance from old to newtreasurer By E. A. Cockefair S. H. Elkins American Express Co Columbia Typewriter Exchange. . . . S. H. Elkins L. F. Childers Columbia Statesman National Paper Co M., K. & T. R. R. Co S. H. Elkins To requisition Dr. $125 39 100 00 Cr. $7 50 2 87 117 89 4 30 14 00 2 25 00 75 40 00 10 75 6 25 3 30 15 00 Report of Secretary. 25 MONTHLY CROP REPORT FUND— Continued. Date, War. No Name. Dr. Cr. May June 1906. April 4 . " 4. " 4. " 4. " 4. " 4. " 4. 1. 1. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 2. 2. 2. 2. 4. 4. 4. 4. July Aug. Nov. Dec. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 2. " 2. " 2. " 2. " 2. Oct. 10. Sept. Oct. 1. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 18. 369 370 371 372 373 374 375 376 377 378 379 380 381 382 383 384 385 386 387 388 389 390 391 392 393 394 395 396 397 39S 399 400 401 402 403 404 405 406 407 408 409 By S. H. Elkins Wabash R. R. Co National Paper Co L. F. Childers S. H. Elkins S. H. Elkins To requisition By L. F. Childers Columbia Statesman By National Paper Co Smith Premier Typewriter Co S. H. Elkins S. H. Elkins L. F. Childers Columbia Statesman To requisition By L. F. Childers M., K. &T. R. R. Co S. H. Elkins S. H. Elkins W. A. Bright S. H. Elkins L. F. Childers Columbia Statesman S. H. Elkins To requisition By Columbia Daily Tribune Columbia Statesman L. F. Childers To requisition By S. H. Elkins Smith Premier Typewriter Co.. . L. F. Childers S. H. Elkins S. H. Elkins Columbia Statesman S. H. Elkins Paul Hulett Eloise Kneisley W. H. Marr Scurlock Transfer Co S. H. Elkins Columbia Statesman Columbia Typewriter Exchange. W. A. Bright To requisition By balance $200 00 ICO 00 100 00 100 00 100 00 $825 39 $19 00 2 49 45 37 40 00 2 65 22 00 45 00 17 75 26 75 2 60 10 00 10 41 40 00 6 50 42 00 1 69 15 00 8 20 5 00 2 2-) 40 00 12 50 15 00 6 50 9 50 40 00 10 00 4 25 40 00 15 00 3 00 2 25 30 00 1 50 2 40 3 12 1 00 30 00 6 00 1 48 5 00 68 31 $825 39 EXPENSE OF MEMBERS FUND. Date. War. No. 1 Name. Dr. Cr. 1905. Dec 19 To balance $396 25 " 20 613 614 615 616 Rv M B rjrppnsfpldpr .... $26 60 " 20 E E Swink 17 10 " 90 C F Afflick 13 50 " 20 N. J. Colman 13 00 26 Mindouri Agricultural Report EXPENSE OF MEMBERS FUND— Continued. Date. Dec. 20 . , ,. 20... " 20... " 20... " 20... 1906. Jan. 12. . . " 12... " 12... " 12... " 12... " 12... " 12... " 12... " 12... " 12... 12. 12. 12. 3. 3. 3. 3. 6. 6. 6. Feb. Mar. Aug. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. April 4. " 4. " 4. " 4. June 6 . " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 9. 2. 10. 10. 10. 10 10. 4. 18. Oct. Dec. War. No. 617 618 619 620 621 622 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 634 635 636 637 638 639 640 641 642 643 644 645 646 647 648 649 650 651 652 653 654 655 656 657 658 659 660 661 662 663 664 665 666 667 668 Name, S. H. Prather. . . . W. T. Carrington . W. C. Howell W. C. Hutchison. S. W. Hudson. . .. John Deerwester F. C. Hayman A M. Thompson J. J. McNatt E. E. SwinK W. C. Howell Geo. B. Ellis C. F. Afflick A. T. Nelson W. A. Bright (transfer of funds to new treasurer) ($265 13) W. C. Hutchison S. W. Hudson To requisition By S, W. Hudson, H. J. Waters Geo. B. ElUs W. C. Hutchison N. J. Colman S. W. Hudson W. C. Howell W. C. Hutchison S. H. Prather Geo. B. Ellis To requisition By W. C. Hutchison S. W. Hudson C. F.' Afflick Geo. B. ElUs M. B. Greensfelder S. W. Hudson W. C. Hutchison W. C. HoweU Geo. B. Ellis S. W. Hudson M. B. Greensfelder W. C. Hutchison W. C. Howell Geo. B. Ellis S. H. Prather W. C. Howell W. C. Hutchison S. W. Hudson H. J. Waters Geo. B. Ellis To requisition By N. J. Colman H. J. Waters Geo. B. Ellis S. W. Hudson W. C. Hutchison To requisition To requisition By balance Dr. S200 00 100 00 200 00 100 00 200 00 SI, 196 25 Cr. $23 82 6 05 14 90 15 25 15 80 32 00 25 25 31 20 28 60 16 85 18 00 5 30 13 50 57 00 18 90 13 40 6 20 16 80 16 30 15 70 16 00 2 75 17 50 15 70 16 00 14 75 15 00 2 60 18 50 14 80 8 90 8 75 19 45 12 60 5 30 9 00 28 10 4 00 21 50 14 31 22 00 21 15 7 00 21 50 13 00 19 70 21 00 17 30 27 20 2 50 16 45 281 02 $1,196 25 Report of Secretary. 27 FARMERS' INSTITUTE FUND. Date. 1905. Dec. 19 . . " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20. . " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. 1906. Jan. 12.. " 12.. " 12.. " 12.. " 12.. " 12.. " 12.. " 12.. " 12. . " 12.. " 12.. " 12.. " 12.. " 12.. 3. . 3.. 3.. 3.. 3.. 3.. 3.. 3.. 3.. 6.. 6. , 6., 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 6. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. 4. War. No. Feb. Mar. April 693 694 695 696 697 698 699 700 701 702 703 704 705 706 707 708 709 710 711 712 713 714 715 716 717 718 719 720 721 722 723 724 725 726 727 728 729 730 731 732 733 734 735 736 737 738 739 740 741 742 743 744 745 746 747 Name. Dr. To balance By J. C. Whitten J. W. Connaway C. D. Lyon C. M. Long S. M. Jordan American Express Co. G. W. Waters H. J. Waters P. Schweitzer H. H. Banks F. L. Kelso ■. .. S. H. Elkins P. E. Crabtree Columbia Statesman. H. P. Mason To requisition $369 51 Cr. 1,000 00 By Jos. E. Wing F. H. King C. H. Eckles G. W. WilUams W. H. Chandler Columbia Printing Co Geo. B. ElUs Pacific Express Co Hulett Bros J. B. Rector J. H. Pettit J. D. Funk W. A. Bright (transfer from old to new treasurer) ($532.65) To requisition By Geo. B. ElUs Smith Premier Typewriter Co E. E. Laughlin C. E. Thorne C. O. Raine C. M. Long W. H. Chandler Lewis W. Moore To requisition By C. O. Raine Columbia Statesman W. H. Chandler C. M. Long Geo. W. WilUams J. W. Connaway E. E. Laughlin Geo. B. Ellis R. E. Hyslop Binner Wells Co Barnes-Crosby Co S. H. Elkins W. H. Chandler Geo. B. Ellis G. W. Williams Smith Premier Typewriter Co American Express Co P. E. Crabtree E. A. Grantham To requisition 500 00 500 00 600 00 $17 75 38 33 103 10 48 18 42 32 9 02 253 87 18 19 18 16 37 50 20 00 5 00 67 44 8 00 150 00 40 40 42 52 8 40 81 54 89 55 34 00 50 00 9 53 3 00 15 00 25 56 33 00 50 00 6 65 17 05 29 40 68 12 74 62 50 00 3 40 70 35 26 25 42 25 78 33 84 91 25 20 85 85 50 00 97 96 2 07 20 94 3 60 51 80 50 50 42 83 15 30 6 81 30 68 3 90 28 Missouri Agricultural Report. FARMERS' INSTITUTE FUND.— Continued. Date. War. No. Name. Dr. Cr. May July Aug. 1906. 4.. " 4. . June 6. . " 6. . " 6. . " 6. . " 6. . 2. . 2.. 2. . 4. . 4.. 4.. 4. . 4.. 4.. 4.. 4.. 4. . 4.. 2 . " 2. . " 2 " 2.. " 2.. " 2.. " 2. . " 2. . " 2 . " 10.. " 10.. " 10.. " 10.. " 2.. " 10.. " 10.. " 10.. Nov. Sept, Oct. Dec. 748 749 750 751 752 753 754 755 756 757 758 759 760 761 762 763 764 765 766 767 768 769 770 771 772 773 774 775 776 777 778 779 780 781 782 783 784 785 786 787 788 789 790 791 792 793 794 795 796 797 798 799 800 801 802 803 804 805 800 By Geo. B. Ellis P. E. Crabtree By Geo. B. Ellis National Paper Co S. H. Elkins M. F. Miller American Express Co R. E. Hyslop Geo. B. Ellis S. H. Elkins Geo. B. Ellis F. P. Spalding W. A. Bright S. H. Elkins Columbia Statesman S. H. Elkins To requisition By E. W. Stephens Pub. Co. Geo. B. Ellis J. B. Rector Geo. B. Ellis S. H. Elkins R. W. Clothier The IJberal Enterprise . . . F. P. Spalding Columbia Printing Co. . . . S. H. Elkins S. H. Elkms P. E. Crabtree Columbia Tribune S. M. Jordan E. A. Trowbridge Western Union To requisition By Piedmont Banner D. P. Leonard E. E. Laughlin L. F. Childers D. P. .4.shburn E. B. Forbes C. D. Lyon W. L. Howard F. B. Mumford P. E. Crabtree D. Ward King H. Krusekopf S. H. Elkins Columbia Telephone Co. . . Pacific Express Co American Express Co S. H. Elkins Geo. B. Ellis C. M. Lewelling H. J. Waters Henry Steinmesch To re(iuisition By A. E. Grantham D. P. Ashburn C. M. Lewelling E. E. Laughlin S. M. Jordan J. W. Waller $500 00 1,000 00 1,000 00 S54 08 28 57 55 30 21 25 15 00 26 27 3 99 50 00 65 91 5 50 50 00 3 15 20 00 5 00 7 00 30 00 12 50 50 00 31 62 50 00 10 00 56 49 3 25 9 17 n 50 11 00 20 00 84 76 2 50 50 14 17 00 1 40 2 00 25 15 59 72 67 81 119 35 26 06 108 60 64 19 35 40 96 70 115 76 8 30 8 40 11 70 75 1 25 70 00 50 00 167 60 37 50 50 00 47 70 116 96 81 30 36 06 205 SS SO 00 Report of Secretary. 29 FARMERS' INSTITUTE FUND— Continued. Date. War. No. Name. Dr. Cr. 1906. Dec. 4 807 808 809 810 811 812 813 814 815 816 817 818 819 820 821 822 823 824 825 826 827 828 829 T. E. Quisenberry $200 00 4 M. F. Miller 200 00 4 W. A. Bright 20 00 " 4 By Geo. B. Ellis 62 50 4 Cloud & Savage 1 25 " 4 . C. D. Lyon 98 75 4 J. B. Tiffany 1 62 4 Bates County Democrat 1 50 4 Butler Weekly Times 1 50 4 P. E. Crabtree 61 92 4 Western Union Co 10 47 4 Smith Premier Co 12 35 4 Columbia Printing Co 25 00 4 C. F. Marbut 24 75 4 .... Oilman & Dorsey 9 00 4 L. F. Childers 82 29 4 G. W. Williams .... 126 05 4 F. B. Mumford 31 12 4 C. H. Eckles 22 09 4 J. C. Whitten 51 70 4 D. Ward King 147 40 4 S. H. Elkins 40 00 4 C. C. Lockwood 6 90 4 To requisition 2,300 00 " 18 By balance 1,518 84 $7,669 51 $7,669 51 OFFICE EXPENSE FUND. Date. War. No. Name. Dr. Cr. 1905. Dec. 19 To balance $103 33 " 20 575 576 677 578 579 580 581 Bv Columbia Tvnewriter Exchange. . $3 00 " 20 Smith Premier Typewriter Co. . . . 12 60 1906. Jan. 12 Parker Furniture Co. . . , 31 50 " 12 J. R. Ellis 16 05 " 12 W. E. Harshe . . 2 30 " 12 J. B. Reccor. . . 8 35 " 12 " 12 W. A. Bright (transfer from old to new treasurer, $87.73) To requisition 100 00 Feb 3 582 583 584 585 586 587 588 589 590 591 592 593 594 595 596 Bv J. B. Rector 10 00 3 J. R. Ellis 17 11 Mar. 6 J. B. Rector 10 00 6 Schoolev Stationerv Co 1 79 6 J. R. Ellis 15 64 6 . . . . R. L. Jenkins 1 25 6 . . . . W. E. Harshe 2 95 Ai)ril 4 4 . J. R. Ellis 16 35 J. B. Rector 10 00 4 Barnes-Crosby Co 3 15 Mav 1 National Paper Co 10 68 "1 J. B. Rector 10 00 1 J. R. Ellis 16 30 "1 Columbia Statesman 3 00 1 Parker Furniture Co 40 00 " 1 To requisition 100 00 ^0 Missouri Agricultural Report. OFFICE EXPENSE FUND— Continued Date. War. No. Name. Dr. Cr. 1906. June 6 597 598 599 600 601 602 603 604 By B. W. Tillman $9 25 " 6 G. T. Tooms 5 00 •' 6 J. B. Rector 10 00 •■ 6 M., K. AT. R. R. Co 2 45 " 6 J. R. Ellis 4 00 " 6 National Paper Co 27 50 '■ 6 Wabash R. R. Co 2 44 6 Columbia Statesman 2 50 " G To requisition . $100 00 July 2 605 606 607 608 609 610 611 By Kampmeyer & Warner 4 40 " 2 Barnes-Crosby Co 8 63 " 2 Barnes-Crosby Co 25 58 " 2 C. W. Prier 10 00 2 G. T. Tooms 5 00 •' 2 J. B. Rector 10 00 " 2 National Paper Co 8 02 2 To requisition . . 100 00 Aug. 4 612 613 614 615 616 617 618 619 620 621 622 ■ 623 624 625 626 627 628 629 630 631 632 633 By W. E. Harshe 4 05 '• 4 Columbia Printing Co 7 50 " 4 C. W. Prier 10 00 " 4 G. T. Tooms >. . 5 00 " 4 J. B. Rector - 10 00 4 Nifong Mfg. Co 4 75 Sept. 4 Smith Premier Co 3 00 " 4 National Paper Co 9 IS •• 4 G. T. Tooms 6 00 4 J. B. Rector 10 00 4 Lemuel Crouch 12 48 4 W. E. Harshe 6 75 Oct. 2 J. B. Rector 10 00 2 G. T. Tooms 5 00 " 2 Jas. L. Hall 3 75 2 Barnes-Crosby Co 1 95 •' 2 " 2 M.. K. & T. R. R Pacific Express Co 1 27 80 2 Strawn & Holland D. G. Co 2 25 2 Columbia Typewriter Exchange. . . . 35 22 2 J. R. Ellis 11 12 " 10 W. E. Harshe 2 20 " 2 To requisition 100 00 Nov. 1 634 635 636 By J. B. Rector 18 35 1 J. R. Ellis 17 37 " 1 F. M. Joy 3 87 1 To requisition 100 GO Dec. 4 637 638 639 640 By T. D. Murphy 1 25 " 4 Alex Stewart 6 50 " 4 J. R. Ellis 16 67 " 4 J. B. Rector 18 35 " 18 By balance 82 91 $703 33 $703 33 Report of Secretary. ^1 STATE VETERINARY FUND, Date. War. No. Name. Dr. Cr 1905. Dec. 19 . . " 20.. " 20.. " 20.. " 20. . " 20.. " 20. « " 20.. " 20. . •■ 20. . " 20.. " 20.. 1906. Jan. 12. . " 12.. " 12.. ■• 12.. " 12.. " 12.. " 12.. '■ 12.. " 12.. Feb. 12. 3. " 3. " 3. " 3. " 3. " 3. " 3. •' 3. " 3. ■' 3. " 3. Mar» 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. '• 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. " 6. AptU 4. " 4. " 4. " 4. • 4. " 4. " 4. " 4. 1719 1720 1721 1722 1723 1724 1725 1726 1727 1728 1729 1730 1731 1732 1733 1734 1735 1736 1737 1738 To balance By H. H. Banks Columbia Telephone Co S. H. Elkins Western Union Telegraph Co. Horace Bradley R. B. Love H. V. Goode I. H. Collier J. W. Connaway L. D. Brown H. M. McConnell $609 66 1739 1740 1741 1742 1743 1744 1745 1746 1747 1748 1749 1750 1751 1752 1753 1754 1755 1756 1757 1758 1759 1760 1761 1762 1763 1764 1765 1766 1767 1768 1769 1770 1771 1772 1773 1774 R. C. Moore D. F. Luckey Stanley Smith I. H. Collier Horace Bradley H. V. Goode D. F. Luckey N. K. Hall W. A. Bright (transfer from old to new treasurer $349.15) To requisition By L. D. Brown J. W. Connaway Western Union Telegraph Co R. C. Moore N. K. Hall R. P. Poage Stanley Smith D. F. Luckey F. W. O'Brien Horace Bradley To requisition By J. H. Slater Stanley Smith T. E. White R. P. Poage H. H. Wolf Samuel Sheldon Pacific Express Co F. W. O'Brien H' V. Goode R. C. Moore N. K. Hall H. V. Goode Columbia Statesman S. H. Elkins W. R. Jenkins L. D. Brown R. L. Allen D. F. Luckey To requisition .- By R. L. Allen Columbia Telephone Co N. K. Hall Western Union Telegraph R. C. Moore Jas. Cullison L. D. Brown F. W. O'Brien $1,000 00 500 00 500 00 $55 00 9 60 21 20 4 23 15 10 27 50 21 75 101 25 8 38 18 60 4 50 36 00 192 74 27 85 70 25 19 55 12 60 101 02 50 00 37 45 29 88 3 61 49 10 60 00 48 10 44 35 228 55 61 03 20 05 9 33 6 80 9 15 56 50 9 00 28 00 4 84 12 50 14 60 20 00 50 00 41 15 6 00 42 00 2 50 70 88 91 80 174 70 173 38 10 10 50 00 3 29 15 00 24 98 64 86 16 20 32 Missouri Agricultural Report. STATE VETERINARY FUND— Continued. Date. War. No. Name. Dr. Cr. 1906. April 4. . " 4. May 1. " 1.. 1. " ].. 1. . " 1.. " ].. " 1. . June 6.. " 6.. " 6. . " tt. . " 6. 6. . " 6. . B. . " 6. . B. . " 6. . " 6 . fi. . " 6. . '• 6 . " 0.. " 6. . 6. . " 6. . " 6. . " 6.. " 6 . " 6. . July 2.. 2 . *• 2. . " 2. . •' 2.. " 2. •' 2.. " 2. . " 2. . 4. . 4.. 4.. 4.. 4.. 4. . 4. . 4.. 4., 4., 4.. 4. , 4. 4. 4. 4. 4 4. 4. Aug. 1775 1776 1777 1778 1779 1780 17S1 1782 1788 1784 1785 1786 1787 17S8 17S9 1790 1791 1792 1703 1794 1795 1796 1797 1798 1799 1800 1801 1802 1803 1804 1805 IS06 1807 1808 1809 1810 1811 1812 1818 1814 1815 1816 1817 1818 1819 1820 1821 1822 1S23 1824 1825 1826 1827 1S28 1829 1830 i»;;i 1832 S. H. Elkins D. F. Luclcey To requisition By Samuel Slieldon N. K. Hall By R. L. Allen L. D. Brown J. H. Slater F. W. O'Brien S. H. Elkins D. F. Luckey J. W. Connavvay Western Union H. F. Bopttner Stanley Smith R. V. Moore H. V. Goode H. H. Wolf Columbia Telep'iono v"o V. K. Hall D. F. Luckey S. H. Elkins W. .1. Ward E. M. Hendy R. I.. Allen T. E. Wliite Pacific Express Co Western Union Telegraph Co. Horace Bradiey Stanley Smith Columbia Statesman L. D. Brown James Cullison To requisition By D. F. Luckey Western Union L. O. Brown . . Jas. Cullison R. L. Allen J. H. Slater R. C. Moore N. K. Hall To requisition By Eloise Kneisley N. K. Hall W. F. Berry R. B. Love W. A. Bright Stanley Smith Horace Bradley Western Union J. W. Connaway R. L. Allen 'lilley & Hatton R. C. Moore S. H. Elkins .1. K. Slater SI, 000 00 1,000 00 Horace Bradley. F. W. O'Brien.. S. Sheldon D. F. Luckey... To requisition 1,000 00 $15 00 192 82 62 03 60 00 186 71 18 84 7 34 16 55 14 00 186 65 17 44 1 33 34 22 9 30 97 50 29 95 16 00 7 00 .50 00 284 75 5 50 10 00 17 25 198 32 6 85 7 04 1 94 19 45 17 35 2 00 66 20 8 88 190 22 2 21 63 27 2fi 32 205 35 19 63 10 00 50 00 Ifi 20 3 85 9 90 IS 03 26 00 16 40 36 66 1 40 17 05 125 00 « 00 40 00 18 00 8 53 22 90 44 82 21 26 205 99 1,000 00 Report of Secretary. 33 STATE VETERINARY FUND— Contiaued. Date. War. No. Name. Dr. Cr. 1906. Sept 4 " £. 1833 1834 1835 1836 1837 1838 1839 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 1845 1846 1847 1848 1849 1850 1851 1852 1853 1854 By Eloise Kneisley $8 77 R. L Allen 276 65 4 Columbia Statesman 5 50 4 H. V. Goode 32 77 4 Columbia Tribune 3 00 4 Columbia Telephone Co 7 95 4 R. C. Moore 65 95 4 . . . . B. H. Hawkins 40 00 4 . . . . D. F. Lurkey.. 227 30 " 4 By Western Uuion $1 27 4 S. H. Elkins 36 00 4 E. Brainerd 8 25 4 S. H. Elkins 21 20 O'i. 2 B. H. Ha7/kiLS ... 40 00 2 S. H. Elkins 10 00 2 Columbia Typewriter Ex 42 88 2 Horace Bradley 18 45 2 S. H. Elkins . 3 00 " 2 L. D. Brown 48 16 2 H. F. Boettner 49 IS • t 4> D. F. Luckey 233 71 2 R. C. Moore 58 70 2 To requisiton $1,000 00 " 10... . 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1S60 1861 1862 1863 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 Bv Jas. Cullison . . . ... 48 62 '• 10 R. B. I,ove 107 15 ■• 10 R. L. Allen 218 60 " 10 Mabel Bailey 4 37 " 10 Pacific Express Co 12 18 Nov. 1 D. F. Luckey.. . 205 48 1 Horace Bradley . .... 6 22 1 Eloise Kneisley 1 87 1 B. H. Hawkins 40 00 1 S. H. Elkins 7 00 1 R. C. Moore 30 00 1 S. H. Elkins 45 00 1 F. W. O'Brien 16 64 1 H. V. Goode 22 85 1 R. L. Allen 195 00 ] To requisition 1,000 00 Dec. 4 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 18S6 Bv R. L. \Ilen 170 55 4 Jas. Cullison 209 93 4 Stanley Smith 16 90 4 R. C. Moore 17 50 4 S. Sheldon 00 36 4 Parker Furniture Co 47 75 4 R. B. Love 135 63 4. . Jas. Cullison. ... 140 74 4. . . Strawn-Holland D, G. Co 27 60 4 . . . Pacific Express Co 4 68 4 . . . W. F. Berry.. . . 16 40 4. . D. F. Luckey 264 28 4 . Horace Bradley 26 05 4 F. I. Vandeventer 6 25 4 . S H. Elkins ... 2 00 4 . . . W. A. Bright. 25 00 4 . . B. H. Hawkins 40 00 " 4 To requisition . . 1 , 400 00 " 18 . Ev Balance . . 1,33189 $10,009 66 S10.009 *)6 A-S 34 Missouri Agricultural Report. SUMMARY OF SECRETARY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENT. Printing and Distributing Annual Report Fund. Date. Dr. Cr. December 19, 1905.. . December 19, 1906.. . December 19, 1905, to December 18, 1906 December 18, 1906. . To balance in State Treasury To balance in Treasury Board of Agriculture. . By warrants drawn on Treasurer Board ol Agri- culture By balance in State Treasury By overdraft Treasurer Board of Agriculture. . J!3,937 79 0,000 00 $3,937 79 $^07 61 3,130 OS .10 13,937 79 Monthly Crop Report Fund. December 19, 1905.. . December 19, 1905.. . December 19, 1905. to December 18, 1906. December 18, 1906. . . December 18, 1906.. . December 18, 1906. . . To balance in State Treasury To balance in Treasury Board of Agriculture. . By warrants drawn on Treasurer Board of Agri- culture By amount paid for printing monthly bulletins, account with printing commission By balance Treasury Board of Agriculture. . By balance State Treasury $1,200 00 125 39 $1,325 39 %7r, 08 286 21 68 31 213 79 $1,325 39 Expense of Members Fund. December 19, 1905.. . December 19, 1905.. . December 19 1905, to December 18 1906 December 18, 1906. . . To balance in State Treasury To balance Treasury Board of Agriculture. . . . By warrants drawn on Treasurer Board of Agriculture By balance in Treasury Board of Agriculture $800 00 396 25 $1,196 25 $915 23 281 02 $1,196 25 Farmers' Institute Fund. December 19, 1905.. . December 19, 1905. . . December 19, 1905, to December 18, 1906 December 18, 1906. . . To balance in State Treasury To balance T reasury Board of Agriculture . . . By warrants drawn on Treasurer Board of Agriculture By balance Treasury Board of Agriculture. $7,300 00 369 51 $7,669 51 $6,150 67 1,518 84 $7,669 51 Report of Secretary. 35 Office Expense Fund. Date. Dr. Cx. December 19, 1905. . . To balance State Treasury $600 00 103 33 December 19, 1905. . . Decemoer 19, 1905 to December 18, 1906. To balance Treasury Board of Agriculture .... By warrants drawn on Treasurer Board of Agriculture .....' $620 42 December 18 1906. . . By balance Treasury Board of Agriculture. . . 82 91 $703 33 $703 33 State Veterinary Fund. December 19, 1905.. . December 19. 1905.. December 19, 1905 to December 18, 1906 December 18, 1906.. December 18, 1906.. To balance State Treasury To balance Treasur5' Board of Agriculture. . . . By warrants drawn on treasurer Board of Agriculture By balance Treasury Board of Agriculture. . By balance State Treasury $10,200 00 609 66 58,677 77 1,331 S9 800 00 $10,809 66 $10,809 66 The above report is a true copy of the records of this office. Geo. B. Ellis, Secretary. 36 Missouri Agricultural Report. Treasurer's Report. To the State Board of Agriculture j I, W. A. Bright, Treasurer of the Board of Agriculture, sub- mit the following report of the amount of money received from H. H. Banks, your former treasurer, and from the State Treasurer, including balances, and the amounts paid out on warrants pre- sented against the several funds of the Board of Agriculture, and the balances now on hand, all for the year ending December 17, 1906: Printing of Annual Report. Date. Dr. Cr. May 8 To State warrant $300 00 300 00 207 51 10 August 8 . . . State warrant September 13 state warrant December 17 Overdraft December 17 By warrants paid and cancelled 3807 61 $807 61 $807 61 Monthly Crop Report. January 13 To funds transferred from former Treasurer .... State warrant $117 89 100 00 200 00 100 00 100 00 100 00 100 00 March 9 April 6 State warrant State warrant June 11 .... August S State warrant September 13 State warrant December 11 State warrant December 17 Bv warrants paid and cancelled $714 96 December 17 balance •. . . 102 93 $817 89 $817 80 Expense of Members' Fund. January 13 To funds transferred from former Treasurer. . . State warrant $265 13 200 00 100 00 200 00 100 00 200 00 January 18 March 9 State warrant August 17 State warrant October 20 State warrant December 11 State warrant December 17 By warrants paid and cancelled $784 11 December 17 balance 281 02 $1,066 13 $1,065 13 Reiyort of Treasurer. 37 Farmers' Institute Fund. Date. Dr. Cr. January 13. . January 18. . February 8. . April 6 August 8 . . . October S. . . November 8. December 11 December 17 December 17 To funds transferred from former Treasurer State warrant State warrant -. State warrant State warrant State warrant State warrant State warrant By warrants paid and cancelled balance $532 65 500 00 500 00 500 00 500 00 1,000 00 1,000 00 2,300 00 2,338 41 $6,832 65 $4,494 24 $6,832 65 Offlce Expense Fund. January 13. . January 18. . May 8 June 11 ... . July 11 October 8... November 8. December 17 December 17 To funds transferred from former Treasurer . . . State warrant $87 100 100 100 100 100 100 73 00 00 00 00 00 00 State warrrant State warrant State warrant _ State warrant State warrant By warrants paid and cancelled. ... $004 82 balance 82 91 $687 73 $687 73 State Veterinary Fund. January 13. . January 18. . February 8 . . March 9 April 6 June 9 July 11 August 8 . . . October 8. . . November 8. November 11 December 17 December 17 To funds transferred from former Treasurer. State warrant State warrant State warrant State warrant State warrant State warrant State warrant State warrant • State warrant State warrant By warrants paid and caiuelled balance $349 15 1,000 00 500 00 500 00 1,000 00 1,000 00 1,000 00 1,000 00 1,000 00 1,000 00 1,400 00 749 15 $8,366 46 1,382 69 $9,749 15 Respectfully submitted, W. A. Bright, Treasurer. 38 Missouri Agricultural Report. Report of State Veterinarian. Mr. President and Gentlemen of the Board of Agriculture: With the exception of a wide-spread outbreak of sheep scabies in Laclede county and Texas fever in parts of Jasper, Newton and McDonald counties, the control work by the Veterinary Depart- ment has been about the same during 1906 as in former years. Aside from attending to outbreaks of glanders and other diseases which require more or less attention every year in all of the states, this department has undertaken to completely stamp out sheep scabies and Texas fever, and an unusual number of tuberculin tests of beef and dairy cattle have been made during the year. The tables in another part of the annual report will show in detail the work done by regular deputies. In addition to the work shown by the tables, and aside from attending to work at the office, I have given my personal attention to testing cattle with tuberculin, and have spent a considerable part of my time in attending farm- ers' institutes and other educational work. Although not requiring much of my time, the work of regis- tration of the veterinarians of the State has been completed, and it might be of interest to the Board to know something of the re- sults of the registration. The Veterinary Practice Act, which made it unlawful for anyone to practice veterinary surgery after the first day of January, 1906, without a license, provided for the registration of veterinarians on three conditions. Section 2 pro- vided for the registration of anyone who had practiced in the State for a livelihood for three years prior to January 1, 1906, regard- less of the qualifications of the applicant. Under this section 265 persons registered, many of whom are by no means qualified to practice. The privilege of registration under this section was provided on account of a decision rendered by the Supreme Court in connection with a medical act, in which it was held that to de- prive a man of the right of earning a livelihood by his usual voca- tion was unconstitutional. Section 3 of the Veterinary Act pro- vided for the registration of anyone who was a graduate of a regu- larly chartered veterinary college at the time the act went into ef- fect. Under this section 164 persons were registered. Nearly all Report of State Veterinarian. 39 of the veterinarians registered under section 3 are competent men. Some few, however, among this number secured diplomas from colleges which did not maintain a thorough course of instruction. Section 4 of the Veterinary Act provided for the registration of anyone after January 1, 1906, only on condition that he pass a satisfactory examination before the Veterinary Board. Under this section 37. persons have been registered. The examinations have all been held in writing. The questions have consisted of ten each on the subjects of theory and practice, medicine and surgery, and were so framed that their correct answer would require a knowl- edge on the part of the applicant of pathology, physiology and anatomy. All applicants have been required to make 70 per cent on each set of questions. While the Veterinary Examining Board has endeavored to make all examination questions extremely prac- tical, one or more applicants from each college represented so far has failed to pass. The papers of all of those who failed, enclosing in the handwriting of the applicant the questions which he at- tempted to answer, have been placed on file for reference, in case of dispute. I will add further that it has been the custom of the Veterinary Board to require each applicant for examination to sign his name to a secret list opposite some number which he used on his paper during the examination, and that all papers have been graded and the applicant passed upon, as far as possible, without a personal knowledge, upon the part of the Board, of whose appli- cation it had under consideration. In dealing with all applicants, the Board has made every effort to be impartial. Anticipating enough extra work to keep one busy, I advised the Board, at a meeting February 10th, to employ a deputy veteri- narian for constant work. Following this recommendation, the Executive Committee employed Dr. R. L. Allen, a graduate of the Kansas City Veterinary College, who at the time was in the federal meat inspection service. Dr. Allen began work February 15th and was employed until March 30th in making tuberculin tests of dairy cattle. From March 30th to May 15th he was employed in Laclede county in hunting up and quarantining sheep affected with scabies. From May 15th to June 15th he was again employed in making tuberculin tests. From June 20th to December 1st he was employed in Southwest Missouri in the work of stamping out Texas fever. During the time he spent in Laclede county, Dr. Allen placed in quarantine 129 bunches of sheep, including a total of 2,999 head, which he found affected with scabies. At the time of sei-ving the quarajitiiie jiotice, the owJier of the sheep was supplied with writ- 40 Missouri Agncultural Report. ten directions for the preparation and use of the lime and sulphur and the tobacco and sulphur dips, and instructed to use either one of the dips twice at intervals of nine to eleven days, and that his sheep would be released from quarantine on an affidavit stating in what manner he had complied with these directions. All of the sheep placed in quarantine were released by Dr. Allen, by notice sent through the mail, on receipt of the proper affiidavit. On De- cember 1st Dr. Allen returned to Laclede county and remained until the 15th. During this time he re-examined, as far as possi- ble, the sheep which he had placed in quarantine. One thousand and seventy of these sheep were re-examined and all found free from scabies. The control of sheep scabies in Laclede county seems to be well in hand, and except for infected bunches, which were not found during the last spring, there seems little likelihood of any further trouble from this disease. The infected sheep were scattered over such a territory that it is barely possible that all of the diseased sheep have been located. In case of any indications of scabies in any part of that section of the State, its control will be promptly undertaken. In his work in Southwest Missouri from June 20th to Decem- ber 21st, Dr. Allen had instructions as follows : To place in quar- antine in dry lots all cattle found carrying fever ticks ; to authorize the transfer of infested cattle from one pasture to another only after a thorough hand dressing of oil; to release such cattle from quarantine only when they had been personally examined and found free from fever ticks, and then on condition that they be re- moved to pastures or ranges which were not infested with ticks; and to quarantine all tick-infested pastures, forbidding their uss for horses or cattle from date of quarantine to December 1st. During the time that Dr. Allen was engaged in this work he placed in quarantine 14 pastures and 164 lots of cattle, including 1,719 head. Up to December 1st, 51 bunches, including 1,248 head of cattle, were disinfected and released from quarantine. On De- cember 1st, 113 lots, including 471 head of cattle, still remained in quarantine. A good number of those still in quarantine had been disinfected, but were not released on account of the fact that no convenient place, free from ticks, was found in which to turn them. The remaining 471 head were released from quarantine December 20th by notices sent through the mail. These cattle were released from quarantine from the fact that the cold weather makes it improbable that they will spread any infection. The work of eradicating fever ticks will be renewed early in the spring, Report of State Veterinarian. 41 and every effort made to completely stamp them out of the State during the coming year. In this connection it might be well to state that an unusual number of violations of the federal quaran- tine law was largely responsible for the increased number of tick- infested cattle in this State during the past year. Being a matter of interstate commerce, the enforcement of the quarantine line on the southern border of this State has been left to the federal department. The work of enforcing it during the past year, by the federal department, has been very desultory, to say the least. As far as can be learned, no inspector has been assigned to any part of the line and allowed to remain on it long enough to get acquainted with the territory in which he worked. At least, quite a number of violations of the federal quarantine law have occurred, definite facts concerning which have been reported to this office. These violations occurred not only in Southwest Missouri, but in the vicinity of Taney and Ozark counties, and one shipment of ticky cattle originated at Mountainview, in Howell county. The spread of fever ticks became quite extensive in Ripley county, but their introduction was undoubtedly not due to quarantine viola- tions. Every indication points to the fact that they were carried into the vicinity of Doniphan on western horses. Of the contagious diseases with which this department has to deal, tuberculosis of cattle is of vastly more importance than any other one disease, and probably more than all others put to- gether. The proper control of tuberculosis in cattle in the future will require an unlimited amount of work by this department. In August, 1905, a bulletin was issued explaining the tuberculin test and offering the services of the Veterinary Department of this State to the owner of any permanent herd in making an examina- tion of his cattle. Before this bulletin was issued there were some tests made, and as a result of the offer a number of applications were received at this office. Altogether 51 herds, including 1,405 animals, have been tested ; 129 head of cattle were found diseased with tuberculosis in 15 of these bunches. These tests were con- fined to registered beef herds and grade dairy herds, to which registered animals were being added with a view of improving the herd. In tests of registered beef cattle, tuberculous animals were found coming directly from six prominent registered herds of this State, which have not yet been examined. On August 23rd, out of a shipment of 55 hogs to Kansas City, Mo., 23 head were con- demned on account of tuberculosis. I traced these hogs back to their origin, and found that they came from a farm on which a 42 Missouri Agricidtural Report. large herd of registered Shorthorns was propagated, and on the premises I found the skeletons of cattle from which the hogs had eaten the flesh. I had had unofficial knowledge of the existence of tuberculosis in this herd for three or four years. Individual animals from this herd can now be found in many prominent herds of the State. This is mentioned as an example to show the situa- tion in regard to tuberculosis among the beef breeds. Tubercu- losis was found prevalent in the dairy herds in St. Louis county, where dairying has been carried on for a great number of years. In one herd, as an extreme example, 27 cows and heifers, out of 78 head, were found diseased with tuberculosis. One cow, showing the most doubtful reaction from the test, was slaughtered, and plain lesions discovered in the glands of the throat. Later in the summer another cow, which had gone down rapidly from tuber- culosis, was killed and found badly diseased in the udder and throughout the internal organs. A quarter of this cow's udder, in which was found a tubercular abscess with a fistulous tract alongside of the teat, was brought to the Experiment Station and preserved for future reference. Of the reacting cows probably 20 head were giving milk ; five of these showed marked signs of tuber- culosis. A notice, placing all of the diseased cattle in quarantine, was served on the owner, who is an ex-member of the Board of Agriculture, on March 17th. Since that time the owner of the herd has continued to ship milk from the diseased cows to St. Louis, where it is mixed with the general milk supply. The tests of dairy cattle have been carried far enough that we are able to state posi- tively that the milk supply of St. Louis, Kansas City and St. Joseph is contaminated with the milk from tuberculous cows. At a meeting of the Executive Committee, June 6, 1906, the State Veterinarian was ordered to make an investigation of the slaughter house conditions of this State and report the same to the Board. The investigation was duly made and a report rendered to the Executive Committee at a meeting at the State Fair, Octo- ber 6th. The results of the investigation developed some very im- portant facts, which may be summed up as follows: At public expense, the Federal government is furnishing meat inspection to all packing plants doing an interstate business. The principal part of the interstate business is done by the four large packing firms usually referred to as the packing trust. These powerful financial institutes are getting the benefit of free meat inspection, and their products are now being given the preference in all the markets of the world. Some of these firms are filling magazines Report of State Veterinarian. 43 and newspapers with glaring advertisements, giving prominence to the fact that they are selling inspected products. Numerous retail shops in the large cities are posting signs stating that nothing but U. S. inspected meat is sold. The federal inspection stamp on dressed meats is a guarantee to the public of its wholesomeness and healthfulness. The system of inspection provided for by the federal government gives those firms engaged in interstate com- merce a great prestige over the smaller packers, and the indica- tions are that this will be the greatest possible stimulus in favor of a meat trust. The public is now aware of the necessity of a thorough inspection of live animals and dressed meat, and there is no possibility of the discontinuance of federal meat inspection. It now devolves upon this State to provide, as far as possible, in- spection of meats for everyone engaged in the butcher business in this State. The only way to meet the competition of the trust packing houses is for independent firms to provide meats equal in quality to theirs. It seems that this State now has a golden oppor- tunity for providing inspection and offering other protections to the independent packer to encourage the extension of a number of thrifty independent firms. The result will naturally be a greater number of markets for live stock and a greater number of sources of meat supply, amounting altogether to a wholesome competition in the meat business. If the opportunities which are now at hand are neglected, the independent packer will have a slim chance for existence. The proposition before the Board is simply as to whether or not the independent plants in operation in this State shall be sustained and encouraged and others like them brought into existence, or whether the situation shall be let alone and slowly, but surely, resulting in the extinction of the independent packing houses. In order to accomplish what should be done, four acts by the State Legislature and one by the Board of Agriculture will be necessary. The first piece of legislation necessary is an act to prescribe a standard of cleanliness for country slaughter houses. This act ought to provide that every country slaughter house should be cleaned and disinfected after each killing, and forbid any offal of any kind to be left within 200 yards of any slaughter house to decay or to be eaten by hogs. If such an act were put into force, the public would feel more secure in regard to the quality of meat dressed in country slaughter houses. Most of the diseased food animals are shipped to the public markets; there is too much chance of detection for the country butcher to use diseased animals 44 Missouri Agricultural Report. to any great extent. It is well known that some country butchers make a practice of slaughtering diseased cattle and hogs, but this practice is very limited, and if the law requiring cleanliness in the country slaughter house was faithfully enforced, little fault could be found with the meat slaughtered therein. Another act of the Legislature necessary is one giving cities more authority in providing meat inspection. The present stat- utes only provide for cities to inspect the live animal. This statute should be extended to give any city authority to inspect and con- demn meats at the time of slaughter and to regulate the cleanliness and disinfection of the plant. The statute ought to be so compre- hensive as to provide cities with authority to establish a central public abattoir, and require all local slaughtering to be done there. Another important act of the Legislature necessary is one pro- viding for State control of "out of condition" animals at the pub- lic stock yards. The federal yard inspectors have authority to control only such animals as are affected with or capable of spread- ing a contagious disease. There are many conditions, aside from contagious diseases, which render an animal unfit for food and for which their carcasses are condemned by federal meat inspectors. Such animals are referred to as "out of condition." Some of these are affected with non-contagious diseases, and some are unfit for food simply on account of such things as advanced pregnancy, too recent parturition and being too young. The federal meat in- spectors have no authority over these animals until they are pur- chased by a packer engaged in interstate trade and are within the abattoir pens. At the St. Louis, St. Joseph and Kansas City yards there are received altogether probably 1,000 head per week of this class of food animals. Unscrupulous butchers are now engaged in driving them from the public stock yards to slaughter. Unless prohibited by State law, this practice is likely to increase rapidly. The results are that the public is imposed upon with unfit meat, and the few who are engaged in this traffic are doing a great deal to injure the reputation of meats from all sources not covered by inspection. The State ought to provide inspectors at once, to be stationed at all of the public stock yards in this State, with authori- ty to control "out of condition" animals, and require them to be slaughtered, if at all, under competent inspection, where their car- casses would be permitted to be used for only such purposes as they were found fit. If any difficulty is found in making the pro- visions under the law necessary to obtain the desired end, the matter can be disposed of by a law requiring a permit from a State Report of State Veterinarian. 45 inspector for the removal of each animal from the public stock yards. Permits for the removal of unsound animals may then be refused by the inspector in charge. Still another piece of legislation which, from my investiga- tion, I think would be of immense benefit toward encouraging in- dependent packers, is a law requiring all packing plants to quote meat f. o. b. the same price for all points in the State. In any town where an independent packing firm attempts to operate to any extent, meat is sold by the trust packing houses much cheaper than the same quality is sold in other towns of the State. At Sedalia and Webb City, for instance, where independent firms are operat- ing, the carcasses of beef, in quality known as dressed beef, are sold by the trust packing houses for about the same price they charge in other towns of the State for a lower quality of meat known as "butcher" stuff. This practice makes it next to impos- sible for any independent firm to do a profitable packing business. There is no assurance that an independent packer will not be closed out of business by such competition at any time. Under these conditions, it is unsafe for any independent firm to invest much money in a packing plant. The law ought to provide that meat of any given quality should be quoted to all towns of this State at the same price. If this law is avoided by substituting meat of a higher quality in those towns where there is independent competition, the law ought to provide for federal inspectors at the packing plants to grade the meats, so that evasion of the law by this plan would not be possible. The act of the Board of Agriculture, which will help a great deal along the line of promoting independent packing houses, is to pass an order making it a policy of the Board to extend to any independent packing firm or city abattoir the privilege of handling southern cattle for immediate slaughter. This can be done with absolute safety. At Kansas City alone, in the year 1905, there were received in the southern pens for immediate slaughter 332,- 000 head of cattle. Out of this number, those that are classed as butcher stuff, sell for about 50 cents per hundred less in the south- ern pens than cattle of the same quality in native pens. This is equivalent to $5.00 per head for every 1,000-pound steer. The trust packing houses only have access to cattle in the southern pens. The independent packers must buy in the native pens or in. mar- kets controlled by them. The privilege of dealing in southern cat- tle extended to the independent packer will do a great deal toward his success. 46 Missouri Agricultural Report. On account of a limited outbreak of mangs in Worth county and scabies among sheep in Lewis county, I wish to recommend for appointment as deputies Dr. J. H. McElroy of Grant City and Dr. T. F. Arnold of Lewistown. Respectfully submitted, D. F. LUCKEY, State Veterinarian Farmers^ Week in Agricultural College January 7-12, 1907. Fourth Annual Meeting Missouri Corn Growers' Associa- tion, Tenth Annual Meeting Missouri Improved Live Stock Breeders' Association, Seventeenth Annual Meeting Missouri State Dairy As- sociation and First Annual Meeting Missouri State Sheep Breeders' Association. (Held under the auspices of the State Board of Agriculture.) Abstract of the Addresses Delivered. Opening Session. Farmers' week in the Agricultural College has grown to be the annual event for the farmers of the State. The first meeting was held in the Agricultural College in January, 1904, with only one organization assisting the State Board of Agriculture — namely, the Improved Live Stock Breeders' Association, and at that time the Missouri Corn Growers' Association was organized. The sec- ond Farmers' Week Convention was participated in by the Im- proved Live Stock Breeders' Association and the Com Growers' Association, with a much better interest and a larger attendance. The third meeting held in the Agricultural College, January, 1906, was participated in by the above-named conventions, with an at- tendance about twice as large as the year before. The fourth an- nual meeting was participated in by the Improved Live Stock Breeders' Association, the State Corn Growers' Association, the State Sheep Breeders' Association and the Missouri State Dairy Association, with the largest attendance and greatest enthusiasm of any meeting yet held. The farmers of the State are just begin- ning to realize that the Agricultural College is their school, and that it is profitable to visit the college at least once a year. It is 48 Missouri Agricultural Report. hoped to make the college the home of all State farmers' associa- tions, giving the members of the different associations an oppor- tunity to meet and get acquainted with each other, as well as to meet the members of the State Board of Agriculture and the facul- ty of the Agricultural College, and to visit the State Experiment Station and observe the experiments which are being carried on. The State Corn Show has become a fixed feature of these conven- tions, and at the last meeting prizes, aggregating nearly $1,000, were given for the best exhibits of corn. The first State boy-s* com growing contest was held this year, boys receiving prizes from the State Board of Agriculture amounting to $200, and from the Commercial Club of Columbia to the amount of about $150. The boys' corn growing contest will be the principal feature of the meeting to be held in 1908. ADDRESS OF WELCOME ON BEHALF OF STATE UNIVER- SITY. (Hon. Walter Williams, Member Board of Curators.) It is my pleasure, Mr. President and gentlemen, to add a word to what the city government, through the president of the council, has said to you in the way of welcome. I recognize the inability on my part to follow two Christian preachers, and one a city councilman as well. I have always hesi- tated in speaking to an audience of farmers. It would seem natural that a man, after asking thirteen or fourteen or fifteen farmers for their daughters, should get used to it. (Applause.) But the first time he does a thing of that kind it is very embarrassing, and he hesitates always thereafter when he speaks in the presence of one or more farmers. , In the name of President Jesse, whose regrettable illness gives me place here in his stead, in the name of the Board of Curators, of the faculty and of the students, I bid you welcome. This is your University, if you are Missourians. It is here to serve all the people of all the State, as that which Missouri builds or bears or adopts should ever serve all the people of all the State. If you will note, on yonder portico you will see as the central orna- ment of this great building the central building of the University quadrangle and campus, the great seal of the commonwealth, which says to all Missourians that the welfare of the people is the su- Farmers' Week in Agricultural College. 49 preme law of this University as of the commonwealth of which it is the chief school. It rests, as all Missouri rests, upon the broad and liberal sup- port of the men who make the real wealth of this agricultural State. Five per cent of the students here come from the homes of lawyers, and about five per cent come from the homes of physicians, and about eleven per cent come from the homes of merchants in the towns; but nearly forty per cent of the students here, in the college of mines, and in the college of law, and in the college of education, and in the college of medicine, and in the college of en- gineering, and in the college of agriculture, and in the college aca- demic come from the homes of farmers in this State — nearly forty per cent of the students enrolled in the seven colleges which make the University of today. These are your children and this is your child. May your coming here be an inspiration unto them and may it be pleasant and profitable unto you. May the education which they gain within these colleges make of these students worthier children of your homes and better fit for the duties of the highest citizenship in this great commonwealth. I bid you welcome. The doors of the State's chief school swing open to you; the latch string is out to that which is yours and mine and all Missourians. Mr. President and gentlemen, I bid you welcome. (Applause.) SPEECH IN RESPONSE TO ADDRESS OF WELCOME. Dr. H. J. Waters, Dean Missouri Agricultural Oollege.) Ladies and Gentlemen: It is impossible for me to appropri- ately and properly represent a man of Governor Colman's ability as a speaker even if I had unlimited time for preparation. It is, therefore, still more inappropriate for me to attempt to represent him without notice or preparation. But speaking for the State Board of Agriculture, under whose auspices this meeting is held, it may be worth while to say something about the work of this department of the State, about its place in the commonwealth, and the relation it bears to the work of the College of Agriculture and of the University. In the popular mind there is not a clear distinction between the State Board of Agriculture and the College of Agriculture. This comes about because of the fact that the State Board of Agriculture is, A-4 50 Missotiri Agricidtural Reijort. by the law of the State, quartered in the agricultural building, and because of the further fact that the two lines of work are very similar, and that the Board of Agriculture and College of Agriculture have been engaged in not only somewhat similar work, but have been parallel and have in some small degree over- lapped. I do not mean to create the impression that there is any duplication in this, nor that there is any lost motion or any waste effort. For in all the years that the Board of Agriculture has been stationed with the College of Agriculture, so far as I know there has been the most cordial co-operation, the most friendly relation and absolutely no friction between the two bodies; and when the Board of Agriculture sets out upon a certain campaign of educa- tion, which might in some ways be considered the function of the College of Agriculture, it has always been with the fullest and fairest understanding, and with the most cordial consent. And then again, when the College of Agriculture should at any time begin the work of exploitation, or the extension and carrying on the research of some line for the improvement of agri- culture, which might by some be considered a part of the work of the Board of Agriculture, it has always been likewise with the common consent of the other party. And so these two institutions f tand here to co-operate, to support and to assist each other. The College of Agriculture, with its Experiment Station, de- velops and discovers the facts, and the Board of Agriculture, with its machinery, and with its hold upon the people, reaching down to the farmers, is carrying this discovery, with its results and ap- plication, to the people of the State. Thus there is no duplication, there is no friction, there is no lost motion in this arrangement; but it is an arrangement which permits the College of Agriculture to occupy one field, primarily discovering the truth in reference to practice on the one hand and on the other teaching it to the students who come here; and the Board of Agriculture to occupy another, that of carrying this information to the farmers direct. It is peculiarly appropriate in my judgment that the Board of Agriculture should come here once each year and hold a con- vention like this. It is also peculiarly appropriate that the farm- ers should get together once a year, at least. Standing isolated, as they are, they forget, if they ever fully realize, their own im- portance and the importance of their profession. Getting to- gether in this way, they begin to feel more proud of themselves and of their profession. Farmers' Week in Agricultural College. 51 When I see any assemblage of farmers, I always think of the old fable that all of you have read or heard many times, of the peasant who thought he was going to die, and called his two sons to his bedside and said, "I am about to die, and I am go- ing to leave to you the little plot of ground behind the house, the vineyard. In that vineyard is buried a great treasure. All you need do is to dig for it, and you may find it." And he passed away, and the young men, strong of arm, set about to find the treasure, the pot of gold, and they dug the vineyard over most carefully and failed to find it, and thinking perhaps they had not gone deep enough, they dug again still deeper, and failing again, went still deeper, with the same result, and when they came to the conclu- sion that their father was beside himself at the time he had said these words, and that there was no pot of gold, no treasure buried there, and they went their way. But they came back the next sum- mer, and lo and behold! There was a crop of fruit on their vines such as they had never seen before, and they harvested it, and from that came their pot of gold. It was the treasure that had been buried in that soil, and that was what their father had re- ferred to. And so it is with agriculture. Yet, when we begin to think of the mineral wealth of our country, when we begin to survey our wealth, we begin to figure immediately the gold, the iron, the lead, the silver and that class of minerals which have been styled "the precious metals." The truth is, however, that last year's crop mined out of the soil by the farmers of the United States amounted to more than six bil- lion dollars, and was worth more than all the gold and silver mined in America since Columbus discovered it. The truth is that the greatest mineral resources of this country is the mineral plant food within its soil. The greatest mines are our farms, the greatest miners are the farmers themselves. It is the only mining business that is permanent; it is the only business that is basic. Our silver mines work out and the cities based upon them pass away from the earth; but the cities, the universities, the churches built upon agriculture, stand ; they are permanent ; they are as everlasting as the hills themselves, provided the farmer who mines that soil mines it intelligently, appreciates its own limitations, and does not waste its resources. (Applause.) As illustrative of this very basic industry, let me cite another illustration. Just a few days ago I happened to be in conference with a gentleman who represents great millions of accumulated wealth of the eastern portion of the country, which had been 52 Missouri Agricultural Report. placed in his hands for the development of education. Rockefeller had placed at his disposal twenty-five million dollars; others addi- tional sums. He said he had gone into other portions of this country, not Missouri, with a view of strengthening the universi- ties, and with a view of strengthening and upbuilding certain de- partments of that State, and the schools of which State were not well supported until they began to support them. He said they investigated the condition of the university -and found it was not the university which was at fault, and concluded that the fault must be with the preparatory or high schools, and they therefore made an investigation of them, as they knew it was necessary to properly build them up before they could support their university as they should. But it was found that the difficulty was not in the high schools ; that it must be more basic than that, and the con- clusion was that it was with the primary schools, and that they must therefore look to these and the strengthening of them if they would hope to build a high school system, and rest a university upon it. And when they investigated the primary schools they found the fault was not there, but that they rested upon an agri- culture that was not prosperous, and therefore strong schools could not be made. They were thoroughly convinced the difficulty in the school system was with the agriculture, and they set about to spend their money strengthening the agriculture of the sec- tion which they had first sought to expend toward the strengthen- ing of the university, after they had finally seen that, when their agriculture was strengthened, the district schools and high schools and university would be supported and would take care of them- selves. That is a natural and logical conclusion anywhere you go ; and anywhere the agricultural industry is basic, if that is false, if that is weak ; if behind it is a man without nerve, without strength and without mental capacity, the whole superstructure of whatever kind is of the same sort. Fortunately, the Missouri farmer is an intelligent farmer, is on good land, is prosperous; and when those conditions prevail everything else prospers with them. And it is only when the lead- ing farmers come together like you gentlemen, in this way, and compare their experiences and get the best thought and the re- sults of the best study and investigation, that we will continue to have on the Missouri farm the best intelligence of the State, the most progressive men in the country and the most prosperous of all classes of people. (Applause.) Missouri State Dairy Association.* Condensed report of the proceedings of the 17th annual con- vention, held at Columbia, January 10-11, 1907. STATEMENT. The seventeenth annual meeting of the Missouri Dairy As- sociation was held at Columbia, January 10-11, 1907, in conjunc- tion with the Improved Live Stock Breeders' Association and the Missouri Corn Growers' Association. By joining with these other two State Associations, better rates were secured on the railroads, and a stronger program pre- sented. Mention is made below of persons who contributed to the success of the program, but whose addresses are not included in this report: Invocation by Rev. C. H. Winders. Address of Welcome by Hon. W. S. St. Clair. Response for Dairy Association, Secretary R. M. Washburn. "What Have We a Right to Demand of Our Cows?" Prof. Oscar Erf, Manhattan, Kas. "Dairy Farm Crops," Hon. C. D. Lyon, Georgetown, Ohio. "Does it Really Pay to Weed Out Poor Cows?" Hon. H. B. Gurler, DeKalb, 111. "The Future Dairyman," Hon. W. W. Marple, Chicago, 111. Debate (by agricultural students) — Question: "Resolved, That more profit may be derived from the special purpose dairy cow than from the dual purpose cow." Affirmative — B. 0. Brown and R. A. McCoy. Negative — H. P. Rusk and H. H. Krusekopf. "Eastern vs. Western Opportunities for Dairy Farmers," B. D. White, Washington, D. C, 54 Missouri Ayricultaral Report. PRESIDENT'S OPENING ADDRESS. (Geo. O. Moshcr, Kansas Oity, Mo.) Gentlemen of the Missouri State Dairy Association : The seventeenth annual meeting of our organization finds us in the most gratifying environment as compared with the past. We are beginning a new era, this being the first meeting under auspices which ally us with the other great agricultural and breed- ers' associations of the State, and thus draw more attention to the dairy industry in the position it must occupy in our State, as land gradually becomes higher priced and farms cut up into smaller tracts. The experience of Missouri in the raising of cattle has been always along beef lines. As one gentleman recently expressed it, every effort was made to get fat on the animal.- Any cow that could have a calf was considered good enough to give milk. A good illustration of this is given in Professor Eraser's object lesson, where he shows 19 good dairy cows worth 1,900 of the kind which give only enough milk to pay for their feed ; or, as has been shown in Hoard's Dairyman cow census, many of these cows were fed at an actual loss to the owner, not counting the value of his time in care of his herd nor the investment in the cows. A most lamentable picture. I believe one of the greatest boons to the farmer is the Ex- periment Station and the institute work under its direction. We have the men in Missouri who are doing this great work of build- ing up our agricultural wealth until she is an empire beyond ques- tion. Take the matter of com breeding and selection. If followed out intelligently, it is not such a burdensome task ; yet if each far- mer will adopt this system, it will add millions to our annual corn crop. The same statement applies to the work Mr. Ellis and Dean Waters are doing along the lines of stock breeding, and our own Professor Eckles, in the dairy division, is undoubtedly adding to the worth of our herds of dairy cows by advice in breed- ing and feeding which is hard to appreciate, unless one follows the history of the work which has to be done. The intelligent and painstaking care which Dr. Luckey, our State Veterinarian, has exercised, will minimize, and finally, prac- tically eliminate tuberculosis from Missouri herds. The good roads propaganda is a child of the Experiment Sta- tion, and bids fair to have a vigorous and valuable development. state Dairy Association. 55 It is a pardonable pride that points to these great movements in Missouri. We have been working for years as a separate entity. Now we come in close touch with the other great lines of modern farm- ing industry, and the result must be an increased impetus to all branches of agriculture. It is not out of place at this juncture to express our apprecia- tion of the great good fortune we have in the eminent gentlemen who have given their time, and who will devote their valuable thought to our advancement in the program to be enjoyed at this meeting. The dairy division of the National Department of Agriculture has been most generous, and year after year, sends of its best to our meetings — this year Professor White, one of the practical scientists of the dairy world. Not the least entitled to our thanks is the great dairy and agricultural press, which sends the lectures and teachings of all the best minds to every corner of the State. No dairyman can hope to succeed unless he takes and reads these most valuable newspapers. They are the encyclopedia of knowl- edge of dairying. The dairy industry in Missouri is fast assuming the import- ance to which it is entitled. This statement has reference to the various points where improvement has been wanting; a larger in- vestment in dairy equipment; better dairy cattle; higher type of finished product; and to the farmer, a better price for his goods. Why should Missouri be paying out $2,000,000 surplus to other states for her milk, butter and cheese? There is no better pasture in the world than our blue grass, and in the center of the corn belt, we have ensilage produced at the minimum cost per ton. The making of ensilage in Missouri is a new method of feed supply. Naturally it is looked on with some degree of question until its value is more thoroughly established. Who would need an argument if he were to realize that the chopped corn stalk has more feeding value than any roughage except alfalfa, and it is to be had at a cost of $1.25 to $2.00 per ton in the silo. This year in particular, when hay is selling at $10 to $16 per ton, it takes very little arithmetic to settle in the minds of the average man, what is profitable feed. The price of mill feeds is less by one-third than the dairymen in New England pay. We have the market within our own bor- ders. "Every prospect pleases." There remains to be accom- plished only the education of our people to realize how valuable an 56 Missouri Agricultural Report. heritage is being wasted in the overlooking of these great oppor- tunities. On the high-priced land in Holland the dairy farmer has made fortunes which are proverbial. No doubt the same con- dition prevails in the channel islands. We have thousands of acres of rich pasture land, which could be brought to return big yields of profit if put to use in raising dairy stock. The advent of the great creamery concerns, with their agents ready to take cream at the door and return a monthly check to the farmer, reduces his otherwise financial business outlook to a system, which gives him ready cash to meet his obligations, and a margin to add to that received from the sale of surplus farm pro- ducts at the end of the year. In the vicinity of the great cities of the State the opportunity to participate in the higher-priced market for commercial milk and sweet cream, should make every small farmer essentially a farmer, and only incidentally a general farmer. In other words, his suc- cess will lie in his being able to feed his crops and turn them into milk and butter; the by-products, the skim milk being converted into pork and veal, rather than to strip the farm each fall of its earned reward. The economic saving of the fertilizer contained in the manure of a herd of dairy cows will in many cases decide the chances between failure and success in farm operations. These statements, it is realized, are not new. They are none the less valuable because of this, because the truth is always mighty and never loses interest in being kept before us. We have many reforms to work out aside from the problems of balanced ration and season for breeding cows, the advantages of clean barns, clean cows and pure water supply. We would look to the State Legislature for help in many lines. We want changes in the dairy laws ; in the laws with reference to the sale of artificial substitutes for dairy products ; for the preven- tion of adulteration of our output after it leaves the farm in a pure state. We want a fair and reasonable standard for fat and solids in milk. The Pure Food Laws will harm no honest producer. It has raised the retail price of commercial milk in Kansas City to eight cents. The farmer should have his equitable share of this increased price for his wares. The subject of sanitary milk has received, through the press of Missouri, more attention than it ever before could boast. Keep up the agitation until every consumer is educated to demand bet- ter milk, but to realize that for a high class article he must pay state Dairy Association. 57 an increased price commensurate with the increased expense of production. In closing, may I express my profound thanks to the Associa- tion for conferring on me the undeserved honor of being its Presi- dent during the year just closing. I look forward to the new administration, taking up the work with industry and enthusiasm, which will show 1907 the grandest year in our history. I am sure the present meeting will be one of much value, and an inspiration to every member to do his share to make Missouri the greatest dairy State. Gentlemen, the meeting is open and ready for consideration of business. THE INEVITABILITY OF DAIRYING. (H. J. Waters, Dean of Missouri Agricultural College.) The subject, "The Inevitability of Dairying," is not of my own choosing. I am not by birth, education or sympathy a dairy- man. My sympathies and tastes are all in the other direction — the production of meat, and primarily the production of beef. I like the Shorthorn, the Hereford, or the Angus much better than I do the Jersey or Holstein or Guernsey, and I like the beef business much better than I do the dairy industry. Nevertheless, I realize that the man who stands out against dairying as the basis of our permanent agriculture is standing out against an irresistible force, and will in the end be as effectual as he who with a broom attempts to sweep back the ocean tide. Either this country is going to be an exception to all human experience, or we must ultimately sur- render to the inevitable. There is no question that as population becomes denser, as land becomes higher, as labor becomes more abundant, and, there- fore, cheaper, we must produce on our farms products which will require and reimburse more labor. The beef business is primarily adapted to the newer condi- tions of a country, to broad acres, to cheap land, to scarce and high-priced labor, to transportation of products over long distances. As the country becomes more densely populated and land becomes higher, they look to something else. New York, Pennsylvania, Massachusetts, New Hampshire and Connecticut were formerly the great beef producing centers of this country. Then the dairy industry was being nursed and carried along by its enthusiastic 58 Missouri Ayricultural Report. friends as perhaps it now is in Missouri, and the beef business was able to take care of itself, as it yet is with us. Now the dairy busi- ness dominates in the east and they are trying to coax back the vanished beef industry. Thus, as the country becomes older, its land divided into smaller farms, and the people get on a more economical basis and con- servative basis in both production and consumption, the beef in- dustry is the first to wane. In its stead, as a rule, comes dairying. First, in combination with beef, it is true, but later, especially in the vicinity of the large cities and among the most congested cen- ters, it becomes a highly specialized industry. In the rural dis- tricts this combination of beef and dairying has thus far remained stable in the oldest European countries, with dairying as the prin- cipal feature and beef as an adjunct. Broadly speaking, the next class of beef products to diminish, outside of the mountain and the strictly grazing regions, is the sheep. Then follows the hog, although on account of the use to which the hog may be put as a consumer of waste products around the household, he remains to this day a prominent feature in the agriculture of the most densely populated regions of the country. As countries become still more populous, vegetable diets sup- plant practically all forms of animal products, the one standing out to the last being poultry. While it is true that the fowl, when charged up with all the feed consumed, produces the most costly animal products known, at the same time it lives so largely off the products that would otherwise go to waste, is so well adapted to living in close prox- imity with people themselves, that it is perhaps the most perma- nent animal industry that we have. It is an interesting fact that this is the only animal industry that China has left. She has long since ceased to produce beef, if she was ever a beef producing country. The dairy cow has been driven out, if this industry was ever established there. But the duck and the goose and the chicken are still there in such quantities that this constitutes one of China's most important export products. Even as well adapted as the State of California is to the production of poultry, San Francisco buys eggs from China by the hundreds of thousands each year. The fowls themselves are exported in large quantities to this country. It is likewise interesting that much of the albumen used in sen- sitizing of photographic plates comes from China, and is made from the egg. state Dairy Associatio7i. 59 BEEF COSTLY TO MAKE AND SELLS AT A LOW PRICE. There is another and perhaps a more fundamental reason why the beef industry is the first to go. This reason, however, has not as a rule been made clear in our discussions of this subject. The cost of producing a pound of meat from the three prin- cipal sources would be about in this order: First, beef; second, perhaps, mutton; third, pork. In other words, pork costs less to produce than either of the others, although the difference between it and mutton is not large, and on the average is much less than the difference between either of these and beef. On the other hand, however, these animals bring on the mar- ket, when fitted as they usually are, taking the experience of the last twenty-five years as a basis, prices in just the reverse order. That is, hogs have perhaps sold highest, with sheep a very close second, and cattle considerably below either. It is evident, therefore, that in a strictly agricultural region, such as the Mississippi Valley, the margin between the cost and selling price has been lowest in beef of any of our meat animals. It is a striking fact that during the last twelve months there was not a sheep sold at the St. Louis market for less than $5.00 per hundred, while thousands and thousands, in fact, the majority of the cattle sold on that market, brought less than $5.00 per hundred. We have not yet, however, approached the most cogent reason for the elimination of the beef industry when great economy must be exercised in production and consumption. THE EFFICIENCY OF THE BEEF STEER AND THE DAIRY COW AS A PRO- DUCER OF HUMAN FOOD COMPARED. The most striking fact in connection with this whole question is the inefficiency for the production of human food of the beef animal as compared with the dairy cow. Let us assume that we full feed a steer for 300 days, and that his average daily gain for that time is 2^4 pounds, making a total gain of 675 pounds. In the same leng-th of time a dairy cow of quality equal to that of the steer above assumed would produce, at the very least, 6,000 pounds of milk. The dairy cow will require for the production of her annual milk output less grain, less hay, less grass and less range than will the steer in the production of its 675 pounds of gain in weight. 60 Missouri Agricultural Report. Let us, however, inspect these total annual products more closely. . Assuming that the 675 pounds gained by the steer will have the composition shown by Jordan in his studies of the composition of the gain made on animals from 17 to 27 months of age, *we should have the following detailed exhibit: Per cent. Pound.s. Water 42.4 87.5 14.1 6.0 286 Fat 253 Protein.. . 95. 5 Ash 40.5 Totn.l drv mattpr 386 The 6,000 pounds of milk produced by the cow in the same length of time might be safely estimated on the basis of: Water Butter fat Milk sugar Oaseln and albuinen — Ash Total dry matter. Per cent. Pounds. 4.6 4.75 3.85 .8 5160 276 285 231 48 840 The water in the meat and in the milk is of no more value for food than that which comes from the cistern or spring, and we are, therefore, primarily interested in the quantity of dry mat- ter produced. It will be observed that the cow's annual output of dry mat- ter is 840 pounds, as compared with 386 pounds for the steer. A close scrutiny of the detailed figures given above will show that the whole story is not yet told. The steer's product will need to be still further reduced, because a portion of the gain made is inedible, being in the form of increase in weight of bone, hoof, horn, hide, vital organs, blood, etc. We have no reliable data from which to estimate the amount of the annual growth of this ma- terial on a steer, but it is certainly safe to assume that the six per cent of ash shown by Jordan's figures in the above table would not be an over-estimate of the amount that would be classed as •Jordan : "The Feeding of Animals." Page 340, state Dairy Association. 61 inedible and of use only for the manufacture of leather or fertili- zers. On this basis there would need to be deducted 41 pounds from the total of 386 pounds of dry matter, leaving a total of 345 pounds of edible material produced by the steer, compared with 840 pounds produced by the cow. There is yet a difference to be considered: The fat produced by the cow is the most digestible of all the animal fats. The sugar in milk is perhaps the most easily di- gested and assimilated of all sugars, and is assumed to be all avail- able when used as food. In the case of casein and albumen, it is practically completely digestible, and the same is true of the ash. Therefore, not only is the edible material produced by the cow more than two and a half times as large in amount as that of the steer, but it is a significant fact that practically all of this is di- gestible and easily assimilated by people of all years, from youth to old age. In the case, however, of the production of the steer, there is a further waste. For when the animal is slaughtered the butcher is compelled to trim the carcass of its excess fat or tallow. In the average case this green tallow is not worth as much per pound as he has paid for the steer alive. This tallow has perhans cost the feeder ten cents or twelve cents a pound to make, and it has a value when sold as such, and not attached to a steak or roast, of perhaps less than four cents. Furthermore, when the butcher di- vides this carcass into steaks and roasts, the customer is constantly insisting upon having the excess tallow trimmed off before it is weighed. All of this tallow must, like that which was trimmed from the carcass when the animal was killed, go into the tub as low-priced material. Furthermore, when the steak or roast is cooked, a considerable portion of the fat is fried or stewed out, and this is likely to be poured into the garbage can or the sewer. Then, when the meat comes to the table, the first protest from the children is against being given too much fat. The portion of the steak or roast that is left uneaten is the fat, and this is es- sentially wasted or fed to the dog, the chickens or the pigs. Thus, this high grade material — that is, material that is most expensive of all animal products to make, is really of least prac- tical use for human consumption, because it, unlike butterfat, is of itself not especially palatable. In New York City so much fat is poured into the sewers that recently the city authorities set about to recover it, and millions of pounds are thus taken from the sewerage and sold at a low 62 Missouri Agricultural Rei)ort. price, chiefly for the manufacture of soap. This means that the corn of the Mississippi Valley is being converted into high-priced fat on our hogs, cattle and sheep, a portion of which finally finds its way into a soap factory through the sewers of our great cities. Just what number of pounds of the annual production of the steer would be actually left as digestible material it is impossible to say, but it is perhaps not unreasonable to say that the amount of digestible matter produced by the cow is about three times as large as that produced by the steer in the same length of time. Thus it is perfectly evident that the dairy cow is a very much more efficient machine for the manufacture of our grain, grass and hay into edible animal products than is the beef steer, or than is any animal producing meat, for that matter. Of equal importance is the fact that the cow will make the yearly product ascribed to her in the foregoing computations on grass alone without grain during the summer months. The rest of the year she will eat less grain per day than the steer will re- quire. On the other hand, it will be necessary to feed the steer to the full limit of his appetite for each one of the 300 days figured in the foregoing tables in order to have him make the amount of gain credited to him. All these figures for the cow are in every way conservative. It is likely indeed that the amount of food con- sumed by the steer to make the gains used in our computations would produce fully one-third more milk and total solids than has been credited to the cow. RELATIVE COST OF BEEF AND DAIRY PRODUCTS. Because dairy products have uniformly sold at a very much higher price than most other animal products, it has been assumed that the cost was proportionately greater. Professor C. H. Eckles, of the Department of Dairy Husbandry of the University, has been kind enough to supply the records of two cows in the Uni- versity dairy herd of fair to good quality, as follows : Cow 1. Milk produced In a year Butter produced in a year Milk solids produced In a year. Cost of feed for 12 months Cost of butter per pound Oost of milk solids per pound. . . 6988 pounds. 421 W2 $30.00 7 cents. 8 State Dairy Association. 63 Cow 2. Milk produced in a year , Butter produced In a year Milk solids produced in a year Oost of feed for a year Average cost of butter per pound. Average cost of solids per pound . 6910 pounds. 866 918 134.60 .094 cents. .034 The feeds used in the six months winter period were: Corn chop, at 40 cents per bushel ; clover hay, $8.00 per ton ; corn silage, $2.50 per ton. During the six months summer period the cows were at pas- ture, received no grain, and were rated at $2.25 per head per month. These were not specially selected cows, but happen to be fairly representative animals of which Professor Eckles had a complete record. It will be observed that the cost of feed per pound of butter varied between seven cents and nine cents. This is not much in excess of the cost of gain on aged steers made thick fat or that are fed six months or more. The cost of gain on cattle of this sort could be safely figured at the minimum price shown here for but- ter, namely, seven cents. The low price for total solids of from 3 cents to 3.8 cents per pound is in striking contrast. We would need to about double this price for the gain of each pound in live weight of a steer. When it is further realized that fully one-third of this gain in live weight of a steer is water, and that still an- other portion is inedible, and still another portion is indigestible, and that these total solids produced by the dairy cow are free from water and are all edible and practically all digestible, one cannot fail to be impressed with the efficiency of the dairy cow in con- trast with a meat producing animal like the steer. FINANCIAL RETURNS FROM THE DAIRY COW MUCH LARGER THAN FROM THE STEER. The record of the University dairy herd of 34 cows, including all 2-year old heifers for last year, showed an average of 6,792 pounds of milk and 369 pounds of butter each. The average local retail price for the year for butter was 28 cents per pound. At this price the financial return per cow, without counting the calf, was: 64 Missouri Agricultural Report. 369 pounds butter, at 28 cents per pound 5,773 pounds skim milk, at 25 cents per hundredweight. Total return per cow $103 82 14 43 $117 75 CREAMERY VALUE. At the butter fat prices paid by the Dairy Department of the University for cream bought from patrons in different parts of the State this would amount to: 316 pounds butter fat, at 26 cents per pound 5,778 pounds skim milk, at 25 cents per liuiuiredweight. Total return per cow ' $82 16 14 43 $96 59 From a few of the leading dairymen of the State Professor Eckles gives me these data: S. H. Pile, Glasgow, Missouri, reports a gross income of $120.00 per cow for 17 head. E. & E. J. Hosmer, Marshfield, Missouri, have 71 cows, which averaged over 340 pounds of butter, selling at 23 cents per pound, or $78.20 per head for butter alone. Squire Innis, Nevada, Missouri, sold products to the value of $119.50 per head for 22 head. E. B. Cooper, Trenton, Missouri, reports a return of $2,050.00 from 25 cows. S. W. Coleman, Sedalia, milks seven cows that average 400 pounds of butter each. This is sold at 25 cents, and the skim milk is fed to calves and pigs. He sold $850.00 worth of hogs and $700.00 worth of butter in a year. All from 10 acres of land. H. C. Goodrich, Calhoun, Missouri, sold 331 pounds of but- ter per cow for 32 head, at 23.8 cents per pound. Geo. Koontz, Carthage, Missouri, realized $3,161.00 from 31 head of cows for butter at 25 cents and 30 cents per pound, or an income of about $102.00 per head for butter alone. DAIRYING THRIVES IN HARD TIMES ; THE BEEF BUSINESS IN PROSPER- OUS TIMES. Another way to illustrate the superiority of the dairy cow, or to emphasize the profits of the dairy business, is to consider the fact that when prices are low and times are hard, men leave other specialties in farming and engage in the dairy business. Upon the return, however, of good times, with high prices and state Dairy Association. 65 good opportunities for fair remuneration in all lines, dairying is neglected, because men can make more money comfortably in some other way. DAIRYING ADAPTED TO GOOD LAND. It is a popular notion that land too poor or too rough to yield prolitable returns in other lines of agriculture is well adapted to dairying. While it is true that dairying will thrive on land on which most other forms of agriculture will fail, for the very rea- sons already pointed out, it is a fundamental mistake, however, to assume that because of this fact dairying is adapted only to regions of that sort. The truth is, dairying is just as well adapted to the best land of the country as it is to the poorest, and the dairy- man ought to insist upon taking possession of the best of this land, where are already developed the best schools and churches, where he has the best roads, the best markets, and all the modern con- veniences. The beef men cling tenaciously to these best regions, and will not surrender their business or their places easily. They are not built along that line. When they have not the dairyman to fight, they fight among themselves. But one thing is certain; that the average beef man must mend his ways or yield to the inevitable. THE BEEF MAN MUST IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF HIS STOCK. We are interested in extending as much as possible the con- sumption of animal products, particularly of beef, because the race that will dominate the world with its ideas, its form of government, its religions, its point of view, its language, its culture and its general point of view will be the race of people that eats meat. The role of beefsteak in the world's civilization has been of tre- mendous importance. Last winter one of the graduate students in animal husbandry in the University collected statistics from a large number of cattle men in the corn belt, principally in Missouri, Iowa and Illinois. It was shown by the returns from these men that the average calf was worth at weaning time $15.00. For the production and nour- ishment of this calf a cow was kept the entire twelve months. It has already been shown that the gross return from good dairy cows, without counting anything for the calf, varied from $75.00 to $120.00. It is perfectly feasible, without materially increasing the expense, to produce calves that are worth at weaning time for beef purposes from $25.00 to $35.00 per head. A-i 66 Missouri Agricultural Report. It will be necessary, therefore, for the beef men, on the high- priced land of Missouri, Illinois and Iowa, to either produce this class of beef and feed it out as baby beef, or leave the raising of the cattle to the owner of cheap grazing lands in the west. This will mean, then, that they must become cattle feeders rather than cattle raisers and feeders if they wish to continue in the beef busi- ness. Or, if this be not satisfactory, to choose between the suicidal policy of selling the grain or engaging in the dairy business. THE COMING OF THE MILKING MACHINE MARKS AN EPOCH. In the past the chief trouble in the dairy business was the difficulty in securing labor of the proper sort the year round, 365 days in the year, to do the milking. If the milking machines are the success that they seem to be, so that the work may be done by machinery, and this labor problem thereby eliminated, the Mis- sou rian is going into dairying. WHAT WE MAKE OUT OF OUR COWS, AND HOW WE DO IT. (S. H. Redmon, Tipton, Mo.) Gentlemen of the Missouri Dairy Association: You will no doubt realize my embarassment coming before this learned body, with its Gurlers and Erfs, its Lillys and Whites, its Eckles and Washburns, and many other of state and national reputation, to discuss with you the above subject. And yet believing, as I do, that grand old Missouri, with its natural and varied industries and resources, can be made one of the best dairy states in the Union, I feel that as one of her sons I would be untrue to the State of my birth did I not try to comply with the request of our Secretary to say a word in its behalf. Redhurst Dairy — We, at Redhurst dairy farm, have, during the past year, the twelve months ending December 31, 1906, milked on an average of fifty cows, ten of which were cows with first calves, and sold butter fat to the amount of $3,231.95, or an average of $269.33 per month, besides three gallons whole milk per day for home consumption, and the whole milk fed to calves until they are six weeks old. We raise all calves except grade Jersey bulls, which are vealed. As to how this is done : We have a barn with double wall, the outside wall being lined with building paper inside and thoroughly state Dairy Association. 67 ventilated according to King system. Each cow has a good, airy, light and comfortable stall. We try to keep cow clean, barn clean and hands clean; milk into Gurler buckets, take direct to cream house, which is detached from the barn, separate it and bring it down to 40 degrees. Feed Silage — Our cows are fed from the farm, excepting bran. We give them, from October 15 to June 15, 40 pounds green corn ensilage, corn and cob meal, all the shredded fodder they will eat, and bran, and keep up the grain while cows are on the grass, but not in so great an amount. All the heifer calves which have good mothers are kept for future cows. All the bulls from thoroughbred high-class cows are sold for breeding purposes. The skim milk is fed to these young- sters until they are six months old. The balance is fed to hogs. The best way, I believe, is to give to the sow until pigs get large enough to drink, after which give to pigs and add cornmeal, making a mush. In this way, we think, with very little corn, we are en- abled to bring the pigs to 150 to 160, when they can be turned off. Then, again, there is the manure of the herd. We get about one spreader load of manure per day from our cow barn. Then the horse barn, calf and pig pens furnish almost, if not quite, an- other load a day, or 700 loads per year, valued at $1.00 per load, which I think very reasonable, would make $700.00 per year. Expenses — Now, as to the expense of running such a place. We pay hands about $100.00 per month, except during siloing and harvesting, both of which is short. We buy bran, but sell wheat, the only grain we sell from the farm. We have the natural increase of 40 to 50 calves per year, as well as four to six colts and young horses and mules. We have the sale of 140 to 160 head of hogs each year, and all the time we are enriching our farms. So, taking everything into consideration, I think the one who would not be satisfied with this kind of showing would be hard to please. Start right — Now, a word of advice to those thinking of enter- ing this field would be, begin on rather a small scale, try only milk cows, and when you get one that is not a milk cow, sell her, no mat- ter how pretty, how well bred, nor what she ought to do, the fact is more money is lost in keeping the ones which are boarders than any other way in the dairy business. 68 Missouri Agricnltural Report. WHAT I HAVE LEARNED FROM 3,000 YEARS OF PER- SONAL EXPERIENCE WITH A COW (30 YEARS WITH 100 COWS.) (By Hon. H. B. Gurler, De Kalb, 111.) Mr. Chairman, Ladies' and Gentlemen : I am glad to be with you again. I was talking yesterday but had to saw right off in order to make room for somebody else. I think we ought all to feel mighty good this morning after feeding on that red roan steer last night, and the dairymen ought to get a lot of satisfaction out of it, if it is true, as I am told, that they actually fed that steer on the milk of a Jersey cow. Now if a shorthorn steer is allowed to nurse on a Jersey cow, and if you cannot get fine beef that way, I don't know how to get it. I never had any finer beef, and I awoke this morning feel- ing mighty good. I got a good night's sleep last night, and I feel like working this morning. At home, lots of my friends say it is so long since they have seen me work, that they have forgotten that I ever did, when the fact is, I v/as once one of the hardest workers on the farm. Babcock test — I gave yesterday a brief account of my early experience at testing cows. We had no Babcock test then. We used first a percentage glass and found the percentage of cream, and then we churned the cream from the milk, and I followed that up with my dairy, having some forty cows and having it all to do myself, and brought the thing up to the time the Babcock test came into use, and that simplified matters tremenduously. It cut the labor twenty times in two and was fully as accurate as the old way. I had worked many years trying to build up my herd, and I was always finding out something new. Abortion — I remember how surprised I was down in Pennsyl- vania when I heard Dr. Pearson describe contagious abortion. It was a revelation to me. I remember how I doubted it. I was so skeptical I said to Dr. Pearson, "Do you believe that is so," right on top of his lecture. But I was convinced, and went home and on the strength of what he had said, the next time contagious abor- tion started in my dairy herd, I knew just what to do. The first cow that aborted, I isolated her, and every cow that aborted from that time on, went to the stable over across the road, away from the herd, and then I cleaned everything up where she had been. state Dairy Association. 69 Out of the first experience with sixty cows, there were thirty- five abortions, and it just ruined that dairy. After I learned that it was a contagious form, and that was what was doing the mis- chief, I went after it and headed it off before it could hurt me ma- terially. Later I had a larger dairy and when the sickness attacked it, had eighty cows and twenty-one aborted before I cut it off. Now, as soon as a cow aborts, we do not wait to find out whether it is accidental or anything like that, but we isolate her right away and clean everything up. Q. (Audience) Do you sell that cow? A. If it is a good cow, I keep her, because I don't know that she is any more likely to abort again than if she had not done so. I have in my dairy now a splendid young Holstein cow that has aborted two years in succession, but she is a fine cow, and I am going to try her again. Perhaps it would be good for us to have Dr. Luckey give us some of his ideas on this subject. I see him back there, come up and give us your ideas, as to the disease and its treatment, especially its treatment, Doctor Luckey. Doctor Luckey : The treatment of contagious abortion is one quite inexpensive and simple in its application, and which, if carried out, is almost sure to prove absolutely successful. The dairyman in charge of the Southern Hotel Dairy at St. Louis, had something like one hundred cows, and they all became affected with this trouble, but the year I was there they went through the year with the loss of one calf. The treatment consists first in washing the regenerative organs, and the rear parts, and of internal administration, of a solution of carbolic acid. As a wash I would suggest that you use pomanganate of potash, one ounce to eight gallons of water. It is not expensive, is very effective and is probably the best of all washes for this purpose. I will not stop to describe the fountain syringe for internal administration, and all that, which you can devise for yourselves. But I will say, if you want to handle the herd properly, build a place to handle them, by building a chute where you can handle them one at a time. I do not favor feeding carbolic acid, for you may have to starve your cows in order to make them eat it, and this will cut down their milk. You can get better results with carbolic acid by using a two per cent solution. That is equal to carbolic acid two parts and water ninety-eight parts. Use pure crystal carboli<*. acid in this proportion, because if you use a weaker solution you 70 Missouri Agricultural Report. will not get the strength. With a hypodermic syringe (and the ordinary black leg syringe will answer this purpose) inject every ten days of this solution thirty-five to fifty cubic centimeters or nine to twelve teaspoonfuls. Most syringes have the cubic centi- meters marked on the syringe handle. A cubic centimeter, for all practical purposes, means fifteen drops. Four cubic centimeters make a teaspoonful. Run the needle through the skin anywhere on the animal's body. It is most convenient on the shoulder where the skin is easily pulled up and thinner, and while you run the needle through the cow's skin, if you will have some one take hold of the nose and jerk the nose rather violently the moment the needle passes through the skin, she will not know it goes in and you will not have any trouble from that source. The nine to twelve cubic centimeters is a rather large amount to put in one spot, and it will be absorbed better if distributed in smaller quantities. This in- jection should be made in the cows of the herd that have not aborted as well as those that have, because we don't know which ones are likely to become inoculated and abort. But I want to make this plain. In giving carbolic acid, be governed by the action on the individual. You want to give full doses. How can you tell how much you can give? If you will watch the cows closely, you will see when they have a full dose that the pupil of the eye is somewhat enlarged. That indicates you have given enough. If you do not get that result in the animal, the next time you administer the carbolic acid you had best do that. If you get too big a dose, you will cause temporary paralysis and the cow will lie twenty-four hours, probably, without being able to move, though without any material injury to the cow. I think this fairly well covers the case, and I think it unneces- sary to go into further detail right now. I might add that this treatment should be continued every ten days through the period of pregnancy. Mr. Gurler (continuing) : We will go back thirty or thirty- five years when this trouble was so serious in New York State that the legislature appropriated ten thousand dollars for the purpose of stopping it. I remember Mr. Harris Lewis, one of the com- missioners who helped to spend the ten thousand dollars appropri- ated, said when they were through, "We don't know so much about the cause of abortion as we thought we did when we commenced." Cows put on their merits — There was a period of time after I left my farm that I dropped the testing of the cows individually, because I could not be there to try the churn test, and then the Bab- state Dairy Association, 71 cock test came along and we began using that. I always believed in setting a butter standard for my herd. In 1892 I made my standard 198 pounds. I had to sell twenty-one of the cows that I was using at that time. In 1894 I raised the standard to two hundred and twenty-five pounds, and I had only six cows to sell. In 1895 I commenced to get ready for the certified milk busi- ness. I was in the business for ten or eleven years, and then, with the risk that there was, I had to buy cows to increase my dairy to keep pace with the demand, and there was quite a risk on account of tuberculosis. We had to test the animals and I dropped my standard back to two hundred pounds on account of that risk. All I could do was to buy the cow and take her on my own risk, and whatever I had to slaughter were my own loss for several years. I put this dead line at two hundred pounds of butter or 172 pounds of butter fat, because when they dropped below that, there was no money for me in it. After I had paid for the feed and labor, if they could not make this, I had simply nothing left. If I had to depend upon that dairy I might as well have quit the dairy busi- ness and gone out to work for twenty-five dollars a month as to keep cows that would not come up to that. In the year 1900 I shipped milk to the Paris Exposition. Your secretary was practically right about what he said in regard to that. The milk was seventeen days on the road and kept sweet four days after it reached Paris, France. That milk was a revela- tion to the French people, and they could not believe it had not been doctored until they gave it a test. Major Alvord, at the head of that dairy commission, told me the milk produced near by was not fit for use after two days, and in hot weather was not fit for use after twenty-four hours. Yet milk shipped from the United States kept for twenty-one days. In the year 1900 I have the figures on a stable of my cows. The best cow in the stable made 472 pounds of butter and a profit of $50.74. The poorest made 174 pounds of butter and lost mo $11.00. Now, what is the sense of an intelligent man going blund- ering along through life and not understanding their own cows as individuals? The best cow, it costs me to feed, $46.06, the poor- est cow $31.23. Some people have an idea that it costs no more to feed one cow than another, but that is a mistake. Because som.e cows have not the capacity to handle the feed that others have; and one cannot buy that capacity; it is bred in them. I remember a little incident in my own town. I knew the parties wejl. There was a young lady in school who could not go!; 72 Missouri Agricultural Report. along; she could not keep up with her classes. Her mother com- plained, and the teacher said, "Your daughter has not the capac- ity," and the mother said, "I will have her father go right down town and buy it." The same is true with regard to cows. Now this stable of cows, where there were fifty cows in 1900, made an average of 298 pounds of butter. There is nothing im- possible about that. You have dairies here in Missouri that do that. I am told that there is a German in your state who gets his butter average up to four hundred pounds. You do not need to g':o into Illinois, Iowa, Kansas or anywhere else for examples of this. You have them right here. I would like to emphasize this point and put it up before you in a way that you will see it. If a man has fifty cows that will make four hundred pounds of butter in a year, he can sit down and hire all the work done, merely super- vising it himself, and he can have an income of two thousand dollars a year and be a gentleman. Where is the average college professor in comparison with tha't? Of course, somebody like Dean Waters here will do better than that, but where is the average professor beside it. Especially do I want to impress this upon these young men who are getting their education here. Just stop and think about this, and if you do not get any other idea out of this whole convention except that one idea, the possibility of what you can do by studying your individual cows, and weeding out, and getting a good male of some of the special dairy breeds, your time has been well spent. Do not let any of this all-purpose stuff get in your way, and you will find not only that you are going to get your- self into the way of a good income, but you will think intelligently and win the respect of everybody that knows what you are doing. You are laying the foundation to make yourself and your family comfortable and happy and have the respect of everybody that is worth having the respect of. Adopt a standard — When you start in this line of work, you should have a standard and make that standard yourself. In different localities there is a difference in the cost of labor and food and what you can get for the product, though not very much, but get at it and make your own standard. Draw your own dead line and then live up to it. The Bull — Do not forget that the bull is one half of the herd. Some may ask, how is that. It is just here. The heifer calves are most likely to take after the sire and back on the sire's side than on the dam's side. That is where the male is more than oner- half of the herd. That is true not only of the boyine family. Jt Is state Dairy Association. 73 true m a great many cases in the human family. Do not let a few dollars prevent your buying the most desirable male you can buy. When you stop to think of the project, figure up, from the size of your dairy, how many heifers you will get from that animal, and do not sell him until you have learned what he is worth to you. As an illustration along that line, about two and one-half years ago I bought a registered Holstein bull, and the man, from whom I got him, had had him a little over two years and a half and had not tested any of his heifer calves. I had not had him six months until that man called me up and asked me if I were not ready to sell that animal. Right away I was suspicious. I backed right up in the harness and would not sell him at all. He had been test- ing some of his two-year-old heifers and wanted to buy that animal right back. He didn't use any policy at all about it; he almost fell headlong trying to get him back. Now I prefer to buy a male of a few years use so I can know his get. I would rather do that than to buy a younger one where I cannot have an opportunity tc learn what the latter's get is doing. I remember a few years ago I was up in Wisconsin to a dairy convention. I made a statement something like this, that I cared more for the butter record of the sire's dam than I did for the cow's own dam. Ex-Governor Hoard jumped to his feet and said, "It amounts to more." There is no part of the work that will pay as well as looking after the individual cow and seeing that the cows are properly bred. The testing must be followed up faithfully. Do not go through your herd and test it once and then lie down and quit, because there will be conditions changing and the cows may change, there will be something happening most all the time, and you want to know when they are at a point that they are not proving profitable. You want to know what you must weed out every year. That is the only way you can improve your standard. I guarantee any of you people, who will start out with that kind of principles, that you will become facinated with the work. When you have got one year's work done, you will want to follow it up. It is one of the most facinating things on the farm, and we are following.it up now, and I will tell you how we are con- ducting it. A three-day sampling period — We make a three days com- posite test (three consecutive days ) every month, making it with the Babcock test and keeping the weight of the three days milk every month. It is an exceedingly interesting duty, and especially f.o to 74 Missouri Agricultural Report. see what the two-year-old heifers, that come in, are doing, and to follow back and see what their dams are doing and what their sires' dams did. Q. Do you weigh the milk night and morning every day in the year? A. No, just three days a month, and take the average of the three days, and figure the cow as giving that average for the month. Q. Is it not advisable to take this test about the middle of the month ? A. I had not thought about taking this test by the calendar month, but if you are going to take it by the calendar month that test is all right. Q. If a cow would calf the first of the month, no doubt the middle of the month would be all right. Suppose she would calf about the middle of the month, a test at the middle of the month would not be all right, would it? A. If she calved about the middle of the month, I would let her go to the middle of the next month. If I were making my test at the middle of the month I would test the cow that had come in at the first of the month, but I would not test a cow that had just dropped her calf. You find, when you come to average it up, where these minor points do not amount to much, for the practical dairy- man. We do not want to get the thing so cumbersome that people cannot handle it at all. At the National Dairy Show last fall I made some remarks that provoked considerable discussion. I know at one of the institutes in Illinois last fall they had some of Gurler's figures up, and thought he had shot pretty high. I made a state- ment that a cow that would produce four hundred pounds of butter per year was as well worth four hundred dollars as a cow that would make two hundred pounds of butter was worth forty dollars. I have a few figures here I am going to give you. I will put them on the blackboard. Example — We will put two hundred pounds of butter at twenty-two cents. I do not believe that is any too high, as a matter of comparison. We have forty-four dollars, and I suppose that cow will make four thousand pounds of skimmed milk. I shall put that at twenty cents, which makes $8.00. Here we have $52.00. We will suppose the cost of feed to be $35.00, which I think is about right. The labor we will figure at $16.00. A few years ago, when I left the farm and figured this thing all out, I figured it cost me per year per cow when milk went to the creamery, about $12.50. state Dairy Association. 75 Now labor is much higher than it was then, and I am putting the cost up to $16.00 for labor. Here we have $51.00. We have $1.00 on the right side — ^just $1.00. Now, I think you might as well work for $25.00 per month, or for the going wages, which would be $28.00 per month now, as to keep that kind of cows. Now we will take the four hundred pound cow. We have 400 pounds butter at 22 cents, or $88.00. We have 8,000 pounds of skimmed milk at 20 cents, or $16.00; making a total of $104.00. The cost of feed in this case was $45.00 and the labor $16.00 ; mak- ing a total of $61.00. We have $43.00 profit, or $42.00 more than we got out of the other cow. Now that $43.00 will pay ten per cent interest on $400.00; almost twice what we can get for our money any other place. Some of you will raise the question that there is more risk. Your loss would be greater if anything happens to that $400.00 cow than that $40.00 cow. Now we go on the other side of that. We have the heifer calves from that cow. We may have three or four that may be her equal, and this certainly more than pays for the risk. I am now through with the items I had noted here, and it is about time for me to close, anyhow. Q. I want to ask as to breeding a bull to his own get. A. I would not do that. Though I have had no occasion for that, because I have had a herd of a size to support two or three males. I do not like to discuss that question. That is a field in itself. I am not well enough informed upon it to go into it. Here is one point I want to tell you. I have rented my farm now to two men that have been superintendents on the farm, one for three years and the other five years, and one has a son eighteen years old, just out of the township high school, and we are applying this test now. Do you know that young man is so interested he is watching all this work. He is just as interested as he can be. He is going into the subject in earnest, and is to be one of two men, who with six milking machines, will milk the sixty-four cows which we are keeping. I know those men will follow my lead and are going to weed out those cows that are not doing what they ought, and hold the standard up where there will be some money in it for them and for me. Q. Does it do to mix the dairy breeds? A. Do not do it. I did that once and I had to pay for It. T bred a Holstein bull to grade Jerseys and grade Guernseys and 76 Missouri Agricultural Report. secured a very uneven lot of heifers, a few were good but more of them were not what pleased me. A Jersey or Guernsey bull may be bred to grade cows with good results. Q. Do you dehorn your cows? A. We dehorn by simply blistering those little buttons on the head before they adhere +o the scalp. Q. What do you use for a blister? A. Caustic potash. Q. Would you dehorn a cow with long horns ? A. Yes, it is a humane act. Several years ago I got to de- horning cows and the humane society got after me, but I tell you they got off in a hurry, when I told them a few things. Q. Do you use a clip or a saw? A. I use a saw, and I gen- erally cut down a little under the skin and start a little blood. They will usually heal right over, so you cannot tell the animals ever had any horns, and sometimes even an expert cannot tell they ever had any. I use a sav/, because I think a clip has a tendency to crush the horn. Q. I want to ask you what influence the feed has on the milk? A. Well, if I live to be old as this man has represented me (3,000 years), I could not find that out entirely. Let us go back thirty or thirty-five years. I was on the farm, making my own butter, and I reached this conclusion: that possibly (I use the word "possibly") I could have the amount of fat in the milk somewhat improved by the condition of the cow, but I was never quite sure of that, and I tell you it is not worth fooling with. Q. You can increase the milk by that means, can you not? A. Oh, yes. Q. Why do so many people think the feed makes the cow give rich milk? Is that possible? A. I don't think it is. I don't think the food has much in- fluence on the richness of the milk. THE CARE OF MILK. (Prof. O. H. Eckles, Columbia, Mo.) It is a well-known fact, that a great variety of odors and tastes are found in milk and dairy products at different times. Some of these are desirable and some undesirable. In fact, the market value of butter and cheese depends largely upon having the proper taste and odor present and avoiding the objectionable ones. State Dairy Association. 77 In order to handle milk intelligently, it is necessary to under- stand the causes of these odors and tastes, and to assist in this effort, it is helpful to classify the sources under three heads: 1. Absorption from the air. 2. From the cow herself. a. Feed. b. Sickness. 3. From the action of bacteria. a. Souring. b. Gassy. c. Putrifactire. d. Slimy. e. Bitter. Odors from the air — The absorption of odors from the air is a common occurence as every one knows, and so far as I know in no case are the odors absorbed, beneficial. Milk, cream and butter absorb odors readily, but cheese very slowly. On account of this characteristic of milk it is necessary at all times to guard against exposing milk or cream to any odor. This means that the barn and surroundings must be free from odors. It was formerly thought and even taught in the dairy schools, that milk would not absorb odors as long as it was warmer than the atmosphere, but scientific experiments showed this to be a mistake, and in fact that the reverse is true. Warm milk absorbs odors faster than cold. Every retailer knows that he is often blamed for odors and tastes which are absorbed from the refrigerator where the milk is placed by the consumer. The odors of fruit are especially easy oTnptoms of disease ; 15 were not yet sufficiently advanced to create suspicion and might have been sold as healthy cattle. Although a notice quarantining all of the diseased cows was served upon the owner, he has continued from March 17, 1906, up to the present time to ship their milk to the city of St. Louis, where it state Daiinj Association. 89 goes in with the general milk supply of the city. There seems to be no law in this State under which the sale of milk from tuberculous cows may be prevented. A letter addressed to the Attorney-Gen- eral, asking whether or not anyone had any authority to prevent the shipment of milk from these cows, has never been answered. There are two great objects in mentioning these cases. The first is to thoroughly convey the knowledge that any dairyman who trusts to his own judgment and neglects the use of the tuberculin test stands a good chance, sooner or later, to get tuberculosis among his cattle ; the second is to show that there is a limited amount of tuberculosis scattered through the herds of this State, and dairy- men may well infer from the examples mentioned that it is only a matter of time till the disease will become as common as it is in older states and in European countries. A sufficient number of tests of dairy cattle have been made over the State to show that the milk from tuberculous herds is going into the general supply for the cities of. St. Louis, St. Joseph and Kansas City. Dairymen cannot afford to have a few people with diseased cows to carry on a business which reflects upon the whole dairy industry of the State. The necessity, therefore, of looking after the spread of tuberculosis in dairy cattle, from a business standpoint, becomes imperative. The loss of the cows that die of tuberculosis is a comparatively small matter. The greatest loss is due to the decreased price which dairymen must in general accept for their products, resulting from any inferiority in quality, whether from disease or lack of cleanli- ness. The discussion of the subject of tuberculosis in the human family and lower animals is just well started. The people of the cities who purchase the dairy products of the State are the ones who are doing the most reading and thinking about this matter. They are rapidly learning the danger of tuberculosis, and naturally desire to shun it. They demand, and have a right to demand, dairy products that are clean and free from tuberculosis. The average dairyman today, who is careless about handling his milk and allows it to become saturated with filth and who takes no precaution to prevent disease among his cattle, is compelled to sell milk in the cities at a small profit, if he gets any at all. From personal obser- vation I know that some dairymen have gone out of the business for the reason that they cannot get enough for their milk to pay for producing it. At present prices of feed and labor they say that they must have twelve cents a gallon for milk during the summer and sixteen cents in the winter. During the past summer ordi- 90 Missouri Agricultural Report. nary milk has been wholesaling as low as ten cents a gallon in St. Louis. At the same time the wholesale milk dealers, at least in one case, have offered to contract for milk known to be of a good quality from a certain dairy at thirty-five cents per gallon for ten years. The stipulations in regard to the dairy were those known to be required in order that the owner might use the copyrighted terms "certified milk." They were by no means beyond the reach of an intelligent dairyman. What is known as certified milk has been retailed in St. Louis for the past year at fifteen cents a quart or sixty cents per gallon. The only reason that dairymen are re- quired to accept unprofitable prices for their milk is that the pub- lic has not enough confidence in its cleanliness and its being from healthy cows. This is mentioned to show that from a financial standpoint it will pay the dairymen of the State to take any step necessary to thoroughly rid the dairy cows of tuberculosis and raise the standard of milk. I believe it is fair to estimate that if it were generally known that dairies are conducted in a cleanly manner and every precaution taken to prevent disease, that the price of milk would soon double and the demand be much greater, even at the advanced price. For the past seven years the subject of tuberculosis has been discussed in this State, in season and out. Bulletins giving ac- curate information on the subject have been distributed without limit. The subject has been discussed before hundreds of farmers' institutes and a number of times before the State Dairy Associa- tion. In August, 1905, a bulletin explaining in detail the use of the tuberculin test was published and twenty thousand copies put in the hands of the cattle owners of this State. This bulletin offered the services of the State Veterinarian and his assistants to the owners of permanent herds in making careful and scientific ex- aminations of their cattle and without any charge. Up to the present time only about twenty-five dairymen have availed them- selves of this offer; a number of these were solicited to do so. It is no exaggeration to say that the dairyman of the State are appar- ently sound asleep on this particular matter. The great question arises. What are you dairymen going to do? The whole matter rests with you. It is not the intention of the veterinary department of this State to force the inspection of your herds upon you against your will. We simply want to let you know that the veterinary service is at your command, and that every effort will be made to assist you in preventing the spread of tuberculosis among your cattle. It does not seem proper that any state Dairy Association. 91 State department should assume to dictate to you on this matter. The first impulse of the dairymen will naturally be to stop the discussion of the subject of tuberculosis. I am afraid that some of you will blame me for saying anything further about it, but you must understand that this is a matter now too well understood for the truth to be suppressed. Even if I were never to say another word about tuberculosis of cattle, the facts, as they exist, are bound to become public from time to time and bear their evil results. Even though I were to say nothing further, it is a case of "Truth crushed to earth will rise again." In all of the discussions of this subject I have tried to avoid sensationalism and in every respect to be conservative. More than that, I have planned diligently to get about the control of tuberculosis of cattle without causing the owners of herds any unnecessary loss, either from animals sacri- ficed or from damage to the reputation of the dairy products. Any- one who will read the August bulletin of 1905 carefully will know that these facts are true, regardless of the many allegations of those who are opposed to any aggressive campaign against tuber- culosis, and who would probably rather let future generations handle thousands of head of tuberculosis cattle and use their milk than to sacrifice a few head at the present time. There are a few serious obstacles in the way of the control of tuberculosis, and the business end of the matter comes down to the serious and practical consideration of these by the dairymen. One thing that makes the use of the tuberculin test unpopular is that it shows animals to be diseased which to the average eye appear healthy. In rare cases a mistake may be made and an absolutely healthy animal condemned for tuberculosis. I believe that a liberal estimate of the errors that will be made in the use of the tuberculin test by a man of good judgment is one out of one hundred. When properly considered, the actual mistakes are so few as to be of very little importance. If a man had ninety-nine diseased cows in his herd, and if, in order to get rid of them, a mistake were made and the one hundredth healthy one was sacrificed, that this would still be better than to leave ninety-nine diseased cows in the herd. The sacrifice of the healthy looking cows is the hardest proposition for the dairymen to face, yet in the case of the Mis- souri State Farm herd, the sacrifice of one healthy looking but diseased Holstein cow prevented the inevitable loss of ten or fif- teen more by the end of the year, and probably the general spread of tuberculosis in the State herd. I admit, however, that it will take considerable confidence on the part of dairymen in the tuber- 92 Missouri Agricultwal Report. culin test for them to willingly part with cows which are in the earliest stages of the disease and show no external symptoms. Mr. H. B. Gurler: Mr. President — Perhaps my experience with the tuberculin test for ten years might be of interest to some of you. At the time I started in the certified milk business I had my herd of 130 animals tested with tuberculin by the State board of live stock commis- sioners. We found 3 per cent to react, and at the post-mortem the disease was visible in all. I knew of a case in McHenry county, 111., where a cow re- acted, and at the post-mortem no trace of the disease was found, but a guinea pig that was inoculated with this cow's milk died with tuberculosis. I find that I cannot detect the disease of tuberculosis in its early stages by outward appearances. I remember buying three cows from a dairy where I had every opportunity to examine them, and when we applied the tuberculin test two of the cows re- acted and were slaughtered, and found to be much affected. I well remember a newly appointed official of the State board of live stock commissioners passing judgment on some of my cows in advance of the tuberculin test, being very confident that he could tell a tuber- culous cow. But not one of the cows he selected reacted to the test. After ten years with the tuberculin test I have come to have great confidence in it, believing it to be as near infallible as any- thing we have to deal with. I cannot prove that it detects all the tuberculous animals; but in all cases the animals that have re- acted to it have proven to be tuberculous. Dr. Luckey: The greatest problem for the dairymen to consider is the disposition of diseased cows. In all states it has been a very difficult matter to arrange for the dis- position of cows reacting to the tuberculin test without working a hardship on someone. Many of the cows which react to the test are too good to slaughter, yet dangerous to keep in a dairy herd. Their milk is unfit for human food, yet many of them, after reacting to the test will put on flesh and lead the average dairyman to believe they are healthy. This fact should be thoroughly established in the minds of dairymen before they go about arranging any general campaign against the spread of tuberculosis. It is hardly possible to suggest a satisfactory plan for disposing of re-acting cows. In some states they are shipped to slaughtering plants having Federal inspection, and if the lesions are found not to have developed beyond certain limits prescribed by Federal meat inspection, their carcasses are passed for food. state Dairy Association. 93 The carcasses of those in which the disease has spread from one organ to another are condemned by the meat inspectors and thrown into the rendering tank and made into fertilizer. It is questionable whether or not, if this were generally known, the practice would be tolerated by the public, yet according to the best authorities this practice is a safe one. It does seem that if cows which have re- acted to the test were properly branded and marked and sold as diseased with tuberculosis and given an especially close inspection at the time of slaughter, it might be possible to dispose of them by sending them to the public markets. It is now the practice of those who have tuberculous herds to ship all animals that become ad- vanced with the disease to the public markets for slaughter. These animals are sold without any warning to anyone, and the public is protected from their use as food only by the meat in- spectors. Compared with this practice, the one of sending re- acting cows duly marked to the market to be slaughtered would be a very safe one indeed. On the general principle that the sup- pression of the contagious disease is for the public welfare, the public should willingly bear at least a part of the loss when ani- mals are condemned. Horses affected with glanders are now con- demned and killed and an allowance to the owner is made by the State. The same law does not apply to cows affected with tuber- culosis, but it might be well for the dairymen to ask the Legis- lature to extend the provisions of the law to cover tuberculous cattle. This provision is justly due the dairymen, and I am satis- fied that any organized effort to secure it would prove successful. Another problem worthy of consideration in dealing with tuberculosis, but one very favorable to the cattle owners, is the possibility of immunizing young cattle against this disease. The great von Behring, who discovered diphtheria anti-toxin, which has saved so many lives from diphtheria, has led the way in im- munizing cattle against tuberculosis. Other able men are at work on the subject, and it is only a question of time until the successful immunization of cattle against tuberculosis promises to be an ac- complished fact. This is a thing which the owners of registered dairy cattle and valuable strains of milk stock may well take into consideration in planning for the eradication of tuberculosis. Summing the matter up, we find that the business end of it consists in the dairymen finding out, first, which cattle are tuber- culous, and second, some satisfactory arrangement for disposing of them. The first question has practically been settled by the offer of the State Veterinary Department to make a test of all 94 Missouri Agricultural Report. permanent herds of the State. The second question must be worked out by the dairymen themselves. Although having given the mat- ter of disposing of tuberculous cattle a great deal of thought, I have not yet been able to arrive at a practical solution of this question. I stand ready at any time to advise with the dairymen and help to plan the matter, and would be more than glad to do so. Some of the herds which were found diseased were located in St. Louis county. I took the liberty to ask the representative of that county to study the actual conditions existing among his constituents and draw up a bill covering the situation and present it to the Forty- fourth General Assembly. After advising with the owners of herds and giving the subject of tuberculosis some very intelligent study, he prepared a bill which provides in brief that it shall be necessary for every dairyman in the State to secure a license from the county clerk of the county in which he resides, and that the license be granted him only after he has had his herd tested and secured a certificate of health. The bill, as drawn, provides for the State to take charge of all reacting cows and pay the owner $15.00 per head. In the main, the ideas embodied in this bill are correct, and even though it would be put into force at considerable expense, the cost at the present time will probably be not more than one-tenth what it will be five or ten years hence. For two reasons, however, it does not seem advisable to undertake a sweeping result of this kind at this time. The first is that the disease is not well enough understood by the owners of dairy herds, and the second is that it would be impossible to secure competent men to do the work of inspection of herds. The execution of this plan will naturally be met with more or less opposition, and a few mistakes made by in- experienced veterinarians would threaten the success of the work. It seems to me that for the time being a good plan is for the dairy- men to simply get the Forty-fourth General Assembly to add the word "tuberculosis" to sections 10548 and 10549 of the present law and for the next two years, at least, dispose of reacting cows by having them appraised under the authority of the county courts, as is now done in cases of horses with glanders. It seems that it would be much better to take time enough to go at this matter right and with due care, than to go to any extremes. As I have said, the whole matter is with the dairymen, and the State Veteri- nary Department is ready and anxious to do the work. state Dairy Association. 95 THE ECONOMICAL PRODUCTION OF CERTIFIED MILK. (B. D. White, Washington, D. 0.) The word "certified" may be new to many of you as it is ap- plied to milk . To give you a comprehensive idea of what is meant by certified milk, I will say it is simply milk and nothing else ; pure, clean, sweet milk, free from foreign matter, and practically free from bacteria. A standard of purity has been established in sev- eral states describing just how pure and how free from bacteria milk must be to be allowed the use of the name "certified." In order to use this name one must have the 0. K. of the medical so- ciety in the county in which the milk is being sold. The medical society of a county form a milk commission, which is composed of members (physicians) who have given the subject of pure milk more or less attention. This commission is composed of a chairman, secretary and several willing boosters ; men who are willing to' de- vote some time without remuneration. This commission formu- lates rules under which milk is produced. These rules read some- thing like the following : 1. A bacteriologist in the employ of the Board of Health shall procure a specimen of the milk from the dairy or preferably from the delivery wagons at intervals to be arranged upon between the commission and the board of health, but in no case at a longer interval than one month. The exact time of the procuring shall be without previous notice to the dairyman. Milk thus collected shall be tested as to the number and nature of the bacteria present. The milk shall also be examined microscopi- cally for the presence of pus cells or other objectionable extraneous substances. Milk free from pus and injurious germs and not hav- ing more than ten thousand germs of any kind or kinds to the cubic centimeter -shall be considered up to the required standard of purity. 2. A chemist in the employ of the Board of Health shall make analysis of the milk to determine the percentage of pro- teids, fat, sugar, mineral rnatter and water present, at similar in- tervals as those prescribed for the bacteriologist. Test shall also be made for the chemical reaction and specific gravity, as also for the presence of foreign coloring or other matters or chemicals added as preservatives. Standard milk shall have a specific gravity ranging from 1.029 to 1.034, shall be neutral or faintly acid in reaction, shall contain 9G Missouri Agricultural Report. not less than from 3.5 to 4.5 per cent proteid, from 4 per cent to 5 per cent sugar, from 3.5 per cent to 4.5 per cent fat, and shall be free from all contaminating foreign matter and from all addition of chemical substances or coloring matters. Neither milk nor cream shall have been submitted to heat be- fore the examination has been made. When milk is produced that comes up to this standard the medical society grants a certificate, the purport of which is printed on paper discs about the size of milk bottle caps, or other forms which are usually placed on the top of the caps in the bottle. This certificate reads something like this : The Clover Hill Dairy having complied with all the demands of the county milk commission is hereby granted a certi- ficate to that effect. This certificate is good until February 1, 1907. (Signed) , Secretarj^ The milk commission usually works in conjunction with the city or State Board of Health, and some one is detailed to take samples from the wagons of the persons distributing the milk at irregular intervals unknown to the producer or distributor. These samples are subjected to the necessary tests and the results re- ported to the producer. If the milk continues to run below the standard for more than a few weeks the certificate is revoked and the milk can no longer be sold as certified. Now as to the production of certified milk. Unfortunately for the progress of this branch of the dairy industry, extremely wealthy men own most of the certified dairies, and the manufacturers of the apparatus largely used in these dairies took advantage of the op- portunity and included thousand of dollars worth of apparatus and increased the fancy equipment with the erection of every plant, until the dairy building of a certified dairy farm is filled to over- flowing with coolers and pipes and pans and conductors and strain- ers and elevators and cables and sterilizers and apparatus too numerous to count. In fact, there was so much apparatus for the milk to flow over that I found it impracticable as well as very costly, and it required about three times as much help as any busi- ness of that kind could stand ; besides, it was difficult or practically impossible to trace the causes of the high bacterial count. After worrying along for six or eight months we discarded most of the fancy equipment and wanted to discard more. We then produced milk under simple but sanitary conditions, such as any dairyman could afford, and by so doing lowered the number of bacteria several thousand to the c. c. state Dairy Association. 97 In January the average number bacteria was. In February the average number bacteria was. In March the average number bacteria was. . . In April the average number bacteria was In May the average number bacteria was In Jane the average number bacteria was 18.25 13.75 12.00 21.20 10.26 9.35 84.81 Or an average of 14.13 for six months, and all of these samples were plated at least 36 hours after the milk was bottled, and some when it was 60 hours old — it being held by the Board of Health. We have heard of certain dairies that produced milk with an aver- age number of bacteria of only a few hundred per c. c, but an in- vestigation revealed the fact that the samples of milk were taken from the milk pail immediately after it was drawn from the cows and plated at once. Results of this kind cannot be compared with those obtained in a fair manner. I shall now endeavor to outline what, in my estimation, is the proper method to pursue to produce certified milk economically. The first thing to be considered is the location of the farm, which should, if possible, be within driving distance of the city or town in which the milk is to be sold, because transporting milk in cases by express is expensive and the breakage of both filled and empty bottles is terrific, and the possible delay of trains, the extra labor and expense of drawing goods from the depot to the place of dis- tribution ; besides, the maintenance of a place from which the goods are distributed. If this is not possible, then the dairy should be located near a railroad or trolley line with good shipping facilities as near the trade as possible. The location of the buildings is the next consideration which should be given most careful consideration. I would recommend that they be located on an elevation which would afford good drain- age. The next is the number, style and size of the buildings, con- sisting of a barn, an ordinary structure for hay, grain and building for the dry cows and young stock, and room enough for the horses necessary to carry on the farm work ; also storage capacity for hay and grain for the same and a one-story cow barn, a modern, sani- tary, well ventilated and well lighted building, which need not be expensive. This may be so built that it can be enlarged if desired without inconvenience or much expense. Then comes the dairy room, where the milk is cooled, bottled and stored, and where the Ar-7 9S Missouri Agricultural ReporL empty bottles are washed, sterilized, etc. This building has beeil given so much importance and many have spent from $10,000 to $50,000 in such structure, and I here show you a plan of a building if constructed of wood with cement plastering will cost about $1,700, and if built of brick would cost about $2,000. I have taken into consideration the average cost of building material in different parts of the country. All the equipment necessary is a cooler, sterilizer, bottle washer, a small boiler and a few other utensils. I wish to draw your attention to the fact that the more ap- paratus there is in such a plant the greater the danger of contam- ination, and the less unnecessary apparatus the less danger of con- tamination, and the easier it is to trace troubles. For instance, when we had in use all the utensils furnished by the machine men and the bacterial count ran high, we could not lay the blame on any one. The men in the dairy would say their work had been per- formed as usual, and the men in the barn would claim the same thing; but with the simple apparatus I have shown you, there is only one place to watch, and that is the barn; if the work is done carefully at that point, good milk will be produced every time. Now as to the cows for a certified dairy. So far as the ap- pearance goes, thoroughbred cattle will please the eye of the public, but I would advise keeping common cows. 1st, because a person having a herd of thoroughbreds is anxious to get as many as pos- sible into the advanced registry, and the extra washing the cows should get in a certified dairy seems to affect the flow of milk to some extent, and if a valuable cow loses a part of her udder the owner does not want to dispose of her, and in course of time the milk yield would be diminished; but when only common cows are kept, and one has a defect, she can be disposed of and another put in her place, and it is much easier to keep up an even flow of milk with a common herd than with a thoroughbred, and an even flow of milk is very essential, as the class of trade that uses certified milk is not the kind that will be put off with the simple statement that the cows have gone dry. That class of trade will either take the milk all the time or not at all. FEED FOR THE COWS. Cows must be fed somewhat differently when certified milk is produced than ordinarily, as that class of milk is largely consumed by infants, and necessarily must be good, or the reputation which such milk has in order to sell for a higher price would soon be de- state Dairy Association. 99 stroyed. and the trade lost. The condition of the cows regulate the condition of the children consuming the milk; therefore, a change of feed, or too much feed of a certain kind, especially such as green oats, clover, alfalfa, corn or sorghum, which must be fed with caution; and when a change is made from one to another, it should be made gradually, and my experience has taught me that some dry feed should always comprise part of the daily ration. I have in mind one incident that cost me many an hour of worry and several days of investigation before the trouble was located. We started to feed green corn in August, and in a few days we had numerous complaints from our customers that something was wrong with our milk ; that it made their babies sick. Not knowing that the effect of feed has such a wonderful influence on small chil- dren we were at a loss to know the cause, and, in fact, discredited the claims of the customers ; but finally a well known physician be- came hostile, and advised his patients to discontinue using the milk from our dairy. By that time we had found and overcome the trouble. This was an expensive experience for us, and I am giving you the benefit, so if any of you ever engage in the business you will not make this error. CARE OF THE COWS. Having a sanitary barn to start with, it remains for the dairy- men to produce the results. The cows should be tuberculin tested, and if there are any reactions the animals should be removed im- mediately and the barn fumigated with formalin tablets, after wash- ing stalls, walls and floors with a 4-per cent solution of carbolic acid. The cows should be made as comfortable as possible, but should be given as much fresh air and exercise as conditions afford. It is recommended by some that the cows should not be turned out to pasture, but it is my contention that there is no way of feeding the cows so satisfactory as letting them out to pasture; however, it may be advisable to sow some kind of soiling crop to have it on hand in case of short pasture, etc. Silage may be fed in the production of certified milk, but care should be taken and not over feed, and to reduce the amount as soon as the slightest indication of a silage flavor can be detected. It has been my experience that ordinary cows will consume about 40 pounds of silage per head in the fall, and that amount shoud be cut down to at least 30 pounds by spring. I believe that a cow's system becomes saturated with the acid flavor of silage, if fed for a long period of time, hence making it necessary to feed less. 100 Missouri Agricultural Report. The milk should be watched for garget, and if any is observed, the milk should never be used, as garget is an inflammation of the udder of the cow, and pus cells will pass with the milk, which is strictly prohibited by medical societies. Nothing will bring criti- cism from physicians quicker than milk that contains pus cells, bloody milk, or milk with deleterious bacteria. The cows should be groomed in the afternoon, washed before milking, and the udder and flanks re-washed or gone over again with a damp cloth, to slightly dampen the udder to prevent dust from dropping into the milk pail. For one hour previous to milk- ing nothing should be done to stir up a dust, as that is the worst thing to contend with. In the morning the cows should be brushed off with a cloth slightly dampened, and the udder prepared the same as in the evening. The stable should not be cleaned in the morning before milking, and no feed, bedding of any kind taken into or out of the barn. The floors should be sprinkled both morning and even- ing about 20 or 30 minutes before milking. The milkers should wear clean clothes, which are to be washed at least once a week, and only used during the time of milking, and kept in a clean place when not in use. All utensils should be sterilized, the hands washed be- fore milking each cow, and the milk taken to the milk room imme- diately after milking each cow and put through the cooler, which is placed in the milk room joining the barn. This cooler should be completely enclosed and a pan like receptacle placed on top which should be provided with absorbent cotton discs, which are replaced for each milking with new ones after they are sterilized. With this method, if reasonably cold well water is used, no ice need be used until after the milk has been bottled. HELP. There is nothing so perplexing as the help problem, which is in the most aggravated form in a certified dairy where the work must be done scientifically. I believe no dairy can be so successfully operated as when in charge of the proprietor. Certified milk should not sell for less than 10 cents nor more than 12 cents per quart. It can be produced and sold for that price at a small profit, if produced under the economical conditions mentioned, but where milk must be shipped the price should be from 12 to 15 cents. The number of cows for a certified dairy should not be less than 30. state Dairy Association. 101 From what I have said you can see that the economical pro- duction of certified milk depends upon the location of the farm, the economical construction of the buildings, and economical operation of the plant as a whole, with good, intelligent, honest help. In conclusion, I will say if any one has more money than they know what to do with, they can be relieved of a nice little sum if they wish to take the advice of some promoters of certified plants ; however, it is not necessary to go to such usaless expense, as certi- fied milk can be produced at a reasonable expense. THE FARM HOME. (Dr. Edna D. Day, Professor of Home Economics, University of Missouri.) Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen — All this week you have been learning how to grow corn and feed cattle, how to raise pigs and make butter. From morning until night you have been learn- ing how to produce to the best advantage. But why? Why do you care whether the crops are good or the pigs well fed or the butter well flavored? What difference do any of these things make to you if you and your family are not well fed, well housed and well clothed? If your home is not attractive and comfortable? If you and your wife have to work so hard that there is no time to enjoy life? If your children are not always well, good and happy? But, perhaps, you say "It is because we care for these things that we have come here. We are studying how to make money in order that we may be able to provide the best things for our homes." Or, perhaps, you say "We are not so selfish as to think simply of ourselves and our families. We are Missourians, we have a pride in our State, and we are ambitious that Missouri pigs and cows be the very best in the world." You certainly are as ambitious that Missouri men, women and children should be the best in the world. But perhaps it had not occurred to you that, after you have learned how to make money, some suggestions on how to spend it in order to get from it the best possible home for your growing children might be equally profit- able. A few years ago it did not occur to farmers that they did not know the best way to grow corn or feed cows. They felt insulted if anybody suggested to them that they needed to study the subject. But men who have been learning the value of balanced rations for 102 Missouri Agricultural Report. cows may not be surprised to have it suggested that it might be well to see if their children are getting balanced rations. Possibly you say that the feeding of children is the work of women, and that if you had known anything was to be said on that subject, you would have brought your wife along. I am sorry you did not. She might have enjoyed the outing as well as you. Possibly in a year or two we shall have a Housekeepers' Conference Farmers' week that will make it seem worth while for her to come. But, in the meantime, I am glad to have an opportunity to speak to you men, and suggest some things that you can do for the home. As I have been in different parts of the country, I have noticed that, on the average, men on farms are more interested in the de- tails of their homes than are men in the cities. Certainly their pleasure and their recreation depend more on the home than that of men living in more settled communities ; therefore, I feel sure of an interested audience. I have been in this State but four months. I have not yet had the privilege of going into a Missouri farm home. Therefore, if any suggestions I may make to you are not applicable in this State or to your particular home, you may sit back comfort- ably and congratulate yourself on your progress. What then do I suggest? First, if you get so rich following the suggestions made in this conference that you decide to build a new house, be very careful in making the plans that you put more money into convenience than you do into size. Many a prosperous farmer, on rebuilding his home, has felt rich enough to make a house so large that his wife has not yet found time enough for its proper care. Not only are there more square feet of floor to be swept, but the steps necessary to do the ordinary routine work of the house have been multiplied many times. Perhaps in the old home the family ate in the kitchen. Now there is a dining room, and the dining table, the china closet, the pantry, the work table and the cook stove seem suddenly to have taken a dislike to each others' company. Perhaps the bed rooms used to be on the first floor ; now they are upstairs, and be- cause it occurred to no one when the plans were made that it would be much harder to heat a large house than a small one, they are cold in winter weather, and it is hard to persuade the children to stay in them long enough for proper bathing or tidy dressing. And the wife, who used to be bright and fresh of an evening to help the children with their lessons or to join them in a frolic, is now tired after her much walking back and forth and up and down. She has no energy left for her family, and certainly less for a party in the state Dairy Association. 103 new parlor. She who should be the mistress of the house has become its slave. But do not think for a moment that I am dis- couraging separate dining rooms and upstairs bed rooms. I wish only to remind you of the cost of their maintenance and the neces- sity of providing for their care. It is very hard these days to get satisfactory hired help in the house, no matter how much one is able or willing to pay, and it is especially hard in the country. The help must generally be in the form of convenient arrangements, machines and labor-saving devices of various kinds. Put the large- ness into verandas, for they need no furnace heat, are easily kept in order_ and are a great comfort in the summer. Perhaps the convenience most needed in the house is running water and drains. Some kind of power is necessary on most farms. If you have a windmill to draw up water for the stock, it will not cost much more to have it pumped into a reservoir at the top of the house and piped down into the kitchen. Some knowledge and skill is necessary in making drains to safely carry off the waste water from the house, but when you consider the wasted energy of the woman who has, with each dish pan of water, to walk across the kitchen floor, open the door, go down the steps and out across the land to find some place not wet from the last pan of water; when you think of the time wasted in- this way, and think of the things the house-wife might have had time to do, if it were not for these numerous dishwater-throwing expeditions, I am sure you will de- cide the drain is worth its cost. A recent farmers' bulletin (No. 270) on "Modern Conveni- ences for the Farm Home" gives directions for making drains. It gives suggestions also for many other conveniences in the home. It certainly is well worth the price of a postal card to the Secretary of Agriculture at Washington. Since the men of the home generally have some responsibility for the stoves, I suppose I do not need to suggest to you that fur- naces save labor. Perhaps I might add that with a good hot air furnace we may ha- j a good system of ventilation in the house. Of course, you men a a out in the fresh air a good share of the time, but the women a d young children have to breathe the air of the house most of tl i time. For them, especially, some system of ven- tilation is nece .-^ary, and the good hot air furnace is a convenient form. Of cou' se, it costs money, but fresh warm air in the winter time always costs money. But to r(;turn to the subject of saving steps. The china closet ought to be somewhere between the dining room table and 104 Missouri Agricultural Report. the kitchen sink. The kitchen work table ought to be near the stove and the sink, and it may well be a kitchen cabinet. If the food must be kept in the cellar in the summer time to keep it cool, a dumb waiter, with two or three shelves, run on pulleys between the cellar and the kitchen, is a servant well worthy of her wages. I wonder if you have ever stopped to count the number of times your wife makes the trip down and up the cellar stairs struggling with her skirt and a pan of milk, or with her skirt and a dish of butter, and a plate of meat, or, still, with the inevitable skirt and the vegetables or fruit. Are those stairs convenient stairs? Is there any chance that the skirt may catch on anything and cause a serious fall? Is there any danger of knocking her head? Are they light, so that they can easily be kept clean? With a dumb waiter, one trip to the cellar before a meal will be sufficient. If the vegetables are needed sometime before the cream and butter, the dumb waiter can be drawn up, the vegetables taken out and then the waiter let down again until the other things are needed. Sometimes all the food needed from the cellar in one day can be placed on the shelves in the morning and no other trip be necessary that day. Of course, an ice box on the ground floor would save all this effort. And a large ice box in the cellar would help very much with the fresh meat supply. As it is, most farmers have to depend on chickens for the greater part of their fresh meat, and unless one is in the poultry business, the care of chickens is another burden added to the household. In cold weather there should be a pantry on the ground floor in which the food is kept, and this pantry should be within walking distance of the dining room and kitchen. If this is not possible, a box can be turned on its side and fastened just outside the kitchen window and the food kept in it. If your house has been built without care to step-saving in the position of dining table, sinks and cupboards, a small table on rollers, especially if its capacity is increased by a lower shelf, will be found a great convenience. It can be used to advantage in set- ting and clearing the table. It is also helpful to have near the sink when the dishes are washed. They can be put on it and the table then moved to the china closet and emptied. Many a woman who is now tired of an evening would be fresh if she used a high stool at the sink and work table. And many a man would have better dinners if his kitchen floor was covered with linoleum instead of being of unfinished wood. It takes considerable energy on one's hands and knees with the scrubbing brush to extract the. dirt fronx state Dairy Association. 105 the pores of wood. It takes comparatively little energy with a mop to clean the smooth surface of linoleum, and there is plenty of strength left to prepare a good dinner. You men have been looking at the milking machine. Probably each of you have a separator. If you find it an advantage to buy the latest machinery for the farm, you will also find it an advantage to buy a carpet sweeper, a washing machine, and a bread mixer for the home. Of course, your machinery is for the sake of making money, but you want to make money so you can have more comforts and conveniences in your home. Have the labor saving machinery in your home and your wife will be able to produce for you com- forts and luxuries that money cannot buy. There are many little things such as egg beaters, palate knives, measuring cups, soap shakers, dish mops, sharp knives, and the like which are absent from some homes, partly, perhaps, because the wife does not like to ask for the money necessary for their purchase, and partly because not having studied physics or cultivated the mechanical side of her nature she fails to value until she has once used them. Until girls have studied something more of mechanics and manual training, we will have to depend on you men to see to it that the women have the mechanical help they need in the house and that they know how to use. There is much talk about girls learning how to cook. They need to do that, but they need fully as much to learn how to use and value sharp tools and good labor saving devices, and I hope you will use all your influence to see that manual training and domestic science are introduced into the public schools, and to see to it that your wives, if possible, and certainly your daughters, have some time and means to supplement the knowledge gained in the valuable but expensive school of experience. Lack of Variety in foods is too common on busy farms. I have mentioned the fresh meat problem. Certainly in the country there should be no lack of vegetables, but the man of the family is so busy making money that he finds no time for a kitchen garden, and the wife is so busy in the house trying to get along without labor sav- ing devices, that she had no time for the garden, and consequently the meals and health suffer. But while the means of transporta- tion are no better than at present, the kitchen garden gives the only hope of varied diet. If only the men can do the first hard work in the garden and see that the indoor burdens are lightened most women will welcome the opportunity for work out of doors among the green things, and will be the better for it physically. 106 Missouri Agricultural Report. And one of the best kinds of education for the children is to give them each a small plot of land and encourage them to raise vege- tables for the house table. Sometimes it is wise to let the children thus earn money for some of their clothes and learn in this way something of the value of money. But even if the garden is a nuisance, even if it does take time from other things, remember that no amount of money you can make will compensate for the lack of these fresh vegetables for your growing children. It is not simply comfort and convenience that is needed in the home, health is of prime importance. According to the statistics of the United States Census Bureau for 1900, only 2.8 per cent, of the annual deaths in Missouri are due to old age. Just think, only 2.8 per cent of the people live to die of old age. Something is the matter. The larger part of our time is spent in the house. Is the home responsible? You may be perfectly well satisfied with the kind of homes your parents had, or the kind of homes you have. If none of your family have ever died of anything but old age, if none of them have ever been sick, I am not talking to you just now, but to your neighbor. Most dis- eases can be prevented in one of two ways — either (1) by keeping the body in first class condition, by following all hygeinic laws in regard to eating, sleeping, drinking, breathing, working and resting that disease germs cannot find entrance to the body. Or (2) by keeping the body from contact with disease germs. Pneumonia and consumption cause more deaths in Missouri than any four other diseases. The present crusade against spitting is an attempt to prevent the spread of the bacteria causing pneu- monia and consumption. But until the crusade has gained much more strength than at present, the home will need to be very care- ful of all hygienic and sanitary measures necessary to keep the body in good resisting condition. Many a death, but much more sickness, is due to malaria. I wonder if you have ever calculated the amount of money that is wasted by the semi-sickness that allows one to drag around and do only half a man's work. We know that mosquitoes carry the dis- ease germs of malaria. Sometimes it is possible to drain the land, and greatly reduce the number of mosquitoes. Certainly we can put screens in the houses. But above all, we should look after the general hygienic conditions of the body, that it may be able to resist the entrance of disease germs. Typhoid fever is another too common disease. Its prevention in the country rests chiefly with the household. Care must be taken state Dairy Association, 107 that no surface water gets into the wells and that flies do not carry- to food germs from the fecal matter in which they breed. Diarrhoea has the fourth place as the cause of deaths in Mis- souri, and here, again, it is chieflly the home that is responsible. Spoiled food, especially spoiled milk, is the common cause. The dis- ease is more common in the southern part of the State than in the northern. Evidently it is due to food standing in too warm places. Is it not possible to have an ice supply? From every standpoint we will all be thankful when the State has done something to use the limestone that it has in abundance, to make such good roads that communication with the market will be easy, not only to take produce to market but to get there the food, clothes, and tools that it takes too much labor to produce at home. And good roads mean more than material blessings. They mean better education, more regular church attendance, more social life. The isolated home needs not only to use special care to make its numerous duties easily done, and to be most careful of all health conditions, because the doctor is far off; but it has also, especial problems in educative recreation. There are any number of games that are possible in the farm home, no matter how isolated, but there are fewer friends to suggest them. Books are hard to get. I understand that Missouri is still without traveling libraries. Each home must be well supplied with its own choice literature. Art galleries are not near, but it is possible to get very good cheap copies of the best masterpieces of art. The Perry pictures at one cent apiece are a great means of education. After the family have collected a large number of these and studied them for some time, it is able to intelligently decide what two or three large pictures it wants for the walls. Concerts are hard to reach. Good music teachers are at a distance. But the farm home, as well as the city home, can have a Cecilian or some other of the modern piano play- ers. In this way the family may hear a concert of the best music at any time. It is a splendid means of education and certainly a most restful means of recreation when one is tired of an evening. Is all your money spent? Have you spent it before your chick- ens are hatched or your cows grown? I hope you have properly proportioned it, so that all the sanitary conditions of your home are satisfactory, that you have a variety in your foods, that you have every possible labor-saving device, that you have a good library, that on your walls hang masterpieces of art, and that your soul is being elevated by listening to the best of music. 108 Missouri Agricultural Report. SILO EXPERIENCE IN MISSOURI. (R. M. Washburn.) The silo was once a failure because not properly built; it is now a success because experience has taught what points are neces- sary. When it comes to changes in farm methods, the farmers of Missouri know a good thing when they see it. If there are any in Missouri who now doubt the worth of a silo for stock feeding and are willing to learn from those who have had experience, let them read the words of the following gentlemen who have learned by experience. Mr. Jesse Williams, Excelsior Springs, Clay county, Mo., has used a silo two seasons. He feeds silage to milk cows, horses, calves, hogs and chickens and says, "Last year I fed from 35 to 60 head of cattle out of the silo from October 7 to August 15. When the silage ran out it took 400 pounds of bran per day to take its place." Mr. Thomas Shields, Eureka, St. Louis county, Mo., has used a silo two years, fills it with corn, sorghum and cowpeas, feeds to dairy cows and heifers and says, "As to cost of filling, my farm is not sufficiently large to pasture my herd and raise sufficient feed to fill silos, so I have to depend on renting land anywhere I can get it. Some of the corn was hauled three and one half miles this last season. While I could not give the practical cost, I will say I was well paid for the hauling. My silo was filled as follows: Three feet corn then four feet cowpeas, then eight sorghum and finished filling with corn. My dairy herd gave best results with corn. I had intended filling one load of each but fields were so far apart and labor so scarce I could not do so." Mr. J. E. Roberts, Bolckow, Andrew county. Mo., has used a stave silo one year, filled it with corn, fed to dairy cows with "excel- lent" results. He says, "I think a silo is a necessity to any Mis- souri farmer who has stock. I am satisfied the -increase of produc- tion of milk and cream has paid for my silo this year. My cows have milked the past winter just like they were on^rass." Mr. Robert E. Mitchell, Woodlandville, Boone county. Mo., built a concrete silo a year ago, filled with corn, feeds to cows, steers, and young cattle and says, "This is my first year's experi- ence with a silo and, farmer fashion, I have not kept a close account of everything either, as to the cost of building, filling or feed con- state Dairy Association. 109 tained, but feel that by approximating, I can safely say that it has saved me somewhere from 25 to 50 per cent on my feed bill (prob- able one-third this past winter, and the physical effect on the cattle would be very hard to estimate, but it has been very satisfactory. I think anyone wintering as many as 20 or 25 cattle, either milk cows or steers, would be compensated for building a silo." Mr. E. L. Ensign, Cameron, Clinton county. Mo., has used a stave silo one year, filled with corn and sorghum, fed to cows with "fine" results. He says, "It has saved me money. This being my first year, I cannot tell as well as I can after a little more experi- ence with the silo. The corn was pretty ripe before I got my silo ready. I put every sixth load, a load of cane and thought my silage had enough moisture, but believe it would have kept better if I had put several barrels of water in it." Mr. Philander P. Lewis, Cresent, St. Louis county, Mo., has used a stave silo two years, fills with corn, feeds to dairy cows and young cattle and says, "Silage is the cheapest dairy feed we have. It increases the milk and improves the conditions of the cows. I would not try to run a dairy without it." He adds, "I have found that silage is not only a cheap and splendid feed for cows but that horses, hogs and chickens do better from having it. I believe that every farmer who is feeding cows, horses, hogs, etc., would find the silo a profitable investment." Mr. George Bothwell, Nettleton, Caldwell county. Mo., has used a stave silo one season. Fills it with corn and soja beans, feeds it to dairy cows with the "very best results." He adds, "My cows ate the silage with a relish, gave a heavy flow of milk all winter, and came through the winter with a soft coat of hair and mellow hide, in that respect they had the appearance of cattle in perfect show bloom. Of course, in addition, we fed some grain and other rough- ness." Mr. Wm. H. Bruns, Concordia, Lafayette county. Mo., has a stave silo, used five years. He fills his silo with "corn and cowpeas grown together, planted together, drilled all at one time." He says, "Corn and cowpeas make a silage that the cows like better than anything else I ever fed to them." Just think of how much more feed the corn crop will make, if the whole crop is eaten by the stock, stalks and all." Mr. Wm. Plummer, Hale, Carroll county, Mo., feeds silage to dairy cows and calves and says "Our cows milk fine all winter and come out in good order in the spring. I couldn't get along without my silo now." 110 Missouri Agricultural Report. Mr. W. Guy Ensign, Cameron, Clinton county, Mo., has used a Jiilo one winter, filled it with corn, fed to milk cows and calves. He says, "Our cows milk on silage about the same as on grass. Calves grow fine on it," and adds, "We started in last winter with more stock than we had carried through for some time, and on account of the dry weather we had less feed than usually, and we have got feed (hay and roughage) to carry over. Ensilage seems to be a very healthy food. For instance, we had a horse that always stayed poor and not in good spirits till we started to feed him silage, and from that time he began to pick up. I think for a man who owns a farm and keeps either milk cows or who is growing young stock, cannot afford to get along without one. It seems to keep cattle healthy." Mr. E. V. Mahaffy, Pleasant Hill, Cass county, Mo., has used a silo more than two years, fills with corn, cowpeas, sorghum and alfalfa, feeds to milk cows and hogs with "good" results. In answer to the question, "Does the money come to you enough faster with the silo to pay for the trouble?" He answers, "Yes," and adds, "A great many make the mistake of letting the corn get too ripe. I think the best time is to cut the corn when it is just too hard for roasting ears. If you put good silage in the silo, and pack it well, it will come out good, as the silo makes it no better. It just keeps the feed. This is the only economical way of feeding. We feed silage the year around with good results." Mr. Henry Logan, Sedalia, Pettis county, Mo,, has used a silo eight years, fills with corn, feeds to "cattle, cows, hogs, calves and horses" with "good" results and adds, "I would not be without the silo under any consideration. I cut my corn in September when the weather is good, and in about five days I have 250 tons of feed in the silo. That runs me for 12 months. I feed my cows the year around. There is nothing on the farm that pays better than the silo." Mr. H. M. Packard, Kenoma, Barton county. Mo., has used a silo eight years, fills with "corn fodder with a little shredded cane on top. That way it will keep very near perfect to the top." Feeds to dairy cows with "good" results and adds, "I think it is the cheap- est feed I can get. I would not be without the silo. I thought one year I could get along without, but found that I could not. Built a concrete." Mr. H. C. Goodrich, Calhoun, Heniy county, Mo., says "No dairyman can afford to be without a silo. I consider it the best and cheapest way to save the whole corn crop. I have fed ensilage to dairy cows for 12 or 13 years." state Dairy Association. Ill Mr. Joseph Elliott, Windsor, Henry county, Mo., feeds silage to cows and young stock and says "I like the silage for feeding very well. Would not like to be without one. It is not only good feed for cows but all kinds of cattle, and when it is put up in the fall it is so much easier to get at than to have to go to the fields for corn fodder; with ensilage we get the whole corn plant for food." Mr. Fred Parcher, Maryville, Nodaway county, Mo., feeds sil- age to cows and young cattle and says, "Results in a saving of one- half in feed store bills and over one-half in amount of hay eaten." Mr. H. S. Hand, Appleton City, St. Clair county. Mo., says "I find it (silage) excellent for dairy cows. Our cows milk as well in winter as they do in summer; in fact, they usually gain when we commence to feed." Mr. John Miles, Grays' Summit, Franklin county. Mo., feeds silage to dairy cows and horses and says, "Results are good. I like it well and think it an ideal method of securing succulent food." Mr. Fritz Sensor, Corder, Lafayette county, Mo., says, "I have been feeding it to all of my cattle. It is of most value to milk cows." Mr. John Patterson, Kirksville, Adair county. Mo., has fed sil- age for many years and says of it, "When I speak of the economy of putting corn into silos to feed cows, I don't mean that it is good for cows only, it is good for all kinds of stock. All seem to like it and thrive on it, and when you get buildings and machinery for it, it does not cost any more to put it in silos than to cut and shock, etc., and it is much more convenient to feed in barns or sheds where stock can be comfortable and all the manure saved." Mr. N. H. Gentry, Sedalia, Mo., says, "I put up a silo the past summer 30 feet high by 20 in diameter. We filled it with cut corn and it is proving a very cheap, economical feed. We are feeding it to all our cattle, and our work horses have had no other grain all winter, keeping in good condition. In thus consuming the whole corn plant it proves a very cheap food. We mix a little other grain with it in feeding milk cows and young cattle we wish to push along, but the dairy cows get nothing but it, and they eat very little hay. I think I will put up a smaller silo for summer feeding in case of severe drouth, and after carrying it through the summer and it is not needed, we can feed it out through the winter or fall." Mr. C. T. Graves, Maitland, Mo., had charge of the Jerseys at the World's Fair in 1904, and the excellent showing made there was partly due to the superior corn silage that was fed. Redmond & Hurst, Tipton, Moniteau county, Mo., use two "bin" 112 Missouri Agricultural Report. silos and says, "We are milking 50 cows in all stages of lactation, 10 of which are heifers with first calf, and our check for January- cream was $265.00 ; not so bad for winter." Mr. McNish of Brookfield, Mo., has two silos. He says, "I feed all classes of cattle with good results, especially for growing stock. I fed a car load of steers silage and ear corn and topped the market. The only difficulty in feeding silage with ear corn is that the cattle which are to be fattened will quit eating ear corn and eat silage alone. Corn, I believe, should be ground when feeding with silage for fattening steers." The writer has personal letters in his possession from all of the above named men to prove that they said just what is accredited to them. Either the silo is a mighty good thing, or else it has a way of fooling a lot of mighty good men. About 100 were built in Missouri last year. RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE STATE DAIRY ASSOCIA- TION. We, the State Dairy Association of Missouri, assembled in seventeenth annual convention, and representing 25,000 dairy farm- ers in Missouri, hereby resolve : First: We thank the Columbia Commercial Club for their liberal financial assistance. Second: We wish to express our obligations to the State Board of Agriculture for their financial assistance, and to the Honorable George B. Ellis, Secretary, for his efficient efforts in behalf of our meeting. Third: We appreciate the attendance of the representatives of the various machine companies with their exhibits, and wish especially to thank Blanke & Hauk, and A. H. Barber Companies for their unusually extensive exhibits. Fourth : We favor the holding of a National Dairy Show in Chicago next fall. Fifth: The thanks of the Association are extended to Pro- fessor Oscar Erf of the Kansas Agriculture College through whose courtesy was made possible the exhibit of the milking machine, and we also extend our thanks to Mr. S. Suzuki for his services in operating the same. Sixth: We favor the establishment of reasonable pure food state Dairy Association. 113 regulations and higher standards of purity for dairy products. Seventh: We appreciate the effective work of the present Dairy Commissioner, R. M. Washburn, and ask that he be re-ap- pointed, and the sam^e appropriation be made by the General As- sembly as before to carry on this important work. Eighth: We recognize the great importance of the Agricul- tural College of the University to our interests and appreciate the immense value of its past services. We further recognize that this work must now be expended to meet the rapidly growing argicul- tural and dairy interests of the State and the increasing demands made upon the College, and therefore ask that the General As- sembly grant the very reasonable request made by the Board of Curaotrs for appropriation for the next biennial period. Ninth : We ask the General Assembly to pass a law enlarging the scope and the power of the State Veterinary Department for the purpose of the better control and stamping out tuberculosis now found in some of the herds of cattle in our State. Tenth : For the third time we call the attention of the Board of Curators, and through them, the General Assembly, to the urgent need of a new dairy barn on the College ground. The present structure is a disgrace to the dairy interests of the State and to the dairy herd now owned by the University. D. A. CHAPMAN, Warrensburg, Mo. WM. A. H. GETTING, Concordia, Mo. B. 0. TERRY, Greencastle, Mo. Committee. The nominating committee consisting of F. L. Austin, St. Joseph; A. Bergman, Concordia, and J, B. Berghaus, Billings, re- ported that it was their opinion that the officers of the last year should continue throughout another term. Mr. Chapman of War- rensburg took the chair and put the motion, thus electing the fol- lowing to office: President, Dr. Geo. C. Mosher, Kansas City; First Vice-President, J. M. Smith, Brookfield; Second Vice-Presi- dent, Thomas Shields, Eureka; Secretary, R. M. Washburn, Colum- bia; Treasurer, D. B. Matthews, Kirksville. A-8 SESSION Improved Live Stock Breeders' Association. January 8-9, 1907. LIMITATIONS OF BABY BEEF PRODUCTION. (H. J. Waters, Dean of the College of Agriculture, Oolumbla, Mo.) Two quite independent classes of cattlemen are vitally interest- ed in the subject of baby beef. One is the breeder and raiser of cattle ; the other the man who fattens them or fits them for market. In other words, the cattle breeder on the one hand, and the profes- sional feeder on the other. It is from the view point of the professional feeder alone that this subject is on this occasion presented. To discuss it from the standpoint of both parties would be quite beyond the scope of a single address. To deal with this subject from the view point of the cattle raiser is reserved for a future discussion. For many years the teachers and writers on agricultural topics have been strong advocates of baby beef. The professional feeder, whose livelihood depends upon his success in this business, has con- tinued to show a decided preference for older cattle. The teachers and writers have based their opinions on the results of experiments that have been somewhat numerous and extensive, and, at first glance, unimpeachable. The feeder has based his judgment upon extensive experience covering many years and with large numbers of cattle. It is scarcely to be supposed that both parties to this contention are right. Nor is it to be taken for granted that the man whose position is sustained by practical experience alone is necessarily the one who is wrong. Live Stock Breeders' Association. 115 73 a d f) o t< £: tc 03 <^ til «t-» o fl -*3 « d 9 4) 0) -f^ J u > St a ^ 4^ & s rn r) ■a d > M >'o I-t )— t CO J3 IN »0 P) 1-H a> . CO o li: C3 t>> to 1 13 t^ lO ■* l£> ^ r-^ c ^ CO a t~ T-l C9 »-( i-H .— I-l o « •4^ .2 -< lO 00 ■fl< CO r^ I- ■* 0> .I t— t •-I .-1 eq 1-H ^ o 1— < CVI 1 o o ■* 05 u 00 05 oo o 53 cQ y -a r^ «D ■* t^ t^ o tf; 00 >j2 U5 CO "-I O CO •<»< CO CO fi ° (N CO 1 ;d o to T}< OS 00 IN OS C-I O > o N CO HN »-l N •<1' O o fe • W in C3 CO C^I Tji CO OS CO ■* t-- CO '^l (N IN t— ( X t c o 5R to rt 05 to 0) K5 rt CO OS CO rt t- CO (N N ■^ O |i2 .2 (-• O 00 00 ® O 00 00 to 3 & QO 00 CO C GC X CO c « 00 to 00 'Z ^ 00 a> Si 4^ o> ei o < Live Stock Breeders' Association. 125 FEEDERS PREFER CATTLE IN THE TWO-YEAR OLD FORM. As has already been pointed out, it is quite evident that the feeders, in filling out our blanks, had in mind cattle in their two- year-old form. This is evidenced by their stating that the aver- age length of the feeding period was six months, which is about the time required to make two-year-old cattle prime, is longer than is necessary for three-year-olds, and is too short for yearlings or calves. It is further evidenced by the average weight which they considered they had found most profitable, viz., approximately 1,350 pounds. This is too light for three-year-olds, and too heavy for yearlings or calves. Then, again, the question put to them directly as to whether they had found 1,500 or 1,600-pound steers profitable, as a rule, out of 721 replies, in round numbers, or practically 70 per cent, answered in the negative. All of this is further confirmed by the answer to the question direct as to what age they usually put their cattle on full feed. A study of this age summary is exceedingly interesting and in- structive, as the results are very striking. For example, out of a total of 680 replies from Missouri, 257, or nearly 40 per cent, gave two years as the age at which their cattle were put on full feed, which would mean, with a six months' feeding period, as was reported by them in answer to previous question, 30 months old cattle, when finished and ready for the market. Thirteen per cent gave two and one-half years of age, and 11 per cent gave essentially the same answer, namely, "between two and three years of age," as their preference. Thus more than 62 per cent of the Missouri feeders reported that they put their cattle on feed at between two and three years of age, as contrasted with less than 4 per cent who put them on as calves, less than 4 per cent who put them on as yearlings, and but a fraction over 4 per cent who put them on at one and one-half years of age. What is true of the reports from Missouri is essentially true of Iowa, as will be readily seen from the summary just presented. It is a significant fact that in Missouri, Iowa and Illinois the number of men who put their catte on feed at three years of age was almost double the number who put their cattle on feed under two years of age. It is evident, therefore, that after all that has been said about the advantage of cheaper gains made by young cattle, the cattle 126 Missouri Agricultural Report. si a o o -*^ >» -a -o 2 9 u o: 0; >> 6 if H 9 d 0) « Live Stock Breeders' Association. 141 8 8 ^ ^H CO a4 ee s s s »» ^ fiA' €ie «e '^ ^ ^ OS ac lo CO CD S4 OS flO o o o QO CO GO 00 8 ^ CO Oi CO <>» f-i CO 00 cc O '♦^ OS o S5 (30 O -*' in -M IC s 1-1 00 u n CO ■+ U3 g E fe ^ -*< g ^♦1 in E a in o o S 8 g s 00 i i 00 I— 1 " 1—1 -1 ^ 1— 1 ^ [N —' nH — ' 1—1 ^1 t- IM CO 00 CM CO 2 8 CO CO CO o CO CO in X f— I to OS ~^ -H CO CO lO t~ to « CO OS !M O (N 1-1 00 a ol 0) O >< 2 9 6 2 o 1 u 93 ID u xi tn ^ ^ <0 > s 2 o I O 2 o S3 ® >s i > »i tf ;i ■c 1 c u '. 03 OS • SI •■ c a ^ > D s >> o Eh S3 to _j l- o . " 1 O. _- S ft OS . (M 3 a -H a a 03 c3 tf c3 fc fe CO te 4^ -*j 4J A r^ t- « ^ a Q. 3 u — > H > Q V ^_K[ ..^ HtK V --rto t? - r. CD t) ^ p CO < < p < CD 5 CO I'M " CD CO M -S OX p "^ C5 p f* BO — 2 ^ =^ TO »B p"' CD TO TO P TO CD CD w>co TO ►- BP^:; "-0 CD cc S tn c^ to P o p C P o s. TO 8 en p p • O cfi ■ TO'^ . PO n buyi ssary t of ga s !? ti c; c TO 5' TO o CO CO P D O TO 2. D : ~2 < CD . CD CD ng ma o equa in ove 2 *":i^ "! 3 01 TO : V o P _, . .^ fD -1 " • p "< 3. : -T ■-• ^ o • ' • 7 o - -il- tVi-l- IBOCD Linseed meal, 3 lbs. per head • daily, and shelled cor n ad libitum. 8 7 762 932 1259 1490 497 557 2.36 2.64 $6.46 $6.73 Two-vear-olds $ .27 $1.50 $ .16 $ .10 Cottonseed meal, 3 lbs . per head daily, and shelled corn ad libitum. Yearlings 8 757 1209 452 2.14 $6.23 Two-year-olds 7 942 1481 539 2.55 $6.73 $ .50 $2.69 $ .27 $ .18 Gluten feed, 3 lbs. per head daily, and shelled corn ad ' libitum. YoarlinefS. 7 774 1217 443 2.10 $6.20 Two-year-olds 7 940 1456 515 2.44 $6.66 $ .46 $2.37 $ .25 $ .16 Shelled corn alone. Yearllners . 7 760 1204 444 2.11 $5.31 Two-year-olds 6 943 1433 490 2.32 $5.88 $ .57 $2.80 $ .29 $ .19 Average of all rations. Yearlings 30 27 763 939 1223 1466 4E6 526 2.18 2.49 1 $6 06 $6.52 Two-year-olds $ .44 $2.32 $ .24 $ .18 *In computing cost of gain, the following prices of feed were assumed: Corn, 40c per bu. Cottonseed meal, $24.00 per ton. Linseed meal, $28.00 per ton. Gluten feed, $22. 0() per ton. No charge was made for cost of pasture, and no credit was given for hog gains nor for value of manure. 156 Missouri Agricultural Rejwrt. INFLUENCE OF AGE UPON THE COST OF PRODUCTION. (Missouri results in co-operation with Bureau of Plant Industry, U. S. Department of Agriculture.) Summer feeding on bhicgrass pasture. Length of feeding period, 210 days. Tlilrd trial, 1900. Yearlings and 2-year-olds compared. H > o <; (T*- P ^ ^ a o W a> P (t c+ i-» w cr t-tl a> (B K (K) V o >£ J. to O (6 P IK) CD Di P Q o M tJ n> TO P P M. o o o <^ 2 fD ■ P 1-^ -i O ■ o =2' 3 P , • 3 I : TO ;3S LobS ■O (B X I w o I 91 3 O »i «.p - TO'< C P r+ — wO 3 «i P Si f6£S ^3 p -. o = TO " o TO O CD >< ^ o «= CD <» w • d D-B — 2 »'« CD « " 3 P 3. C "1 o CD ''I CD TO o CD t3 CD "> l-CO CD 3 ''TO !^« I CD Linseed meal and shelled corn. Yearlings Two-year-olds . Cottonseed meal & shelled corn. Yearlings Two. year-olds. Corn with linseed meal last 60 days. Yearlings Two-year-olds.. Shelled corn. Yearlings- Two-year-olds.. Average of all ra- tions. Yearlings Two-year-olds.. 7 859 7 875 7 858 7 861 7 861 7 886 7 859 7 886 28 859 28 877 1320 1440 1299 1431 1311 1470 1250 1438 1295 1444 461 566 441 570 450 584 391 552 435 568 2.18 2.69 2.10 2.72 2.14 2.78 1.86 2.63 2.07 2.70 $5.58 $5 58 $5.63 $5.67 $5.26 $5.37 $5.28 $5.52 $5.43 $5.53 00 $ .04 $ .11 24 .10 00 .23 $ .64 $1.32 $ .54 $ 00 $ .03 $ .07 $ .15 $ .05 $ 00 .02 $ .04 $ .09 $ .04 $6.75 $7.00 $6.60 $7.00 $6.75 $7.00 $6.60 $7.00 $6.67 $7.00 $ .25 $ .40 $ .25 $ .40 I $ .33 •On December 3, 1906, Mr. John Alexander, of the commission firm of Alexander, Ward& Conover, Chicago, placed the above values on the cattle of the various ages fed that season. They were sold on the Chicago market December 10, 1906. The 28 liead of yearlings brought $6.35, and the 5J8 head of 2-year-olds brought $0.85. Live Stock Breeders* Association. 157 SUMMARY OF FIRST AND THIRD TRIALS, 1904 TWO-YEAR-OLDS. AND l\m, YEARLINGS AND o o Linseed meal A corn. Yearlings Two-year-olds Cottonseed meal and corn. Yearlings Two-year-olds Gluten feed and corn( 1904 only) Yearlings Two-year-olds Linseed meal last 60 days and corn (1906 only). Yearlings ... Two-year-olds Corn alone. Yearlings Two-year-olds Average of all rations for both years. Yearlings Two-year-olds 15 14 15 14 7 7 7 7 14 13 58 65 Influence of Aye on Cost of Production. ft < ►1 ■ S? 00 O 210 210 210 210 211 211 210 210 210 210 210 210 3 ■ Mi® n.P So- 807 903 807 901 760 861 886 809 912 810 907 (t> tR CO • n > H > Q --K v^R V -jq K ■1 s-^r) P^ ^> Exces per 1 lings 00 < < P P OR rt- si''- "■ to • c xcess In c or season 'en r lings. :; ^ p c - « - ^ — O P 03 82. CP CD ® 2 2. (K3 2. p : 5'^ s in ecess ost o ings. 5ts8'- : * 3 c-t- PS c ft crtf ■a O CD r+ fD 2 P 3 (P3 P ■ 0? : (£" : "t; . IZ • Pt3 : p5 • O r+ : < a> buying ma ary to equi f gain ov selling pri s. necessa e differen f gain ov ■ B : M • - • o : <5 : tJ P : V-8 . Oi ft : 2v7 . fl> fi -. o . (6 • 1 a> Linseed meal, 3 lbs. daily, and shelled corn. Yearlings 8 7 723 1264 1201 1733 478 46l» 2.28 2.23 $5.92 $7.05 $6.20 $6.80 Tliree-yeaj--olds . . . $1.13 $5.30 $ .42 $ .31 $ .60 Cottonseed meal, 8 lbs. daily, and shell- ed corn. Yearlings 8 7 734 1269 1183 1688 449 419 2.14 2.00 $6.03 $7.58 $6.20 $6.80 Three-year-olds ... $1.15 $4.81 $ .38 $ .30 $ .60 Gluten feed, 3 lbs. daily, and shelled corn. Yearlings 7 733 1254 1178 1780 445 475 2.12 2.26 $5.87 $8.52 $6.20 $6.80 Three-year-olds.... $ .65 $3.09 $ .25 $ .18 $ .60 Shelled corn alone. Yearlings 7 C 729 1251 1153 1643 424 892 2.01 1.87 $5.18 $7.20 $6.20 $6.80 Three-year-olds... $2.02 $7.92 $ .63 $ .42 $ .60 Average of all rations Yearlings t \(\ 729 1179 449 2.14 $5.75 $6.20 Three-year-olds... i >6 1259 1698 439 2.09 $7.09 $1.24 $5.28 $ .42 $ .80 $6.80 $ .60 DISCUSSION OF RESULTS. YEARLINGS AND TWO-YEAR-OLDS COMPARED. It will be noted in the Missouri results that not a single lot of yearlings in either year made as rapid gains as did the cor- responding lot of two-year-olds. The average daily gain of all lots in 1904 was as follows : Yearlings Two-year-olds. 2.18 pounds 2.49 " Live Stock Breeders* Association. 159 in 1906 the difference is even more striking, as follows : Yearlings Two-year olds . 2.07 pounds. 2.70 It is believed that this difference was due primarily to the condition of the animals when the feeding trial began. As has already been made clear, the yearlings had been full fed for a con- siderable time before the experiments proper began, whereas the two-year-olds had been merely roughed, and were in thin condition. Thus they entered this experiment with a large appetite and with the maximum capacity for gain and the minimum of maintenance cost per steer in proportion to their appetite. Expressing the results in the total gain made per steer during the experiment, the time in each case being the same, it will be* noted that in 1904 the yearlings gained, on an average, 456 pounds, whereas the two-year-olds gained 526 pounds, or 70 pounds per head more in the same length of time, both being full fed. In 1906 the total gain per steer for the yearlings was 435 pounds, while for the two-year-olds it was 568 pounds, or 133 pounds more for the season. It will be recalled that in this year the two-year- olds were a little more than half fed during the first two months of the experiment, and were gotten on full feed toward the end of June. The average of the two years' trials for all rations, and in- volving 113 cattle, was 446 pounds of gain for the season for the yearlings and 547 pounds for the two-year-olds, or a difference of 101 pounds. Concerning the cost of gains, the student of these tables will have already noted that the difference between the yearlings and the two-year-olds is smaller than it was in the Canadian and the Kansas experiments already referred to. For example, in 1904, the maximum difference in the cost per hundred pounds of gain in favor of the yearlings was 57 cents with the shelled corn lot^ and the minimum difference was 27 cents per hundred with the corn and linseed meal lot. The average of all lots for that year was 44 cents per hundred. In 1906 the maximum difference was 24 cents per hundred, and was again shown by the shelled corn lot, and the minimum difference was 0, which was again the corn and linseed lot. The average of all lots for that year was 10 cents per hundred. The average for both years, and including the 113 cattle fed, was only 27 cents per hundred. 160 Missouri Agricultural Rej^fort. It will be recalled that a difference as high as $1.20 per hun- dred was shown in one of the Ottawa trials, and the Kansas ex- periment showed a difference of 80 cents per hundred. It was expected that the difference in cost of gain between j'earlings and two-year-olds would be less in the Missouri experi- ments than in the other trials reported, for the reason that there was less difference in the condition of the animals at the close. That is, the two classes of animals were more nearly uniform in degree of fatness at the close of the trials at the Missouri Station than was the case at Ottawa or Kansas. In one sense, it would be fairer to take the entire record of the yearlings, from the time they were put on full feed the previ- ous Christmas time until they were marketed, and the record of the two-year-olds, from the time they were put on full feed, May 1st. If this were done, it is certain that the difference in the cost of gain would be larger than the results here given show, because the yearlings as well as the two-year-olds would have had the ad- vantage of the earlier portion of the feeding period, when the cost of gains is relatively low. For the purposes of this discussion, however, as before intimated, we are taking the view of the pro- fessional feeder, who buys his feeders for delivery about May Ist, and who, if buying yearlings, to make prime for the following Christmas market, would necessarily buy animals that had been well warmed, and if buying older cattle, would not require them to be carrying the flesh that the younger ones would hnve to finish at the same time. It is believed, therefore, that the method em- ployed in this discussion Vv^ill be more nearly adapted to the com- mercial practices, and the figures given will be more nearly ap- plicable to the conditions of summer feeding in the corn belt than would the incorporation of the wintering data with the summer feeding results. The difference noted in the cost per hundred pounds of gain in the Missouri experiments in the first trial, in 1904, ranged all the way from $1.50 to $2.80 per head, with an average of $1.32 per head, when the difference per hundred pounds between year- lings and two-year-olds is applied to the total season's gains made by the latter. This means that had the feeder been intending to use shelled corn on bluegrass, it would have been necessary for him to have bought his two-year-olds, according to that year's results, at 29 cents per hundred less than his yearlings, or to have sold them for 19 cents per hundred more. Had he been intending to combine with his shelled corn a limited amount of linseed meal, Live Stock Breeders' Association. 161 he would need to have bought his two-year-olds for 16 cents per hundred less, or to have sold them for 10 cents per hundred more, to have overcome all the difference in cost of gain due to age. The aver- age of all the rations for that year would have necessitated the buy- ing of the two-year-olds at 24 cents per hundred less, or selling them at 18 cents per hundred more. Unfortunately, the cattle were not so marketed at the close of this trial as to enable us to ascertain what the relative selling value of the two classes was. On the basis of the second trial, made in 1906, the feeder using shelled corn alone would have had to buy his two-year-olds 15 cents per hundred lower than yearlings, or to sell them at nine cents per hundred more. A glance at the table of results for this trial will show that the two-year-olds fed on corn sold for 40 cents per hundred more than did the yearlings so fed. In case the feeder used shelled corn with a limited amount of linseed meal, on the basis of the 1906 results, the yearlings and the two-year-olds might have been bought at the same price and sold at the same price and returned the same profit. In other words, as has already been pointed out, there was in this particular lot of cattle no difference whatever in the cost of gain. It will be noted that at the close of the experiment Mr. Alexander estimated the yearlings fed on this ration to be worth $6.75 per hundred and the two-year-olds $7.00 per hundred, or a difference of 25 cents per hundred in favor of the older cattle, not because the older cattle had superior quality, for they had not, but because they were a little thicker and harder. The average of all the lots fed in 1906 showed that it would have been necessary to have purchased the two-year-olds at five cents per hundred less, or to have sold them at four cents per hundred more, than the yearlings to have overcome the difference in cost of gains made. It will be furthermore noted that Mr. Alexander estimated an average difference in the selling value of these cattle at the close of the experiment of 33 cents per hundred in favor of the older cattle. It will be recalled, from the foot note to the table of results for that year, that the actual price brought on the Chicago market by the yearlings was $6.35 per hundred and for the two-year-olds on the same day $6.85, or an actual difference of 50 cents per hundred. It was conceded by all parties that the younger cattle had rather the advantage in quality over the older class, but it was uniformly conceded that the older cattle were in more nearly prime condition. A-U 162 Missouri Agricultural Report. YEARLINGS AND THREE-YEAR-OLDS COMPARED. As in the case of the two-year-olds in these experiments, the three-year-olds had been roughed through the winter, and were in thin flesh when they entered upon this experiment. On the other hand, the yearlings had been practically full fed since February, and were, therefore, carrying considerable flesh. Notwithstanding this difference in condition, it is a very striking fact that the three- year-olds made on the average a smaller gain than did the year- lings. This is illustrated by the fact that the average daily gain for all the yearlings was 2.14 pounds daily, and for all the three- year-olds it was 2.09 pounds. In but one lot, namely, that fed on corn and gluten feed, did the three-year-olds gain more rapidly than the yearlings. It is true that the three-year-olds were fin- ished to a degree that none of the other cattle in this experiment had ever been brought to, and it is likely that in the last 60 days of the feeding period these older cattle produced very small in- crease in weight, which would have the effect, of course, of ma- terially reducing the average rate of gain for the whole feeding period. This is a matter of too much detail to go into in the dis- cussion here, and the student who is interested in this subject is referred to a bulletin soon to be issued by the Experiment Station, by Professor F. B. Mumford, Professor of Animal Husbandry, in which all of such details will be discussed most carefully. In studying our results with yearlings and three-year-olds, it should be borne in mind that we have but one trial, and conclu- sions formed should be subject to confirmation by trials now in progress. In fact, it will be safer to reserve final judgment until more data are accumulated. At the same time, it will be inter- esting to note the trend of these results. It will be observed, as might be expected, that the difference in cost of gains between yearlings and three-year-olds is materially larger than was that noted between yearlings and two-year-olds. For example, the maximum difference shown between the year- lings and three-year-olds having corn alone amounted to $2.02 per hundred, which, applied to the gain made by the three-year- olds for the season, is $7.92 per steer. The minimum difference in this trial was between the lots fed on corn and gluten feed, and amounted to 65 cents per hundred, or $3.09 per steer for the entire fattening period. The average of all the lots shows a difference of $1.24 per hundred, or $5.28 per steer. In order to overcome this excess in cost of gain, it will be necessary to buy three-year- Live Stock Breeders* Association. 163 olds, on the basis of the results with shelled corn alone, at 63 cents per hundred less than yearlings, or to sell them when finished at 42 cents per hundred more, whereas in the case of the gluten-fed lot the buying price for the three-year-olds need only be 25 cents per hundred less, or the selling margin 18 cents per hundred more. The average of all the lots shows that a difference in the buying price of 42 cents per hundred would need to be made in favor of the three-year-olds, or a selling difference of 30 cents per hundred, in order to fully offset the increased cost of gains. It is of interest to note that the average selling price of the yearlings in this experiment was $6.20 per hundred and of the three-year-olds 6.80, or a diilerence in favor of the older cattle of 60 cents per hundred. It should be stated, however, that these fig- ures are not strictly comparable, inasmuch as the two classes of cattle were not sold on the same market and were marketed a week apart. In fact, out of the three-year-olds a show lot of fifteen head were selected and exhibited at the Pittsburg Fat Stock Show, where they won second prize and brought at auction the following day $7.10 per hundred, which was the record price for the year in any market for cattle of that weight, viz. : 1,700 pounds. The eleven discards were sold in St. Louis on the way to Pittsburg for $6.40 per. hundred, making an average for the entire lot of $6.80. A week later, on a less favorable market, the yearlings were offered in St. Louis and later sold in Chicago for an average of $6.20 per hundred. In practically all the trials, therefore, it seems that the older cattle sold for practically enough more per hundred pounds than the younger animals, to fully offset the difference in cost of gains required to fit them for market. If these data may be relied upon in this matter, then the advantage in cutting down the cost of gains by feeding young animals is neutralized by the higher price for which the older animals sell, in case they are both fed some- thing near the same length of time. Eliminate this difference in selling price by making both classes equally fat, and the large difference in the cost of gains reported especially for the earlier trials will be very materially reduced. To what point they will be reduced remains for future investigations to determine. Reference has already been. made to the influence of age upon the cost of feeders, and it was there shown that a six-months-old calf, at weaning time, brings on the average a higher price per pound than at any subsequent period in its life, except when finally 164 ' Missouri Agricultural Report. put in marketable condition by being made fat. It is furthermore shown that between the calf and the yearling form in the stocker or feeder condition there is a very large drop in price per pound. That the curve of cost from this point slowly rises through the two-year-old form up to the three-year-old state, when it reaches its second highest point in the life of the unf atted steer. The ani- mal just before weaning time, carrying its calf fat and milk bloom, looks its best, and is never so attractive in appearance again until fully fattened and ready for the market. The carcass is, however, at that stage watery, subject to heavy and rapid shrinkage, and re- quires during the weaning, dehorning and vaccination against blackleg periods expensive feeds even to maintain the normal weight. There does not appear to be anything in the results of all of these experiments, however, to justify the large drop in the value per pound between the calf and the yearling stage when in ordi- nary thin condition. It is true that the animal at this age still manifests a strong tendency to grow; that this materially retards the fattening process and makes the professional feeder wary of the yearling. This closes to this aged animal the most import- ant market, the feeder, and leaves it only in demand by the man who desires to grow it still further and subsequently sell it as a feeder. The man who proposes to grow this animal needs a margin of profit over and above the value of the actual gains made, which may account for this large decline in price over the younger ani- mal and even over the same animal the following year when in its two-year-old form. Considering the relative ease with which a two-year-old may be made ready for market, justifies the paying of a somewhat higher price for him in the feeder condition than the yearling commands. On the other hand, there seem to be but two possible explanations why the three-year-old should bring more per pound as a feeder than a two-year-old, viz. : The somewhat shorter time required- to fit him for market, and the slightly smaller risk in- volved in handling him and in making him fat. That is to say, the uniformity with which animals will fatten is directly propor- tionate to its age. Or, the percentage of culls or unfatted ani- mals at the end of the feeding period will be inversely proportion- ate to the age. In the light of all the experimental data here presented, it would seem, however, that the increased cost of gains on three- year-olds over two-year-olds is large enough to demand that the three-year-olds be bought at even less per pound than the two-year- Live Stock Breeders* Association. 165 olds, instead of having to be bought even for the same, and that the professional feeder is making a mistake when he pays more per pound for three-year-olds than he would be required to pay for two-year-olds of the same quality. It goes without saying that animals of great uniformity, fine finishing and early maturing qualities are required if they are to be fitted for the market in the calf form. The coarse, common, rough steer will mature too slowly and manifest too strong a tendency to grow and become fat with too great uncertainty to be handled profitably in this way. When in his two or three-year-old form, when most of the tendency to grow has been satisfied, this same animal will as a rule fatten rapidly and sell when fat for a fair price. The difficulty of getting together a sufficient number of young animals of a quality that would justify the fattening of them as calves, and the usual high price which animals of this quality com- mand, and the cost of buying them one or two in a place, all in- fluence in a marked way the practice of the feeder. It cannot ba too strongly emphasized that thus far the whole question has been considered from the view point of the professional feeder, or the man who buys cattle, puts them in his feed yards, fits them for market and sells them. To him, as has been before pointed out, it is a matter of supreme indifference what ages of cattle he feeds or what these animals may have cost the man who raised them, so long as he is permitted to buy them at a price that will enable him to fit them for market at a profit. It may be accepted, there- fore, as final, that so long as he can buy the older cattle with suf- ficient margin to fully overcome the increased cost of gains made in his feed yard, he will consider it to his advantage to feed them in preference to younger animals, in view of the fact that they have at that age been already bunched and can be bought by the carload or the hundred in fairly uniform condition and of uniform age, size, color and quality, because they may be fitted for market in much less time, will fatten more uniformly, will require less care- ful attention, etc. THE CATTLE RAISER THE MAN WHO IS INTERESTED IN BABY BEEF. We cannot escape the conclusion, therefore, that the man who raises cattle is the one who is primarly interested in baby beef production. No one familiar with the facts doubts for a moment that if the feeder had to raise his own cattle or to pay for the two or three-year-old steer on the basis of what it has cost to produce 166 Missouri Afjricultural Re'port. him, plus a fair profit to the raiser, rather than what it will cost to fit him for market; in short, if the feeder had to pay as much more per pound for the three-year-old than for the calf as the three-year-old costs on the high-priced land of the corn belt, there would no longer be cattle of this age on the market. Even pastur- age on the ranges is getting so, scarce and dear that the cattle raisers alreadly seriously consider the forcing of the feeder to buy their cattle younger, in order to cut down the expense of making them. It is a far cry from the heavy, aged bullock marketed twenty-five years ago to the two-year-old steer nov/ found on our markets. This sharp tendency toward making cattle younger will be even more marked in the next quarter of a century, because of the great advance in the price of land in the range country as well as in the corn belt. But before the largest progress in this direction can be made, it will be necessary to interest the breeders. In short, from this time on it is more problem for the breeder than for the feeder. Animals that are capable of and worth being made into baby beef must be bred, not by isolated individuals, but by whole communities and entire states. . "PEDIGREE." (Mr. Walter Miller, Peru, Indiana.) Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen: I have noticed on the program for this occasion that I have been given credit as hailing from Buenos Ayres. I presume Senator Wornall had something to do with it, but I hope that will not cast a reflection upon my being an American also, as I have a little patriotism and love of my country, and I am glad to say I am from Indiana. First, I will give you an account of why I am here. Some days ago I met Senator Wornall in Chicago, and he seemed to insist that I consent to have my name placed on the program to give a little talk on some practical subject, and the "Senator" generally gets what he goes after — at least, he did in respect to the election — and I am very much in the position of the little darkey, I simply could not help it. On the other hand, I feel, too, that I owe you an apology for having nerve enough to stand before you people and try to tell you something, realizing myself that I have so little ability in this regard. The other day I received a letter from the Secretary of your State Board of Agriculture that he considered it a special honor to be able tp place my name on his program, and my father Live Stock Breeders' Association. 167 said, "What are you going to give them ; I have not seen you mak- ing any preparations." And I told him something like this, that I did not want to speak a piece or read a paper, but I wanted to give some of the young men out here a few practical ideas. He said, "If you are not sure what you are doing, it looks like a good way to make a fool of yourself." (Applause.) So you see what some people are expecting, and for that reason I cannot help but feel that I owe you an apology for being here, especially to you older gentlemen, for I cannot hope to say much of any special interest to you, but the man I would like to give some good practical thought is the young man of my own generation, on the side lines here, and I hope they may be able to derive some benefit from what I have to say. And further than that, what I say I do not want to be taken in the way of advice; because of my short years and limited experi- ence I cannot assume that position. The subject I have been assigned, that of "Pedigree," is one of most vital importance in the breeding of the highest type of animal life, and it is most useful to the practical breeder of today. While I shall allow due credit to the value of pedigree, it shall be my intention, on the other hand, to show how little pedigree has to do with the success of a breeder. I mean to treat pedigree in its everyday application to successful breeding, and not from the stand- point of a connoisseur or student of fancy crosses. First, what is the real meaning of "Pedigree?" We find in the dictionary and treatises on live stock that pedigree is simply a record of an animal's ancestors — in other words, a table of descent; and the early significance of pedigree was that the animal thereby represented was of some peculiar and distinct excellence, and un- less the animal possessed some of these qualities, no record of him was preserved. In other words, it was the ancestry preserved by record of noted animals. The builders of breed foundation in those days were breeders in every sense of. the word. They were men who believed in the fundamental law of nature, that "Like produces like," and that from good animals alone could they pro- duce good animals. Sometimes they knew absolutely nothing of the previous gen- erations in an animal's history. Those were days when a pedi- gree would oftentimes consist of nothing more than a number in the record book — in the herd book governing the registration of animals of that breed of live stock — and in many instances I can refer you to certain sires in shorthorn history where they were not -even given entry on their individuality, but years after, when these 168 Missouri Agricultural Reiwrt. sires had proved themselves producers, they were then admitted into the herd book, and the only recommendation they had for their entry in the herd book was simply one of merit, not only of some individuality, but of breeding strength, and I think if that princi- ple were applied today, we would have more high-class registered cattle and not so many registered scrubs. Thus it is seen that in the beginning pedigree, preserved and valued, was an indication of excellence, but as time went on and these distinguished specimens of the different breeds passed from the hands of the originators into the hands of others less, skillful perhaps, we find that they were subjected, more or less, to inferior principles of breeding and of handling, and these things have wrought great changes ; so, generally speaking, the ones we own at present have withstood many destructive factors. Some have been neglected and declined from lack of food, exercise, air, etc., necessary to strong physical development; others have suffered from injudicious mating, and others from intentional inbreedings. After these many years, it would seem that we have arrived at a point where pedigree is not a standard of excellence in the individual, and that is the thing I would like to emphasize. The only, instance where pedigree can be considered a standard of excellence is where that pedigree has been for years a record of animals of extraordinary quality, and in these days, when cattle are bred so much for financial gain and animals are constantly chang- ing owners, likewise conditions and principles in breeding and feeding, and it is practically impossible to find a pedigree which can be considered a real indication of individual merit. No doubt some one would like to ask, what is the real value that should be placed on pedigree? Pedigree, without individual quality in the animal represented, is not worth the paper it is written on. Nevertheless, when representing a good animal, it is of great importance in reference to the various crosses therein, so inbreeding can be avoided, outcrossing procured, and a number of interesting facts learned in the history of the ancestry of the animal, and one of the most important of these is the breeders who have been the factors in the formation of this pedigree; because you all know that where one man may be doing something to im- prove a breed of some kind of live stock, there are ten men wait- ing to tear down what that one man may have done. So by having a pedigree we may be able to see and determine, by going into the herd book records, the sources of blood in the animal, the breeders who have appeared therein, and we know more or less perhaps of Live Stock Breeders' Association. 169 their methods of breeding and handling, and in this respect pedi- gree does undoubtedly add greatly to the value of an animal. When we refer to the men who have done most to improve and establish a certain fixed type in the production of animal form, we should note that in most instances he is a man who has made a success of breeding by not giving special attention to pedigree. Re- ferring to Amos Cruikshank, how was he in position to produce a strain of cattle with a type so fixed and qualities so excellent and make them stand today as they were in his own time? He was one of the greatest breeders who ever lived. It was sim.ply because he paid no attention to pedigree, and selected his sires because of individual excellence alone. It is the only principle a man can safely follow, because the truest law we have in all nature is that "Like produces like ;" by the use of good animals is the only way we can expect good offspring, and pedigree will have very little ma^ terial influence. And I will cite you to some cases where men have paid a great deal of attention to pedigree, and have become, in fact, what might be called pedigree cranks. I know of a number of cases where the result has been a dispersion. These men, who have followed pedi- gree too closely and have bred paper — in other words, looked more to the ancestry than the individual, have invariably come to finan- cial disaster. The one door for all of them is failure at the finish, and their cattle, Vv^hen sold, have some of them not even brought what they were worth for beef because of weak consti- tutions, tuberculous, and in such condition that a farmer would not want them among his cattle. Fashions come and go in the breeding of live stock in pedigrees, the same as they come in dress and other things, but not quite so often; and the moment a man distinguishes himself as a producer of a peculiar type of animal, a type with some peculiar excellence, that man receives a reputation, and breeders fall over each other to buy his animals. And finally some other man, who has taken up this particular strain, turns to the breeding of cattle from this one herd as being favorable, and he no doubt in many cases is not a practical breeder and takes these animals from the standpoint of pedigree only, without regard whatever to the individual merit of the animal represented. Such men, ignoring absolutely this great law of nature, that "Like produces like," are the men who are doing the greatest damage to breeding interests today and who are form- ing the fashions. They are the men who tend to put questions into the heads of some prospective breeders as to what is pedigree and 170 Missouri Agricultural Report. what importance should be accorded it in their selection of founda- tion animals. Since heredity is the base of all breeding operations in the selection of foundation animals, attention should be paid, of course, to the sire and dam, and if convenient, to the grandsire and grand- dam, because it is the few top crosses in the pedigree that reallj'' influence the character of the off'spring. Following the theory that something cannot come from nothing, I go so far as to say that one can make a successful breeder and leave pedigree absolutely alone in the selection of his foundation animals, and this is the encouragement I have to offer the young man considering the breeding of some particular line of live stock. You should, and perhaps many of you do, aspire to taking up that sort of a line, and from the little attention you have given to the subject of pedigrees, you may wonder what is the fashionable pedigree which you should have in your foundation animals, .but the advice, if I may be allowed to term it such, or rather the suggestion I would make, is that when you go out to select your animals you leave pedigree absolutely alone. When you go, go to a man of repute, a breeder who has made a success of the particular line of stock he may be handling. He has in his herd pedigrees of good quality. Breeders of repute would not have ani- mals descending from questionable origin, and I would then place this definition on a pedigree: "Pedigree is absolutely nothing more or less — speaking of a good pedigree — than an extra indi- vidual and an honest breeder behind it." Too many people allow the importance of the previous record of an imported dam in a pedigree to influence their selection of animals. For instance, take Young Mary in shorthorns. She was a great cow in her time and a cow that gave birth to seventeen calves, though the fact that Young Mary was a great cow ninety- five years ago would have absolutely no eff'ect on the offspring of her family today. Now, the thing I want to impress upon you, if I can, is that pedigree has very little to do with the success of a breeder. In starting out, if he will simply leave pedigree alone and trust the man of whom he is buying his animals, if the breeder is a man of repute, and the pedigree comes up to the requirements of the herd book register for the required number of generations, and all that — if he will simply select individuality and then apply the proper methods in the handling of these cattle, in their breeding and feed- ing, there is no question but that man will make a success ; and by Liiie Stock Breeders' Association. Ill a success I mean a man who can take animals purchased from another breeder, and during the course of his possession of those animals improve on their quality, or, at least, maintain them at the same level, and the man who cannot do that is not doing much as a breeder. I hope some of you will take that one idea as to the real importance of pedigree — that it has very little to do with a breeder's success. (Applause.) The Chairman : We would like to have this subject discussed by the breeders present. 7 would like to have Professor Mumford open the discussion on this subject. Professor Mumford : I am surely very much interested in this particular subject, and am especially so because just day before yesterday, I think, this subject was up for discussion in one of our classes in animal breeding, and I was in the same unfortunate position that the gentleman seemed to think he was, I gave the class my ideas on the subject, but I am glad to say that my ideas at that time corresponded very closely to those of the experienced and distinguished gentleman who has just talked to you. Now, it is unfortunate that the idea of pedigree, in the minds of many farmers, has come to mean something of merit in itself. But, as Mr. Miller has just said, every animal has a pedigree, and every animal may have a written pedigree, and because an animal has a pedigree or because the ancestors of an animal are written in books, it does not necessarily follow at all that the animal is a good animal or has a good pedigree. As I look at it, a pedigree, if of any value at all, is of value only in so far as the animals in that record are themselves good. We often hear in our discussions as to whether it is better to buy an animal with a good pedigree and not a good individual, or an ani- mal that is a specially good individual but with a poor pedigree. That is perhaps one of the hardest questions that can be put. If left to me, I think I would say I would not take either one of them, because a poor individual with a supposedly good pedigree is a contradiction. Good pedigrees get good animals, and a good ani- mal with a good pedigree gives us this assurance and gives us perhaps a truly valuable pedigree. A good pedigree insures us, as well as it is possible for us to be insured, that the particularly good individual selected as a breed- ing animal has the ability to transmit his qualities to his offspring. And a good individual without a pedigree has not often that ability, and I am sure that all breeders will agree that the most important 172 Missouri Agricultural Report. characteristic a good individual can possess is the ability to trans- mit those qualities which he possesses. The Chairman : Let us hear from anyone else. Mr. Gabbert: I would like to add a few words along that line. I don't know very much about it, but just because I know so little is the reason I am going to talk, too, perhaps. (Applause.) Now this question has attracted many a man, and I must say more shorthorn men than advocates of any other breed. Some men will not buy an animal if it is not Scotch topped. Ever so good a one, with a common American pedigree, is not wanted. I have been breeding cattle for twenty-three years, and I never found a pedigree to represent very much. Of course, a good pedigree is a pedigree that has an ancestry back of that pedigree that did something in the world, and natural- ly you would suppose that an animal would breed after its parents ; you could not think otherwise. I believe strongly in heredity, and if it were not by that means we would not be able to tell more or less when two animals were likely to nick. That has more to do with breeding than anything else. I venture to say that no breeder with a promiscuous lot of cows, with various kinds of pedigrees, and all may be good individuals, and yet I dare say, with the best bulls he cannot produce good calves from that line of cows ; for it is one of the well known facts in the history of animals that some two lines of breeding will nick and make good animals and some will not at all ; and a breeder by pedigree does not find it out by that alone; he must do so by experience. I would advise any young breeder, if possible, to get a line of cows of one line or breed, and then try to find a sire that will nick with those cows, and to work along that line. This is the only line of success I know. The Chairman : Let us hear from some one else on this sub- ject. Mr. Kidd — Mr. President: I wish to say a few words, not because I know so much, but because I have become enthusiastic. (Applause.) In talking with Mr. Miller last night, after he told me his idea on this subject, I said, I believe you are right. And I do. Let us go back to Mr. Bates and Booth and the gentlemen who bred for individuality. I do not think their experience can be improved on by the present generation. So I think, if a breeder would start right now and let this popular line and fashion business alone, he would not only improve his breed, but make a greater success of the pure bred stock business, and he would help to make more Live Stock Breeders* Association. 173 young men successful, because they will naturally think in start- ing out what line, had we best take up. Often a sharper will say to a young man, "Here is an animal with pedigree which I would recommend to you," when it has abso- lutely no individuality. So it is with shorthorns at the present time — they are, I claim, not Scotch, but simply good animals, and so they were away back yonder when Amos Cruikshank bred them for individuality. We also notice in the show herds that occa- sionally a little Bates blood mixed in gives style and finish, because simply a few men have risked going out of the regular line and putting a little improvement in the points where they think their cattle are wanting. So now, passing on down, for instance, to the different breeds of pure bred hogs : We have them sold in these sales and at the exhibitions at the present time, which is very detrimental to the different breeds, and a man will sell an animal for a fancy price, though he may not be a good individual, but sells high simply be- cause he is sired by a certain other individual, when, as a matter of fact, the stock he was crossed on is bad, or the animals did not nick, and the buyer is disappointed simply because he bought him on pedigree. (Applause.) The Chairman : Mr. Harned of Cooper county. Mr. Harned — Mr. Chairman: Possibly, in the live stock breeding business, there is no other word in the whole vocabulary that is so often thought of and so full of interest, but I am sure there is no other word in the vocabulary of the live stock business as dangerous as pedigree. Pedigree is valuable, and I would not ignore its value, but it is strange the fault that gets into it. I am really surprised at the false ideas that get into as intelligent people as the American people in live stock breeding. It is strange that when we go to look at a pedigree we look at the bottom, instead of the top. We say an animal is a Young Mary ; she should be a valuable article because in some way or other the descendants of Young Mary have been prepotent and transmitted their qualities. We have had a good example of this racket. Our friend, Mr. Kidd, referred to Mr. Bates. We have had a good example of this when we saw what a wreck this following pedigree too closely resulted in, and it was complete. If you keep in the old line you will see what you have got ; you have simply a great big, long-legged, tuberculous nothing. Some men simply inbreed and inbreed — it is a disgrace. I am absolutely more ashamed of breeders on this thing of pedi- gree than of anything else. 174 Mhsowi Agricultural Report. They come into my county, and I advocate that we ought to combine pedigree and individual merit where it can be properly done. Of course, it takes some judgment to do that. The pedi- gree crank lives there in abundance, and if a new man comes in and one of these cranks gets hold of him, he says to him, ''You ought to breed a single strain — the best is straight Bates or straight Cruikshank," and the 'fellow gets so bewildered he doesn't know whether he is in Cooper or some other county. The fact of the business is, that there has been some wonder- fully good things done by line breeding or inbreeding, but the amateur cannot do it. He must be a man of some experience and observation, and a good deal of perception to use line breedhig to good advantage, and I would like to second the motion of Mr. Miller that when you start out to breed any kind of live stock you look to individual merit, and if you are not able to combine m.erit and pedigree in a way that will be of strength to you, you had better look simply to the animal and the honesty of the breeder and let pedigree go to the wind. The trouble with pedigree is it never did make animals better. The pedigree was never intended to make animals better. It was nothing in the world but simply a speculative craze, and whenever you start a speculative craze on anything in the live stock business you can sure guess what the result will be. If a fellow is fool enough, I must say there are always some others who will work him. (Applause.) Now, I have often thought of this thing at home, and from what I have heard I think it is a kind of a pet idea of some that wealth never stays in one family many generations. It seems strange that we harp on a family or on individuals that lived fifty years ago. I say families of cattle are valuable today for the merit they possess today, not for the merit they possessed fifty years ago. That is the standard of value in cattle. I admit I am very much interested in this subject. I had a good many thoughts when I was in my seat upon the subject, but it seems when I get up here my thoughts take a seat, and as they do not come in a regular way, I think I had better give it up. I thank you for your attention. (Applause.) The Chairman: We will now hear from Mr. Halderman of Springfield on this subject. Mr. Halderman : I want to second a good many things thnt have been said here. I think we are now striking the right line Liue Stock Breeders' Association. 175 in breeding live stock, but I wish to say to these young men, do not throw your pedigree away entirely. If an animal has not a strain back behind it, it may develop something you do not want. You may get an individual scrub animal much finer in general appearance than your pedigreed ani- mal, but you don't know what may come out of that scrub. To illustrate: Mary Ann of St, Lambert was a daughter of Stoke Pogus III, whose dam was Old Margaret. Stoke Pogus III was sold to the butcher before his get developed any form. Mr. Lambert took this strain and brought up what we call the St. Lambert strain. There is another point. We want to know what we are going to breed for. If you want milk and butter, you want to look to that feature of the animal. You should look back behind the ani- mal a little ways and see whether it has the power to produce in its posterity the qualities you want, Mr. Miller is right in my judgment in regard to this thing of pedigree, but we do not want to throw pedigree away. A man must exercise his judgment and intelligence and breed pedigree to a certain extent, but he must watch the individuality. We are getting wild over strains. We must not be led off by strains un- less they have the individuality. The greatest cow on the Jersey side was Princess II, owned by Mrs. Shoemaker, and she made a test of her the first year and she tested forty-six pounds twelve ounces. They were feeding her all the feed she would bear; but one night they left a lot of feed in the barn, and she got loose and ate it and died, Mary Ann of St, Lambert stood at the head of her breed with a record of thirty-six pounds. I once owned a cow that stood to compete with this strain. You might skim her milk and then let it set until it clabbered, and you could always skim off of it some new cream. My daughter says I am a crank on cream, and I am, and I think that is why I am seventy years old. I think that is the first and only cow I ever saw, but what I oould stir her cream up and drink it, but I could not do her's that way, because it was too rich. If you are trying for beef, breed for beef, and if you want milk breed for milk, but not for beef and milk at the same time, for you will make a failure of both. The Chairman : We will hear Mr. Grooms, Mr. Grooms: T would like to ask the question if it is not 176 Missouri Agricultural Rei^ort. better to breed from an animal with a good pedigree than just because he has good looks? The Chairman : I think that has been answered. It has been answered in 3'our own minds, at any rate, and I think we all agree on that question, anyway, that a good animal, backed by good an- cestors, is the one to breed. ECONOMICAL RATIONS IN BEEF PRODUCTION. (H. R. Smith, Bulletin No. 80, Nebraska Experiment Station.) The discovery of methods by which beef production can be made more profitable is one of the important problems now under investigation at the Nebraska Experiment Station. During recent years the attractive prices offered for corn by the markets of the world have led many stockmen of the State to discontinue their cattle feeding operations and to sell the crop direct to elevator com- panies for shipment. Others have turned their attention to pork and mutton production. That beef values have not kept pace v/ith those of corn in the upward trend of recent years is undeniable. Nor can it be said that the market quotations for corn-fed beef have been as attractive as the prices offered for finished pork and mutton. Nevertheless, cattle feeding has its place, and the industry will be regarded with increasing favor as we learn to more fully appreciate the importance of cattle in their relation to the economic management of our land. On practically every farm in the State where grain crops have been grown -and sold direct to the elevator for a succession of years, the soil is much below the productive capacity of adjoining farms where crop rotation and stock feeding have been practiced. Pork production, good so far as it goes in turning back to the land fertilizing material taken from the soil, and profitable as it has been during these years of high prices, should not be carried on to the entire exclusion of all other forms of meat production. The occasional destruction of an entire herd of swine by the ravages of cholera is a matter to be considered, but as an argument for a greater diversity of live stock on the farm it does not carry the weight of the one great argument, viz.: the economical conversion of the vast quantity of roughage grown on every farm as by-products to grain into some marketable com- modity. Cattle and sheep feeding not only make possible the utili- zation of such material, but these ruminants, requiring much bulk Live Stock Breeders* Association. YJ't as they do, also encourage the growth of more clover and alfalfa in the crop rotation, thus preserving the fertility of the land. Cattle are not only able to consume bulky material in quantity, but they are also able to take it in its crude form, less costly therefore than if labor is expended in its preparation. During the years of low-priced corn cattle feeding was profit- able under almost any system of feeding, but conditions have since changed, and methods must be varied to meet the new situation, n beef production, like other forms of industry, competition forces us to adopt more economical methods. Beef has always been a luxury, and we can hardly expect it to rise in value proportionate to that of corn and other cereals. When it becomes high in price, the consumers use less meat and more of other foods, which, though less palatable, can serve as substitutes. It is now up to the farmer to adopt more economical methods of production rather than to dis- continue the feeding of cattle because of higher-priced grain. If cattle feeding, aside from its beneficial effect in maintaining or restoring soil fertility, is a profitable industry in more eastern states, as it still is when properly conducted, the farmers of Ne- braska are situated to make it doubly so by virtue of the natural conditions which favor the industry here, viz. : lower-priced corn than any other state in the Union, the possibilities of alfalfa and clover culture, notably the former, favorable markets and shipping facilities, and a climate of relatively low humidity in winter which permits outdoor feeding. It would be unreasonable to expect cattle to return every year without fail prices for corn above what might have been received at the elevator. The instability of the average stock market would hardly permit it. But followed year after year, with careful buying, and the exercise of skill in the management of cattle, particularly with reference to the selection of foods, fair profits are to be depended upon. Nebraska, relatively speaking, is a newly settled State, occu- pied for the most part by farmers who in the past have given most of their attention to the growing and selling of grain. It is not at all surprising, therefore, to find that as the need of stock on the farm is felt, mistakes will be made, and what might have been profits turned to losses. That the experiment station might be brought in closer touch with actual conditions as they exist in this State, the writer, in the early spring of 1903, visited a large number of feed-lots to learn what rations are in common use. In this investigation it was found that by far the largest number were A-12 178 Missouri Agricultural Report. fattening steers on corn and prairie hay, though some were making use of straw, cane or millet as a substitute for prairie hay. In the more central and western portions of the State corn and alfalfa were being fed, while a number in the Missouri river counties were feeding clover. The use of oil-meal and cottonseed-meal was con- fined to a few men who feed on an extensive scale and who buy practically all their grain. From the observations made, it would be conservative to say that unbalanced rations were being fed on two-thirds of the farms visited. That our farmers might have a practical demonstration of the greater possibilities of a system of cattle feeding which is in harmony with Nature's laws with re- spect to the character of the food as opposed to a system which ignores entirely the animal's physiological requirements, the series of experiments herein described were conducted under conditions precisely as they may be found on many farms in the State. PLAN OF EXPERIMENTS, WITH REFERENCE TO CONDITIONS OTHER THAN FEED. The steers selected for all experiments were grown under range conditions, having had no grain previous to their purchase. They were chosen for uniformity in age, quality and size as nearly as it was possible to secure it. When the division into lots of ten steers each was made, previous to the experimental feeding, an effort was put forth to make the several lots representative of the entire herd, so that no one lot would have the advantage of another in weight, quality, condition or age. This would make the several lots of a single winter's experiment comparable, but not those fed one winter with the lots fed another winter. In other words, the reader is not to compare the feed record of 1904-05 with the feed record of 1905-06, or any other year. Grade Hereford yearlings from Cherry county, Nebraska, were fed in 1903-04 ; grade Short- horn two-year-olds from North Park, Colorado, in 1904-05 ; Grade Shorthorn and Hereford two-year-olds from Rock county, Nebraska, in 1905-06, and Grade Angus two-year-olds from Sioux county, Nebraska, in 1906-07. All lots in every experiment were provid- ed with sheds having large open doors on the south side, to permit the steers to go in and out at will, none having horns. The yards were small but of sufficient size to permit of some exercise. All cattle were given water morning and night, and salt was kept be- fore them at all times. Each lot was fed for a preliminary period of approximately three weeks before the records of the experi- Live Stock Breeders' Association. 179 ment were begun, in order that all steers might know how to eat grain, and furthermore, have time to gradually adapt themselves to their respective rations. The initial weights of the different lots a^ tabulated are an average of four weighings made on suc- cessive days just before watering in the morning. This is done to reduce as much as possible the element of error often caused by a fill larger one day than another. It is needless to say that every feed was carefully weighed, no credit being given for any coarse roughness left in racks and afterwards thrown out for bedding. This was charged to the steers just as though it had been con- sumed. From what has been said above, it may be assumed that the differences in gains as reported in the tables to follow are caused by the rations, at least as largely so as it was possible to miake the several lots in a given experiment average uniform in quality ^nd gaining capacity. It is out of the question to eliminate entirely the error which might be caused by individual differences in the gaining capacity of steers even by feeding in lots of ten each. It is for the purpose of making the conclusions more reli- able that the same experiments are being continued through a suc- cession of two or more years. PRAIRIE HAY VS. ALFALFA. Following is a comparison of the relative value of native prairie hay as it grows in Nebraska and alfalfa, each being fed as a roughness to supplement heavy corn feeding : 180 Missouri Agricultural Re-port. rH CO C5 1-H a O! 1 i-H •<1' IC OC TlH CO d t^ C^' -^ cc CC CD CO CD ^ o o li .-< - OJ I— 1 5© £ ^ o c3 «.-i "S *4-t en <0 t-< c3 > >> aj c» ^ c- 10 10 IN t^ ro t-i ■"J' cXi (N (M 05 IN CO IN < d '3 >4 J2 .-1 .-1 CO C<1 CT CO CO 00 m e© o P. rt ^ PH c: rf CO r~ 10 C 10 lO O) CO to •o ■o , ^ ^ CC t- CO ■* m o ID P< P. C o rt t- cm" ci (M •* 10 'O £ CO JO w s d 05 T— I I-H V3 Q ¥i 2 &H ^ (fl o ID o o 0) f!. ^ " o T3 CD 1^ r^ rf (N * g H o * O O g P. 1-1 000 •* IM CO C5 CO CO o CD M CO CD !N t~ C) C/D C tH r-i ^i IN a; CO S ci 6» -5 «« OJ " *""! ^ CO rt rH m 2 m CD OJ o C3J "3 a) o O 01 & ~ ai - tk rt 000 (M 135 .-H CO CO o o ■a ID 0> 05 t' CO rH t- ca 10 05 10 ■«(< IN t-H 00 CD r-l • ^ CD -l ,' a p. 3 T3 C as e « K =* .5 bD tj) £ c 1- S 9 « tc 0) -. >- a> ID ID a ■s ♦» t> > > t- (- C3 4' < <; < < C p: H c. !z 1 13 Si O tn S il> .s 2 cd £1 P. P. a c CO Live Stock Breeders' Association. 181 It is never safe to accept as definite the conclusions drawn from a single experiment, but when we have, during a succession of three years, the marked contrast in daily gains, cost of production and net profits in favor of alfalfa, as compared with prairie hay, which the above table indicates, there would seem to be little room to doubt the superiority of alfalfa when each is fed with corn alone. There may be several reasons for this. Perhaps first in import- ance is the fact that alfalfa is a so-called legume, having, like clover and cowpeas, the power to take nitrogen from the air, storing it within its cellular structure in the form of proteids, which material is needed by the animal in the formation of lean tissue and bone. Alfalfa in itself contains more protein than the average fattening animal requires, an excess sufficient to compensate for that lack- ing in corn, the two together, therefore, making a balanced lation for fattening cattle. Prairie hay, like corn, lacks protein, and when fed singly or together, they do not supply enough of that nutrient to meet physiological requirements. This is best shown by examining the following chart, the black lines representing the digestible protein (lean formers) of each food and the white lines the digestible carbohydrates (starches, etc.) and vegetable oils, both of the latter forming animal fat and body heat. Nutritive ratio. ' Prairie hav 1:12.3 1:10.2 1:9.66 1 :73 4 1:7.00 1:3.81 Corn and prairie hay \ Oorii T Corn and alfalfa hay Balanced ration for cattle (approximate) 1 Alfalfa 1 1 What is approximately a well-balanced ration for the average two-year-old steer is indicated by the line having the nutritive ratio 1 :7, by which is meant one pound of protein to seven pounds of carbohydrates and fats. It will be noted how closely the ration 182 Missouri Agricultural Report. corn and alfalfa — two pounds of the former to one of the latter — approaches this proportion. In fact, we are not sure but that 1 :7.3 is just as suitable as 1 :7 for an average two-year-old steer. The corn and prairie hay combination, however, is decidedly lacking in protein, which is no doubt one of the chief causes of its failure as an economical ration. But the composition of a food is not the only factor which determines its value. Alfalfa is very much more relished than prairie hay and it is less difficult to masticate. Steers crowded for the largest possible consumption of grain can also be induced to .eat a little more corn with alfalfa than with prairie hay. In determining the cost of producing 100 pounds of gain, alfalfa and prairie hay were figured at $6.00 each per ton for the three years. Corn was 33 cents per bushel in 1903, 39 cents in 1904 and 35 cents in 1905. It is unfair to make comparative values on a roughage like alfalfa which balances well with com alone and prairie hay which does not, but when thus fed, as in these three experiments, the alfalfa returned values ranging from $10.80 to $15.70 per ton, as compared with prairie hay at $6.00. The experiments show, however, that we can not afford to feed prairie hay at $6.00 per ton even if we include in the profits all pork made from droppings, as was done in these computations. At least we can not afford to do so if corn alone makes up the grain ration. Referring to the net profits per head as given in the table, it is of interest to know that the net advance of selling over cost price for the twenty-four weeks period was $1.30 per hundred on the corn and prairie hay steers in 1903, and $.78 in 1904, while the advance on the alfalfa steers was $1.65 per hundred in 1903 and $1.00 in 1904. The larger advance received for the alfalfa steers was due to the higher finish made by those steers. It is apparent that good profits can be made by feeding corn and alfalfa, even though the selling price of the cattle does not greatly exceed the cost price. In these experiments the feeding of alfalfa at $6.00 per ton with corn made this grain bring, when converted into beef, 51 cents per bushel in 1903, 44 cents in 1904 and 60 cent,^ in 1905. It would take a larger advance than our markets afford to make corn and prairie hay profitable at existing prices for corn. Clover was not fed in this series of experiments, but because it is similar to alfalfa in composition, though somewhat lower in pro- tein, it would not be unreasonable to expect good gains on corn and clover. Experiments made in other states show this to be true. With any other form of roughness with the exception of Live Stock Breeders' Association, 183 cowpea hay, which is also a legume, we would hardly expect satis- factory gains unless some protein concentrate is fed with corn. THE USE OF CORN-STOVER WITH CORN AND ALFALFA. From the experiments already described it is apparent that a ration of corn and alfalfa is capable of producing large and profitable gains, enough so to make corn bring more in the form of beef than as a cash crop. But with corn there is also the stalk upon which it grew. Do not these stalks, grown in such large quan- tity on our corn land, possess sufficient nutritive value to make it worth while to harvest them for feeding purposes? Left standing in the field they become woody, and are useful only as winter forage for stock cattle and horses, their value being estimated at from 25 cents to $1,00 per acre, a price not to exceed 50 cents per ton. When cut and put in shocks immediately after the corn ripens they remain fairly green, retain in the leaves the nutritive properties which they possessed when harvested, and are much relished even by cattle on a full grain feed. For the purpose of securing data upon the above question two experiments were con- ducted in which the ration corn and alfalfa was compared with corn, alfalfa and stover (stalks without the ears). The stover was fed unshredded in racks provided with vertical slats wide enough apart to permit the steers to enter their heads, thus pre- venting the stalks from being pulled out and trampled under foot. The coarse butts refused, approximately 40 per cent of the stalks fed were thrown out for bedding purposes, but charged to the steers as so much feed consumed. The stover was fed each morn- ing in order that the steers might have the entire day to work over the stalks, and the alfalfa was all fed at night. Following is the record of the steers — ten two-year' olds in each lot — fed as indicated ; 184 Missouri Agricultural Report. a (U 03 ^ - o O O nS O COOt^OJOOSUStO i-lO'^COOWOt- t^ ci •^ CO o 12; a^ -CI S O. ™ C tfl c3 - cj i C d S (D'-^lOO'^'^'-lO OCO'^Oi^COOlM ^ .-I O CI •a< i-H CO lO "i< O! •a tj

CO ■^ tH CO t- CO ^ O t^(M05Cl'*Oi0i0C0 p 00 >;. 1-5 ^ n "^ d OS 1-5 1) >^ (V > o 0> CO >0 05 o ■^■*ost«>n-*' CO COCOCON'-iO'-lOCCO 03 CI 00 Oi M ■* C] CD M ri .-1 «^ CO J3 J2 d d to CiX) J2 p. ^ & <- ■ ■:3 P." cs a 5 -3 o o ■a -a d d 3 3 O O P. P. d C c3 .3 M >-. 5 ° Pi H to Live Stock Breeders' Association. 185 The table shows that in the first experiment equal parts of alfalfa and stover produced a slightly larger daily gain than alfalfa fed as the sole roughness with shelled corn. In the second experi- ment, when snapped corn was fed, the reverse was true. A ration consisting of corn and alfalfa is often too laxative, especially with the later cuttir.gs of alfalfa. In the first experiment it is very probable that the stover lessened the tendency to scour, while in the second experiment the presence of husk and cob served the same purpose. There may have been also some advantage in hav- ing stover with alfalfa for variety. In this connection it may be said that prairie hay will answer the same purposes. In a 1905-06 test equal parts of alfalfa and prairie hay, with a light feed of snapped corn, gave an average daily gain of 2.01 pounds, compared with 1.96 pounds for stover and alfalfa, and 2.06 pounds for alfalfa. The prairie hay, however, cost as much as the alfalfa ($6.00 per ton), so there was nothing saved by using it. In both the experi- ments tabulated above, the use of corn-stover at $2.50 per ton as half the roughness reduced the cost of gains — in the first 40 cents per hundred, and in the second 48 cents. The stover proved to ba actually worth $3.55 per ton with snapped corn and $4.16 per ton with shelled corn, worth 39 cents per bushel, as compared witli alfalfa fed alone at $6.00 per ton. Nebraska produced last year, in round numbers, eight million tons of corn-stover. If one-half of this amount could have been converted into beef, bringing $2.50 per ton from the shock, instead of 50 cents in the stalk fields, eight millions of dollars could have been added to our earnings, and no losses from cornstalk disease would have come from feeding the stalks thus harvested. FEEDING CORN FODDER (ENTIRE PLANT). The objection that is usually raised against the practice of cutting and shocking corn for feeding purposes is the labor in- volved in husking it from the shock. The fact that a great deal of corn may be fed to cattle in the stalk unhusked is entirely over- looked. During the first part of the fattening period a large part of the corn may be fed in that manner. In a 1905-06 experiment one lot of ten two-year-old steers was fed corn fodder for a period of twelve weeks in comparison with the same amount of snapped corn and stover fed another lot. Two-thirds of all the corn given the one lot was attached to the stalk, the remainder consisting of shelled corn fed at night. Charging four cents per bushel for 186 Missouri Agricultural Report. husking, the cost of gains was the same. In 1906-07 this compari- son was again made, though half of the corn was then fed on the stalk. Here again the cost of production was practically the same, being only 10 cents per hundred less for snapped corn. The feed- ing of corn on the stalk in the morning with shelled corn and alfalfa hay at night has proven to be a very economical system of beef production. For such purposes corn which has been drilled a little thicker than usual is best, because the ears are somewhat smaller. It should not be planted so thick, however, that the yield of corn will be reduced. By feeding corn fodder we utilize the stalk, and at the same time are put to no extra labor husking it. In fact, corn can be cut with a harvester and put in the shock cheaper than it can be picked and cribbed. Three men with a team and har- vester can cut and shock seven acres per day. Records from the Farm Department of this Experiment Station show that it costs $1.18 per acre to cut and shock corn, which figure does not allow for wear and tear on the machine. Three cents per bushel should cover the cost of harvesting the- corn by that method. THE USE OF LINSEED MEAL WITH CORN AND PRAIRIE HAY. On many farms alfalfa or clover is not available in sufficient quantity to form even half of the roughness supplied fattening cattle. Under these circumstances the use of some commercfal protein concentrate would seem desirable. In order that this might be given a practical test, three experiments were conducted in which the ration corn and prairie hay was fed with and without the protein concentrate linseed meal (oil-meal). The latter food was m.ade but 10 per cent of the grain ration, because of its high protein content and relative cost. As in all experiments described in this bulletin, ten steers were fed in each lot : Live Stock Breeders' Association. 187 w 5 O z <: < S I Q W W en Z :5 PS o c > <: M w Q < o c OJ CD Hi to o O (1) o v-5 D cs 1-3 o C . 3 tn O O) CO Tjl O N Q OJ o •s a •3 o M c3 P. c ea 0) CO or) t^ ■* >-< C5 OO 00 o CO(NO)0000CONt>"^ h- r-l •-< «^ CCi O o (M C5 t- (M OJ >0 |, -H I- t- -H lO CO 00 ■^ i-H i-H i-H S© e-1 t- O t- t- lO to 00 t- t- ■* 00 CO r^ CI -^ to o ^1 c-^ i^ XT -^ CO (N .-I «© o 5© id S E =s a> S o a; "E 02 O c3 ::3 0) 02 t3 tfi ■t3 . C >> 1 cS o P. O T)< TJI TJH X5 r-H O O t^ to CO'-IC3510'OCOO)0 tne(^ 1- rH ,-1 rt -< !ii T-l M O O O t^ 05 .-(■^lOOCOCOC^ o '*INO5O)O5'*CO00ic— ' CO i-i rt e© o ^ CI C3 -H CO ffl O t^ lO --I t- > &- ^ ■a G ft ft ■a 73 >> § «-. 3 o ° ft. ■2 ^. 3 ft o ft -a I-, "^ O O S o 3 188 Missouri Agricultural Report. That linseed meal is capable of supplying what corn and prai- rie hay lacks is readily apparent when we note the marked increase in daily gains effected by its use. Each year the steers fed lin- seed meal took on a more thrifty appearance, as indicated by the coat of hair a few weeks after the experiments were begun. They ate their grain with greater relish, and when on full feed consumed somewhat more grain, which, of course, partly accounted for the increased gains. This was especially noticeable in the short period of heavy grain feeding in 1905-06, when the steers were crowded with grain throughout that entire period, the oil-meal steers tak- ing 5.5 pounds of grain per day in excess of the lot not receiving it. However, in the two previous experiments, when both lots were purposely kept on the same amount of grain per day for t"he first three months, the linseed-meal steers, particularly the yearlings in 1903-04, gave much larger gains. It will be noted also that much less grain was required to make a pound of gain each year, the average for the three years being 23 per cent less. This Is equivalent to saying that four pounds of corn with linseed-meal produced as much beef as five pounds without linseed-meal. With corn averaging 35.7 cents per bushel and linseed-meal $28.33 per ton for the three years, the cost of producing one pound of gain was'10.7 per cent less by the use of the linseed-meal. The experi- ments show the urgent need of some protein concentrate with corn and prairie hay, providing its cost is not too great. Had the aver- age cost of the linseed-meal been $45.00 or more per ton for the three years, there would have been no advantage in using it. PROTEIN CONCENTRATES COMPARED. Having shown the importance of using with corn and prairie hay a small quantity of some protein concentrate, in this case lin- seed-meal, we next compare three protein foods, commonly sold in Nebraska, viz., wheat bran, linseed-meal and cottonseed-meal. Gluten feed, a by-product in the manufacture of starch, glucosi% etc., from corn, would have been included in these tests if the cost of freight from eastern factories were not such as to make the price of this food prohibitive for stock feeding purposes here. Just as soon as starch and glucose are manufactured in quantity in this section, gluten feed will, no doubt, become a formidable competitor of the protein foods mentioned. Owing to the lower protein con- tent of wheat bran, this food was made 25 per cent of the grain ration, whereas linseed-meal and cottonseed-meal were each made Live Stock Breeders' Association. 189 10 per cent of the grain ration. It will be noted in the table to follow that the basic part of each ration in the first experiment was corn and prairie hay, while in the second it was corn and corn- stover. Stover is even more deficient in protein than prairie hay, and a supplementary food rich in this nutrient is just as badly needed. In fact, one lot of steers on corn and stover in 1905-06 made an average gain of .2 pounds per day below the gains made by another lot on corn and prairie hay. 190 Missouri AgricuUin^al Report. Hi o (N o ft < O > o O " ^^ 2 J 6S o o o .-lCCO»MTHT}-i 65 6?o o o ? O CO S s g o I- ^ OPQg C0(MtD00>OMTHi-lcO MOOOOOOt^«OCOCOM tt>INroO0C»COMt^-<5DO0 t^ (N 1-1 s» 6*9 e© ■• t^CSffirHOIM-^COi-ICO tH U3 © O (N 00 CO CO 1-1 rf 00 t^ IM CD o ft to o O a) O -^ OS g -H aj "6 6£ C5 r>. CI C5 ^ CO »-< (NtOiMt^t^Tji'OCDOoO TfC-lTfcDOC^COCO t-cD lO M iH rt ee «© e© ■■ o '^ — °^ "3 .2 C a; !-, s s g o d: £ M 1^ C t^ t^ r(< M lOi£>OOt~t^^OOOOOCO t~MTtn 1-1 0> IM U5 OS 1> t^ CO CDi-i'OiOlMCOOS'-iOO •• '^ , .s a c .^^ £ a; p. P" - !? a) o ft-" cd bo T3 3 O ft o o a; -a ft ej CD yi o) a) tjD tjj ,1) 'C to o tkO 3 , ^ „ ^ „ q o > 3 « •- cs t_ a) O 2 § a >- 5 a) ^ ft t>. o w .C rt 3 O w a; 3 Live Stock Breeders* Association. lOl In both of these experiments bran gives a much smaller daily gain than either linseed or cottonseed-meal. In order to furnish the desired amount of protein, it was necessary to feed from five to six pounds per day to each steer, which quantity of this food, rather laxative in its effects, caused the steers to scour both win- ters. Several steers in the bran lot became more or less rheumatic or stiff. This was also observed both winters, but it was more pronounced in the second trial. No doubt, these difficulties were partly responsible for the unsatisfactory gains on corn and bran. No other lots were similarly affected, and it looks very much as if the bran caused it. The bran put on the market today is ap- parently less valuable than formerly, no doubt, because of its high crude fiber content, due to modern methods of milling, which effect a more complete extraction of the valuable portions of the wheat kernel. While cottonseed-mxeal is slightly higher in protein than lin- seed-meal, the latter gave the larger gains in both these experi- ments, though the difference was not great. The cattle did net eat the mixture of corn and cottonseed-meal with the sam^s relish that was conspicuous when the ration corn and linseed-meal was placed before them, and this, no doubt, furnishes one explanation of the superiority of linseed-meal in producing not only larger daily gains, but also larger gains from the same weight of food. The feeds used in the first experiment cost as follows : Corn, 35 cents per bushel ; bran, $15,00 per ton, linseed-meal, $32.00 per ton, and cottonseed-m.eal, $32.00. Those used in the second experiment cost as follows: Corn, 36 cents per bushel; bran $18.00 per ton; lin- seed-meal, $29.50 per ton; cottonseed-meal, $27.75 per ton, and stover, $2.50 per ton. The prices given for commercial foods are on the basis of car lots delivered on track F. 0. B. Lincoln. At the above prices it will be noted that the cost of producing one pound of gain was much greater with bran than either of the other foods. In the first experiment the linseed-meal proved to be three times as valuable as bran. The difference was even greater in the second experiment. It would not be wise, however, to place any relative values upon these foods until after further tests are made. In examining the above table, it is interesting to note that the gains made in the second experiment where corn-stover was used as the roughness compared favorably with those made in the first experiment on prairie hay. We can not, however, formulate any estimate of the relative value of the two forms of roughness from the above table, because the first experiment was of only eight 192 Missouri Agricultural Report. weeks' duration during the finishing period, while the second test lasted twenty weeks, practically the entire fattening period. Fur- thermore, grade Shorthorns were used in the first and grade Angus in the second experiment. LINSEED-MEAL (A PROTEIN CONCENTRATE) COMPARED WITH ALFALFA (A PROTEIN ROUGHAGE). The two experiments with protein concentrates conducted to date favor the use of linseed-meal as a food supplementary to corn when the roughness consists of either prairie hay or corn-stover. The question now arises, would it be possible to supply sufficient protein by making half of the roughness alfalfa, dispensing with the use of the concentrates, and still be able to secure just as satis- factory gains? This would make it possible to utilize a great deal of stover or prairie hay, and at the same time obviate the neces- sity of purchasing the commercial food. Two experiments in which the ration corn and linseed-m.eal was compared with corn without such a food when alfalfa forms half the roughness are here re- ported. Live Stock Breeders' Association. 193 o O P. O O < < < > Hi <; Q W W CO 12; CD O P. o 9 <^ . JO OJ u e% a) o 03 (-' 0lMiMO5O5'*M!D'-i>OtD(yi I^ Ol ,-t ¥i ¥i Vi m ■■ 05 i-H coooJccoor^ococotD . inNCOOOOSCOCOt^i-<5D— I ■• 05 •^ g X! bS IH O) O w -.-■2 ■a OJ (OOi-iOt^COM ^INCOOOOCOCOt^'^-. M .a C3 60 2 J ^ -S — ' c3 ^•^ ■3 O "^ d o 3 "o 2 a ft 3 >, o a> a 0. ut T3 ft g •a D dj CO S 1=' S o 3 O > a ^ ^ t« cs ci S IM t~ CO lO "* Oi "-H CI I-l M «© ,-1 O t^ IN t^ CO M to (M ■* (N CO '-' CO t^ t^ iO CO 00 i-i "cS 05 CO ■* 05 Tl< M o CO P. c m * O a ■*< »— 1 m CI Tt< J-l CO lO t^ CO p o I ■3 CI r-< w I— 1 0) o o 1-5 o is l-> r^ (-) o ,^ t^ r^ •4^ a> a p. d a m ■T-1 , o ■* .-H I^ tP i-H ^ Cl o > o O o 3 < oi en l-H CI ■* lO I— * ^ ■* CO ® Cl 1 ^ "nl Oi CO CI o t^ t^ O CO 1 o 0) o t^ .— ( o f-H •:yi lO CO CO CO f o> 6 t:-- +-> t^ l-H »— 1 l-H m - o c o t- o O o o '> o _.., O o t^ >> Oi T-H l-H 00 CO l-H CO CI CJ 00 s =0 o o = OJ o I-H l-H 9i - ^ c; 'r^ t^ * i- ■__) '"• cj o o n Q o PM _ •h ,^- a 'S "3 ■a tl >M ^ a> cs — • c -a - u ^ B * a> c* 2 a S t^ a> o ^ S -a 0.-5 ^ "^ in =^ Oj a; o g P. O, m a> oj ■a ^ ■a c o P. o o E £- § s 0) Fh 3 !U '1 O ?^ s =« > O t, «5: Ph o til •^ hr o o 6JJ "rt O n tf H 196 Missouri Agricultural Report. When balanced rations were fed, the protein being furnished in one experiment by the use of linseed-meal and in the other by alfalfa hay, the corn-stover made a favorable showing with prairie hay, proving to be worth, in the first, $4.23 per ton, and in the second, $5.17 per ton, compared with prairie hay at $6.00 per ton. In the third comparison, without a protein food, the stover re- turned a value of but $2.77, compared with prairie hay at $6.00. This is, perhaps, attributable to the lower protein content of stover. As already stated, not more than 60 per cent of the stover charged to the steers fed in those experiments was consumed, the remainder consisting of refuse butts, which had to be thrown out for bedding. The stover actually consumed would seem to possess a feeding value quite the equal of prairie hay. Inasmuch as corn- stover contains only 60 per cent dry matter, while prairie hay is approximately 90 per cent, it would seem conservative to say also that the dry matter of the entire cornstalk, with ear detached, cut immediately after the corn ripens and properly cured in the shock, is equal to the dry matter of prairie hay. THE RELATIVE ECONOMY OF A HEAVY AND LIGHT RATION OF CORN. The experiments so far conducted and reported in these pages indicate that beef can be produced most economically in Nebraska by the use of corn, alfalfa and corn-stover. It would seem proper to next determine, if possible, what proportion of corn to such roughness is most economical. Corn has ruled high in price during the past few years, while roughness of all kinds has remained rela- tively low in value until the last year, when hay has been abnor- mally high, because the dry weather which prevailed throughout the country during the early part of the summer caused a shortage in this crop, the effect of which will, no doubt, be but temporary. The cost of hauling and shipping hay and other bulky feed is such as to make it seem probable that the price of roughness on our Nebraska farms, many of them situated some distance from sta- tions, will not advance with corn in the future. Beef cattle in the west are ordinarily fed all the grain they will consume, very com- monly by the use of self-feeders, having before them what rough feed is needed to satisfy the craving for bulk. The latter is often of very inferior quality, perhaps a stack of wheat straw, and a very limited quantity is consumed. That a good quality of rough- ness can be made to take the place of a part of the corn is shown by the following single experiment conducted the past winter : Live Stock Breeders' Association. 197 HEAVY VS. LIGHT FEED OF CORN WITH ALFALFA AND CORN -STOVER. Nov., '06, to April, '07— Nov.,'06, to May,'07,— 20 weeks. 24 weeks. Corn (heavy feed) Corn (light feed) Alfalfa hay, 50% Alfalfa hay. 60 % Corn-stover, 50%. Corn-stover , 40%. Average weight per steer Nov. 14, lbs 978 977 Average gain per steer, 5 montlis for lot 4, 6 months for lot 5, lbs 339 2.42 339 Average gain per steer per day, lbs 2.01 Average grain consumed per steer per day, lbs. 22.33 13.89 Av. roughage consumed per steer per day, lbs. 9.77 18.08 Av. grain consumed for each lb. of gain, lbs. . . 9.22 6.91 Av. roughage consumed for each lb. of gain, lbs 4.03 8.96 Average cost of 100 lbs. of gain, cents $6 99 $7 06 Value of pork produced as a by-product for 100 lbs. of gain on steers 1 53 5 46 1 44 Net cost of food per 100 lbs gain 5 62 Profit or loss per head, including pork pro- duced from droppings 6 38 4 61 Nutritive ratio 1:8.7 1:7.3 The steers on the light ration of corn were never given to exceed fourteen pounds of corn per day, the average daily ration for the tw^enty-four w^eeks being 13.89 pounds, while the full-fed steers were given as high as 24 pounds per day, an average of 22.33 pounds for the period of twenty weeks fed. The light fed steers consumed as much more roughness as the heavy fed steers consumed more corn. It is interesting to note that the ten steers on the light grain ration made the same gain in six months (24 weeks) that the heavy fed steers made in five months (20 weeks). The light fed steers were equally well finished with the extra month's feeding and sold at $5.50 per hundred, the top of the South Omaha market, May 14, 1907, when there was a heavy run of cattle. The heavy fed cattle sold for $5.65 April 16th, one month previous, when the market was 20 cents per hundred higher, as found by averaging the selling price of the top hundred steers April 16th, and the same number May 14th. In computing the net profits in the above table, both lots were figured at $5.38 per hundred net, the price received for the heavy fed cattle on home weights at the close of the experi- ment. At last winter's (1906-07) prices on feeds, viz., shelled corn 36 cents per bushel, snapped corn 35 cents, alfalfa hay $8.00 per ton, and stover $2.50 per ton, the heavy fed steers produced gains at a net cost (deducting pork from droppings) of $5.46 per hundred, compared with $5.62 for the light fed steers. Had the alfalfa hay cost $5.00 per ton instead of $8.00 — and alfalfa in the 198 Missouri Agricultural Report. stack on the average farm of Nebraska does not usually command a figure greater than that — the net profits per steer would have been the same in both lots. This would have been true also if the corn had cost 50 cents per bushel instead of 35 cents, figuring the alfalfa at $8.00. This experiment emphasizes further the value of alfalfa as a beef producer, and it opens a new and import- ant field for future investigations. The record made by the light fed cattle was no accident, as another lot in a corn fodder experi- ment made very nearly as large gains on the same grain ration. No conclusions, however, are to be drawn until after further tests along this line are made. As a single experiment, it suggests the possibility of producing beef most economically on what approaches a full grain feed when corn is low in price and alfalfa high. When corn is high and alfalfa low, something more like half a full feed of grain would make beef production more profitable, even though more time is required to finish the cattle. Judging from the re- sults of the above experiment, it is probable that the most economi- cal proportion of grain to hay under varying conditions will be found somewhere between a half feed and a full feed of grain, nothing definite being known until after several tests are mad a in which different quantities of grain are fed. CONCLUSIONS FROM THESE EXPERIMENTS. 1. Prairie hay, when fed with corn alone to fattening cattle, gives small and unsatisfactory gains, and very little or no profit. 2. Alfalfa hay, with corn alone, gives large and profitable gains. 3. The use of well-cured corn-stover with alfalfa and corn, while it may not produce larger gains, will make the gains less costly, because of its low market value, thereby increasing the profits over com and alfalfa alone. 4. In feeding only prairie hay, as roughness to fattening cattle, much larger and more profitable gains can be made if lin- seed-meal or possibly some other protein concentrate is fed with corn in small quantity, rather than feed corn alone. 5. The results of two experiments indicate that linseed-meal is a little more valuable than cottonseed-meal, and much more valuable than wheat bran for supplementing corn when fed with prairie hay or corn-stover. 6. When alfalfa is made at least half of the roughness with prairie hay or corn-stover good gains may be made, and at less cost than when no alfalfa is fed, the protein being supplied by the Live Stock Breeders' Association. 199 use of linseed-meal. In other words, it is possible to grow protein on the farm at a price much below what it will cost on the market in form of some commercial protein food. 7. Corn-stover cut immediately after the ears ripen and cured in shocks possesses a value fully two-thirds as great as prai- rie hay. The part usually consumed, viz., the leaves and upper portion of stalk, is quite the equal of prairie hay pound for pound. 8. The results of a single experiment, in which but little more than half a full feed of corn was supplied two lots of fattening steers, suggest the possibility of making larger use of hay in finishing cattle for market than is ordinarily made and at less cost, especially where hay is relatively low and corn high in price. PROFITABLE MUTTON PRODUCTION. (F. B. Mumford, Professor Animal Husbandry, Missouri Agricultural College, Columbia, Mo.) Mr. Chairman, Gentlemen of the Convention — Whatever other good things the experiment stations have helped to do in connec- tion with agriculture and agricultural operations, they have cer- tainly contributed greatly to the definiteness of the operations which are conducted under the name of agriculture. We talk of beef production and pork production and mutton production now in terms of some understanding. We know within certain narrow limits about how much corn, for example, is re- quired to produce a pound of beef. We know that when under certain conditions we feed a given amount of corn to hogs we se- cure a certain amount of pork, and this is one of the most import- ant results achieved. I am sure this idea has impressed itself on your minds in listening to the papers and addresses that have been delivered before you. It is not my intention to burden you with a long address nor undertake to cover the smaller points of the subject which has been assigned to me, but I shall, owing to the shortness of the time and the magnitude of the subject, refer to only a few of the points I had intended to speak about, and will try to make them as clear and brief as possible. I take it that the fundamental problem in all our agricultural operations is to try to get the largest net profit per acre, combining therewith the idea, which we heard so ably discussed this morn- ing, of permanency. Profitable and permanent farming must go together. 200 Missouri Agricultural Report. We have also heard already in this convention that profitable and permanent agriculture involves necessarily the handling of live stock. It is not possible in the middle west for us to conceive of any other kind of successful farming than live stock farming. This places the farmers in 'a class above mere producers of raw material. The farmer produces raw material, it is true, but if necessary that we must change those raw materials into the fin- ished product, we must, like the manufacturer, use machines, and in this conection I like to think of the animal as a machine to be used in the manufacturing of the raw products — corn, hay, grass and grains of the farm — into the finished products — beef, pork and mutton — and as the efficiency of the machine, in the case of the manufacturer, frequently determines the profit he is to receive from his manufacturing operations, so the efficiency of the animal machine will often, or generally, perhaps, determine the net profit of the farmer per acre of land. This organization, the Missouri Improved Live Stock Breed- ers' Association, is founded upon the idea that it is possible to pro- duce efllcient animal machines, and the improvement of these ma- chines is the primary object of the Improved Live Stock Breeders' Association. It needs no argument at this time to convince breed- ers of improved live stock that there is a difference in animal ma- chines. It is not necessary for me to call your attention to the fact that one horse will eat a bushel of oats, and when hitched to a sulky and driven by an experienced driver will trot a mile in two minutes, while another horse will eat a similar quantity and quality of oats, and when hitched to the same sulky and driven by the same experienced driver, will do very well if he is driven a mile in six minutes. The difference is not in the oats, or the sulky, or the driver, but it is altogether in the efficiency of the animal machine. One horse eats a bushel of oats and obtains therefrom energy to trot a mile in two minutes; another can only secure sufficient energy to trot a mile in six minutes. Some cows eat a certain amount of feed and produce 125 pounds of butter in a year. Other cows will eat the same amount of feed and will make 300 pounds of butter a year. There is no difference in any of the conditions except in the efficiency of the animal machine. So I might go on and show that the profit secured in our live stock operations lies in the fundamental question of selecting the best animal machines. There is not only a difference of individuals in the same breed and class of animals, but there is a very wide difference between the different classes of animals. That is„ there is a very wide differ- Live Stock Breeders' Association. 201 ence between pork-producing machines and beef-producing ma- chines; and similarly a wide difference in the ability of the beef animal to make a pound of beef from the corn fed as compared with the mutton animal. There is likewise a very wide ditference between the ability of the beef animal to make a pound of beef and of the hog to make a pound of pork from the same amount of feed ; and between the hog to make a pound of pork and the mutton animal to make a pound of mutton. I have, with the assistance of one of my graduate students (Mr. C. G. Starr) in animal husbandry, studied the actual amounts of grain required to make a pound of beef or a pound of pork or a pound of mutton, under the conditions existing in the middle west. That is to say, the problem of feeding is this: To feed the raw products which we produce on the farm long enough and in the right way, so the animals to which it is fed will in time become fat or finished — and the best and cheapest way to accomplish this result. Of course, we must feed them until they arrive at a cer- tain degree of fatness. With cattle this time varies from three to six and even twelve months. In the case of hogs, this time is still more variable. In the case of mutton sheep, I suppose the average time for finishing a sheep in the winter season is about three months, this being more or less dependent upon the condition of the sheep at the beginning of their feeding. The experiment stations of the United States have conducted hundreds of experiments in cattle feeding, hog feeding and sheep feeding, and have, as a result of this large amount of work, arrived at certain conclusions as to the amount of feed required to pro- duce these different kinds of meat, and in a chart which I shall show you I have tried to collect the statistics as they are shown by these experiments, comparing the cost of feed in producing beef, pork and mutton : TABLE I— GRAIN REQUIRED FOR 100 POUNDS GAIN— DRY LOT. RATION CATTLE HOGS SHEEP Grain Hay Grain Grain Hay Corn Pounds 1080 914 712 953 Pounds 457 572 292 '' '. Pounds ■'■^. 500 421 446 452 359 431 Pounds 420 331 305 549 370 326 Pounds 458 Oats 595 Barley Peas Pastured Varied (with roots or silage) . . Varied 382 422 914 440 435 383 434 202 i Missouri Agricultural Report. Manifestly, in comparing the cost of beef production with the cost of pork production, it would not be fair to compare a steer three years old with a pig weighing fifty pounds, fed on a mixed or balanced ration, while the steer has not been so fed; and on the other hand, it would not be fair to compare a calf fed on a well balanced ration to a hog fed on corn alone; and in order to make this comparison more accurate, we selected all the feeding experi- ments we could find that had to do with feeding corn to cattle — mostly two-year-old cattle — and we took the experiments of the Missouri, Kansas, Illinois, Iowa and other experiment stations that have ever fed corn as a sole grain ration to cattle, hogs and sheep, and as a result of the average of all those experiments con- cerned with feeding corn to cattle, hogs and sheep, we found these facts: It required on an average 1,080 pounds of corn to make 100 pounds of gain, in the case of cattle, and 457 pounds of hay fed with the grain. The kind of hay fed was variable. In some experi- ments clover hay was used, and in some timonthy and in some trials other roughages. In the case of hogs fed on corn alone, we found the average amount of feed per one hundred pounds of gain was 500 pounds. In the case of sheep, there are included the experiments conducted at the Michigan Station, the Wisconsin Station, the Min- nesota and other stations — six or eight different stations in all — and in these experiments it required 420 pounds of corn to make 100 pounds of gain with 458 pounds of hay. In other words, it required the same amount of hay as with cattle, but it required only one-half as much corn to make a pound of pork or mutton as to make a pound of beef. But we did not stop with corn alone. We compared the same class of animals fed on oats, barley and on varied rations, mostly balanced rations, with the addition of roots and silage, and on balanced rations without the addition of roots and silage. We found oats were used only for fattening hogs and sheep, and it required 421 pounds of oats where they had been fed. When barley was fed to two-year-old cattle 914 pounds were required to produce 100 pounds of gain. Barley fed to sheep required 305 pounds of grain feed per 100 pounds gain. There were three or four experiments only in feeding barley to sheep. In feeding peas, we were able to find only one Canadian ex- periment, which shows that it required 452 pounds of peas to make 100 pounds of pork, and 549 pounds to make 100 pounds of mut- ton. But this experiment with sheep in connection with grazing the peas was on the ground, and this comparison is not, therefore, Live Stock Breeders' Association. 203 of great value. The feeding of mixed or balanced grain rations comprised more work than all the others combined. When mixed rations, mostly balanced rations, were fed in connection with roots or silage, it required 712 pounds of grain to make 100 pounds of gain with cattle. With hogs it required only 359 pounds of grain to 100 pounds of gain, and with sheep it required 370 pounds grain to 100 pounds of gain. The cattle required 572 pounds of hay and the sheep 382 pounds. When the same kind of rations were fed, with the addition of roots and silage, the average is 914 pounds of grain per 100 pounds gain for the cattle, 435 pounds for the hogs and 383 pounds for the sheep. Now, we were considerably surprised at the results of our investigations, and so much so that we went over the matter a second time, in order to get at the truth of this matter; but so far as I am able to compare the information gained, this is a fairly accurate comparison. Now some one may offer the suggestion immediately that we do not know how old these animals were, which is true. As it happens, however, most of the cattle fed were two years old, and most of the sheep fed were lambs, and most of the hogs fed were hogs under 200 pounds. The hogs and sheep were comparatively younger than the cattle ; but in answer to that it may be said that this represents the actual conditions. The greatest amount of mutton produced in the United States is pro- duced from feeding lambs, and the greatest amount of beef from feeding two-year-old cattle, and the figures represent fairly the average kind of hogs fed. So these figures are comparable as representing the particular kinds of animal machines that are used to make over the products of the farm into the finished product: TABLE II— YOUNG ANIMALS— GRAIN>EQUIRED FOR 100 POUNDS GAIN— ALL RE CEIVED SKIM MILK. CALVES PIGS LAMBS 432 lbs. 320 lbs. 284 lbs. The above table (II) illustrates the relative efficiency of cattle, sheep and hogs of similar ages. It must be said, however, that the number of experiments on this point are limited, and I do not, therefore, place the same weight upon this table that I do upon the results in table I. It is then a comparison between calves, pigs and lambs. The Iowa Experiment Station found that calves fed on skim milk re- 204 Missouri Agricultural Report. quired 432 pounds of grain on the average for 100 pounds gain, the larger part of the ration being shelled corn. At the Wisconsin Station, pigs and lambs fed on skim milk with grain required for the pigs 320 pounds of grain to make 100 pounds of gain, and the lambs only 224 pounds. So when we compare the youngest ani- mals fed for beef, pork and mutton, the sheep compare very favor- ably with the others. TABLE III-^GRAIN REQUIRED FOR 100 POUNDS GAIN ON PASTURE. CATTLE HOGS SHEEP 830 lbs. 398 lbs. 245 lbs. Under pasture conditions (see table III), we also have a few experiments in which they were fed grain while on pasture. The Missouri experiment required 830 pounds of grain to 100 pounds of gain in the case of cattle; 398 pounds (several stations) in case of hogs, and 245 pounds (Iowa) in case of sheep. I have made no mention of hogs following cattle, but that is not always stated in the experimental results, but on the average I suppose where 1,080 pounds of corn is required to make 100 pounds of beef, we ought to reduce it on this account to about 800 pounds, and where 912 pounds is fed, we ought to reduce it to, say, about 725 pounds of grain to make 100 pounds gain — that is, sub- tracting the amount of corn that may be utilized for the production of pork. I shall, of course, eliminate all I intended to say about sheep breeding. That subject has been very well covered by the gentle- men who have already discussed it, and I shall confine myself ex- clusively to the discussion of three or four methods of fattening sheep. I shall have to assume, in the first place, that I am talking to sheep feeders, and shall not stop to consider methods of handling sheep in general, but only the feeding of some rations that have been used with great profit in the production of mutton. These facts which I shall present to you are the results of my own ex- periments, and I give them to you because I know more about them and am better acquainted with all the conditions surrounding these particular feeding tests. One thing is certainly established in my mind regarding feed- ing sheep, and that is, it is easily possible to keep them too warm. We have demonstrated to my satisfaction that particularly fatten- Live Stock Breeders' Association. 205 ing sheep are nearly always kept too warm if confined in warm shelters. Our experiments have demonstrated conclusively that the best possible shelter for sheep is a dry place — under an open shed, but not in a warm barn; and this is true notwithstanding what we have learned about saving feed by keeping animals warm. These tests have shown that it will take as much or more grain to make a pound of gain when sheep are confined in a warm barn than if fed in an open shed. This is particularly true of this part of the country. It is also true as far north as Michigan. I cannot stop to talk of the different rations that have been fed, but I will try to call to your attention a few rations that have proven to be good rations for fattening sheep. Corn and clover hay have proven during the series of four or five years not only the best ration, but the most profitable ration in most cases. While this ration may not always produce the highest gains, still, corn and clover hay have in our experiments in feeding lambs, as com- pared with what we call a balanced ration, produced equally good results, and during the four or five years' work corn and clover hay has been a more profitable ration than corn mixed with linseed meal or other supplements that have been tried. The question has often been asked, "Does it pay to shear sheep before feeding them." It is the custom in some parts of the coun- try to shear the lambs in the fall before beginning to feed, and one year at the Michigan Experiment Station the lambs were shorn in the latter part of November. They were placed in a warm barn, kept closed and as warm as possible. Another lot of sheep fed exactly the same way, with the wool left on, was fed in a barn with all the doors left open. The results were all in favor of the un- shorn lot fed in a dry but not warm barn. The following tables give the results of various station tests in fattening sheep : 206 Missouri Agricultural Report. TABLE JV. 10 lambs In each lot. Fodder ration, clover hay, 2! o Distinguishing rations. o P S. B H O P I 15 o p o P p o in p s J. o- CO p 2 c 5 . a • a : ^ II • 3 . a. — ^ "^ c3 a P 1 P I 2 3 4 6 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 Corn (shelled) Oats Bran Corn y2, oats % (weight) Corn %, bran %. " Oats >^. bran K. " Oorn^, oats ^, bran % (weight) Roots ( rutabagas ) Silage "Self feed", corn J<,, oats 3^, bran % Corn Corn and roots Oorn 6 6-7, linseed meal 1 1-7, and roots Corn 6-7, linseed meal 1-7 Oorn ^2. bran 3^ Wheat Yi, and corn ]4 Wheat 6-7, and linseed meal 1-7 Oorn (self feed) Oorn 34, and bran K (self feed) Oorn %, and wheat % (outdoors) Oorn 34, and wheat 34 (indoors ) Oorn Wheat Oorn 34. and wheat 34 (lambs sheared Dec. 1) Sugar beets Oorn, wheat, oats and bran (self feed) 27 Oorn 34. and wheat 34. 1757 1963 1779 1735 1973 1957 1968 1173 1173 2120 1579 1612 1716 1785 1703 1185 1530 1506 1838 1196 1164 1208 1201 1263 5685+ 1460 1232 1675 1694 17:;8 1711 1698 1722 1654 1220 9S7 528 1097 964 967 1158 1124 1118 1147 961 959 1087 1173 1142 1199 1336 1181 924 1209 1190 IIM 1190 1190 1190 1190 1190 6706 4504" 1360 2720 2675 443 379 242 436 358 361 387 893 381 260 328 897 392 357 267 295 291 248 237 205 230 233 217 161 116 206 249 2.6 2.2 1.4 2.6 2.1 2.1 2.3 1.7 1.7 2.17 2.18 2.64 2.61 4.5 7.1 8.25 5.1 6.0 6.7 5.8 7.7 6.3 8.0 4.6 4.6 . 5.3 2.38 5.1 1.78 6.0 1.97 5.4 1.94 6.3 1.65 5.5 1.58 6.8 1.57 6.8 1.77 6.1 1.80 5.4 1.67 7.5 1.24 9.9 .89 9.7 1.58 7.6 1.91 5.9 6.96 8.68 12.9 7.11 9.14 9.13 8.37 9.28 10.01 9.45 7.02 6.41 6.72 6.99 9.1b 7.64 8.04 8.57 10.03 9.65 8.77 8.12 9.S« 13.97 15.60 10.04 8.48 *Silage. tSugar beets. Values used in computing cost of gain: Oorn $0.40 per bushel. Oats 0.32 " Wheat 0,60 " Oil meal $25.00 per ton. Bran 14.00 ' Roots 2,50 Silage 2..50 ^ " Olover hay.. 7.00 * " Live Stock Breeders* Association. 207 CONCLUSIONS. 1. Lots receiving corn in the fattening ration, either in whole or in part produced the best gains, were apparently in better finish, and in general were fed at a greater profit than the lots fed any other ration. (See lots 1, 4, 5, 10, 11, 14, 22, etc.) 2. A grain ration made up exclusively of wheat bran proved to be inferior for fattening lambs. (See lot 3.) 3. Feeding by means of a "self feed" is an expensive method of fattening, and is not to be recommended either from the stand- point of total gains made or the amount of dry matter required to produce a given gain. (Compare lots 7 and 10, 11 and 18; 15 and 19, and 21 and 26.) 4. Wheat bran is more valuable, pound for pound, than corn, and hence can be fed profitably in this State, except when it ap- proaches very closely the value of corn, 5. When roots are fed in a ration better gains are made and less dry matter is required to produce one pound of gain. 6. Shearing lambs late (March 8) in winter during feeding period increases the rate of gain. 7. Shearing in fall (December 1), was not followed by good results, and in these experiments was not as profitable as feeding unshorn lambs. (Compare lots 21 and 24). 8. The animals, fattened on rape during the fall and in good condition at the beginning of the experiment were essentially as successful feeders as those in poorer condition that were pastured on grass during the same fall period. (Compare lots 21 and 27.) 9. Small gains are not necessarily unprofitable, nor are large gains a sure index of profitable food consumption. 10. Roots were a valuable addition to every ration to which they were added. THE ONE HUNDRED PER CENT PROFIT ANIMAL— THE SHEEP. (A. T. Grimes, Greenwood, Mo.) History teaches us that sheep keeping was the earliest of the arts. Abraham, according to scripture, viewed his flocks from his tent door ; Laban sheered sheep ; Isaac had vast flocks ; Jacob used the wool to make his favorite son, Joseph, a coat of many colors. In ancient times a man's wealth was reckoned by the size of his 208 Missouri Acjrindtural Rejiort. flocks. Sir J. B. Lawes, the first agricultural experimenter in Lhe world, in the reports of his work of more than fifty years proved that sheep may be made to yield fifty per cent more profit than any other animal. A well fed flock of sheep is the most profitable property a farmer can own. It is sometimes said that the dairy cow is this. If that be true, why is it that the number of sheep has increased over three millions in Great Britain in the last few years, until now there are over three hundred sheep to every square mile? Sheep raising is looked upon by many as a primitive industry, suited only to poor lands and undeveloped agriculture. If sheep were suited only to rough and waste lands, why is it that in Great Britian :the tenant looks upon his sheep as the surest rent payer on land that is worth from three to five hundred dollars per acre? The sheep business has passed the primitive stage. We can count on a well established and increasing demand for our mutton products. The people of the country, and in fact the consumers of all the American Packers' products, are demanding more mutton, and those who never ate the flesh of the sheep before, once having tasted its fine flavor and discovered its high nutritious value, are becoming steady consumers of it, and not only is this the case, but when this best of all fresh meat is introduced it stays and the demand for it in- creases. We have always advocated that any farmer in our State can keep a small flock with satisfactory success. Failures in the keeping of sheep invariably happen in having too large a flock to begin with, for if one is able to keep successfully a small flock, which any person with good judgment and good common sense may do, is no reason that he can keep a thousand with the same success, for in all arts appertaining to agriculture there is no branch so difficult to become proficient in as the shepherd's art. This does not apply to sheep alone. Let any man overstock the capacity of his farm with hogs or cattle, and disaster is sure to follow. In my thirty years of experience in the sheep business I have always found that my sheep have always made me more profit for the feed consumed and the capital invested than any other stock. I have made one hundred and fifty per cent profit on grade ewes raising early lambs for the Easter market. MANIFOLD SOURCES OP PROFIT. Sheep in fact turn into money in various ways : First is the meat, whether from hot house lambs, ripe weather or fat ewes that Live Stock Breeders' Association. 209 have raised several lots of lambs ; then there is the wool, w^hich is commanding a good price and which is harvested in the spring of the year, so to speak, when the farmer has the least to sell from any other source, and as our wealth and population increases, greater is the demand for the best of woolen goods. Good, warm flannels are and always have been one of the first and most essential things in man's infancy, and as we pass the prime of life and enter our second childhood and these old, frail and decaying bodies become rheumatic, there is nothing that revives, stimulates and makes us feel like the spring of life more than the good old flan- nel shirt. And last, but not least, is the constant improvement of the land which sheep, with their "golden hoof" and rich manure, never fail to bring to the tired and worn out cultivated field. Sheep is the one hundred per cent profit animal, whether it be grazing on the rocks of the Ozarks, or on the rich and rolling blue grass pas- tures, or fertile fields of this great State of ours; and there is nothing that beautifies, or excites the artistic eye or makes the farm more attractive and pleasant than a well cared for flock of sheep. It is not my intention to tire you with dry figures of what some in- dividual has done in the sheep business to prove that the sheep is the one hundred per cent profit animal, but if there is a "doubting Thomas" here, if he will come to me personally, I will prove to him, beyond a doubt, that the sheep, properly cared for, is the most profit- able animal that walks upon the face of this green earth. BRIGHT PROSPECTS. The shepherd's star never shown brighter in the State of Mis- souri than it does today. There is every encouragement for a pros- pective shepherd to start in the sheep business. If you have never had any experience in the business, let me warn you to go easy, and buy few ewes and figure on improving in the future. One of the principles of success is to raise each year lambs that are better individuals than their mothers. Have your ideal. You know the ones that answer to the accepted type and to your ideal. Study your flock ; you know the ones that raise the best lambs and shear the heaviest fleece, you learn to discard the coarse head, the heavy ear, the long leg, the cloudy wool and dark skin. Hold on to the ones that conform the nearest to your ideal, and the most essential and important part is good care. As some one has said, "A wise shepherd feeds his lambs a month before he sees them and the fool- ish shepherd a month afterward." I want to impress upon the A-14 210 Missouri Agricultural Report. minds of all that in all my experience the one essential and most important thing to remember to make the sheep business profitable is care. Care will make constitution ; care will ward off diseases ; care will make size ; care will save feed ; care will make fat, and fat makes more and better wool. Yes, and with care will convince any man that the sheep is the one hundred per cent profit animal. Now in conclusion let me say, that the aim of every farmer in our State should be to keep a small flock of sheep, and it can be shown by figures of the most truthful character, and that can not lie or deceive, that this can be done on what is now wasted on thousands of Missouri farms and the profit from the flock well cared for will be one hundred per cent, if not more. ADVANTAGES OF PURE BRED OVER GRADE SHEEP. (J. W. Boles, Auxvasse, Mo.) In the discussion of this question, whatever may be said in favor of pure bred sheep may be applied to almost any other pure bred stock, so, if I get off the question, you need not be surprised. I am glad to know that the sheep industry is becoming more interesting in Missouri, and hope the time will soon come when she will rank where she should in the production of good sheep. Sheep are nice to handle; they are the cleanest stock on the farm; they are the best weeders we have. Sheep can be kept more cheaply than any other stock ; they will come as nearly making one hundred per cent a year as any stock kept on the farm. Now the question arises, "What kind shall we raise?" I say the best, for we all know the best is the most profitable and gives the most pleasure. In starting in the sheep business, then, shall we lay a founda- iton with pure breds or with grades? Without a solid or sub- stantial foundation we can not build a permanent structure. Good seed must be sown in fertile soil in order to reap a bountiful harvest. The purer the seed the more perfect the offspring. Per- fection gives value and appreciation. The breed of sheep that distinguishes itself from all other breeds by its type, form, markings and general make-up is a pure bred, for in pure breds only of all classes of stock do we find such marked distinctions. Live Stock Breedey^s' Association. 211 Our foundation stock must be pure if we wish to establish a distinct herd. I presume there is not one of this assembly who breeds stock that uses a grade sire, yet a very large per cent of the farmers of the State of Missouri do breed to grade sires. Especially is this true of sheep, and for this reason, I presume, it has been said that "Even Missouri, which raises more mean lambs than any other state in the Union, sends a few convincingly good lambs to market." I wish I could say something, and in such a way, that I could impress everyone present so deeply that he would advocate the importance of using pure-bred sires with his sheep. Think of one of the most productive states in the Union and one of the best sheep states sending the meanest lambs that go on the Chicago market. I am truly ashamed of the condition of the sheep business in our great State. There are no states that excel us in the production of good horses, mules, cattle and hogs. Some- thing must be wrong. If there is a remedy, let us find it. I believe we can, by using pure bred sires and dams, when it is practicable, raise the standard of our sheep. I use both pure bred sires and dames with all the stock I breed, and have never had to sell an animal for less than a grade price. Even the chickens, dogs and corn are pure breds. I have formed the habit of trying to improve my herds by using pure bred breeding stock. I believe that there are many farmers that just drift along and breed grades simply from mere habit. We have to be educated to paying good prices for pure bred stock before we can see the importance of it. When we get in the habit of getting good prices for our sheep we feel all right. It takes the same care to save a grade lamb that it does a pure bred. The same quantity of feed keeps each alike. If a grade will make you one hundred per cent a year, it will be from one- fourth to one-half of what a pure bred ewe will make you with a little more money invested for the breeding stock. A five-dollar grade ewe will raise you a $3.50 lamb; a $20.00 pure-bred ewe will raise you a $12.50 to $15.00 lamb. On the road to the station last fall I overtook a neighbor who was driving 100 breeding ewes worth $5.50 each. I had in my wagon six ewes worth $35.00 each, and I could not see why my one ewe was not more valuable to me than six and one-third of his would have been, as she ate one-sixth the feed and brought as much money. 212 Missouri Agricultural Report. The man who saves from 90 to 95 per cent of his lambs can not afford to breed grade sheep. His labor is worth too much and his time is too precious. It is as easy to raise a $25.00 lamb as it is a $5.00 lamb, if your foundation stock is right and you give them the proper care. A careless or negligent person would better bread grades, if anything at all, for he has not so much money invested. I would not advise every farmer to raise pure bred sheep to sell as breeders, but I would insist that almost every farmer ought to keep a few sheep and use a pure bred sire. One great hin- drance to the pure bred business is that we sell too many inferior animals for breeders. Though the pure bred scrub is better than a grade scrub, neither should be used. With the demand we have for better class of mutton and wool, we can not afford to raise an inferior kind. Early maturity and easy fattening qualities are other features in favor of pure breds over grades. The time is at hand when we must pay more attention to our breeding stock. The demand for high-class material is upon us in every department of business. The moneyed classes are eating more mutton than ever before. A superior quality of wool is also demanded. The grade sheep will no longer supply our wants. We must improve our herds or quit the business. I feel that we are awakening to a keen sense of the demand for better sheep, and that it is only a matter of time before every flock-master will use a pure bred sire and that many will have pure bred herds. Cross-bred sheep are good for specific purposes, but not proper for breeders. Let our motto be "Purify our herds." By improving our herds we not only elevate our great State in the estimation of the world, but we educate ourselves to a higher appreciation of things that tend to make men good. The most energetic and progressive and up-to-date men that we have today in the live stock business are men who have long since quit the scrub. The prosperity of our country depends very largely on the improvement of our farms and herds, and it be- hooves us to use the best breeding stock obtainable. I would say in conclusion to any one who is thinking of start- ing in the stock business, to study your own disposition and char- acter, your environments and your capacity for business, and then buy a few of the best of the kind you like, and make it a life-time business if you would attain the greatest success. Read some good sheep paper and keep posted. Live Stock Breeders' Association. 213 A WORD TO THE NEW BREEDER. (Hayes Walker, Kansas Oity, Mo.) Your program committee asked for a paper on the data of pure bred live stock, filled with figures and statistics, but it would be a very dry subject, and worth nothing unless one could remem- ber all the figures — a task both tiring and almost impossible. In considering such a subject and the figures pertaining to it, apart from other and parallel facts in contemporaneous industries, the breeder of pure bred stock or the beginner is very apt to be fright- ened by the apparently "bearish" figures at hand. The most recent estimates obtainable of the number of pure bred cattle recorded that are now living are 260,000 Shorthorns, 120,000 Herefords, 62,000 Aberdeen Angus and 16,000 Galloways. The young man who contemxplates going into the pure bred stock business argues to himself that with so many registered cattle now living and the present magnitude of the industry the business cannot continue, that it is not on a stable foundation and that it is liable to be overdone. The figures given look big. They are, and they are growing larger each year. Yet this, so the alder ones tell me, was the same argument against the pure bred business twenty and forty years ago. Yet it continues to thrive, with the demand and values on about the same plane. In England where they have been breeding pure bred stock for many, many years, more than in this country, their values now are higher than ever. We hear the prophecy every day from men of affairs, from people who study conditions, that the growth of this country has barely commenced, and that in fifty years or less our population and resources will be doubled. If this be true, and few doubt it, this "bearish" argument of our doubtful friends has no place now, and will not have, at least, until we have reached our largest growth. In my own brief experience as a fieldman on live stock papers and in the larger experience of others with which I am familiar, I never have known of any failure of breeder of pure bred live stock through any weakness or fault of the business. There have been failures, and many of them, but the cause can be traced in- variably to some gross mismanagement or poor business judg- ment of the breeder, aside from any fault of the pure bred. We will suppose, however, that our friend has overcome all 214 Missouri Agricultural Report. arguments and fears, and proposes to buy a few pure breds and become a breeder. I do not pose as a know-it-all, and do not wish to appear presumptuous. I wish simply to make a few sugges- tions from my experience "on the road," during which I have visited several hundred herds of pure bred stock. I hope some of them may be of value and that the breeders will take them for what they are worth. My first suggestion to the beginner, whether he is breeding cattle, hogs, sheep, horses or other stock, would be : start with good animals. Start right at the top today — and keep going higher. This is possible. You can commence with good ones just as easy as with poor animals. If you start your herd with the other fel- low's culls, just because they don't cost much, you are handicapping yourself. You are not getting a "start," but are really buying something that will hinder you. If you commence that way you will never have anything to sell except "culls," and you can't sell them except to some one else who knows as little as you did when you began. You can "breed up," of course, but it will take a long time. You will be ten or twenty years that way in securing what you might have had at the beginning, and it's the exceptional breed- er who "breeds up" his herd without buying something better than he already has. It's not only quicker and easier to start right up at the top, but it's more profitable, and there's more satisfaction in having as good stock as anybody else has. Start your herd with as much uniformity of type and individu- ality as you can secure. That generally means, just as truly, a uni- formity of pedigree. Visit as many good herds as possible. Visit the big live stock shows. Study the animals and select a type that suits you, and stick to it. Your herd will always look better and the produce will sell better. Don't have a miscellaneous collection of different types or too many families. One good breeder recently told me if he were again a beginner he would secure for his breeding herd females all sired by the same bull. He did not mention any particular sire and did not mean any certain one, but he meant in that way to secure his brood cows all of a particular and individual uniformity. Some sires do not breed uniformly, it is true, and the buyer should be careful in that regard. My friend reached that conclusion after ten years of experience trying to "breed up,' discarding culls and making sub- sequent and wiser purchases. He has succeeded, finally, and now has a fine herd, but at a loss of ten years of time, and has just now Live Stock Breeders' Association. 215 reached the degree of excellence he might have started with ten years ago. Ten or twelve good cows are better than two or three times that many of the ordinary kind. The produce from a few good ones will bring two or three times as much money, and you have less to feed and handle. My most earnest suggestion to the beginner is this : Don't be afraid to ask for advice and information from people who are competent to advise. The man who knows that he doesn't know is the wisest, they say. There are so many points in individuality and pedigree that the uninformed may make irreparable mistakes. You can unintentionally buy unfashionably bred animals or ani- mals otherwise good but lacking in breed type or other characteristics that you do not notice and will not notice perhaps until you come to sell their produce. You can never sell them un- less to another uninformed breeder. It is unnecessary to be a "pedigree crank," but it is just as unnecessary to burden yourself with a lot of unfashionable pedi- grees simply to prove your independence and freedom from fash- ion's decrees. Life is too short to try to educate the world to your way of thinking, especially when there may be some doubt as to your own education. It is just as well to ride in the band wagon with springs and cushioned seats, especially when the fare is the same, and you are sure of a speedier and more comfortable ride. It will take some money to start a pure bred herd. You will have something at stake, and should give them good care. To im- prove them requires more thought and more attention than you think. Don't imagine that pure bred cattle require no feed. I have seen some herds that made me think their owners believed their cattle were a kind of supernatural animals and could live on their purity of breeding alone. They can't do it, and you can't "grade up" a breed that will. Keep them in good condition all the time. They will create a better impression, they will bring better produce and will always command a price that means great- er profit. If you keep them in poor condition you can expect no improvement, but a retrogression. But one must love the business to make a success of it. He should study it carefully and continuously. He must keep up-to- date. He can improve his own stock, but others improve theirs, too, and in different points. One man cannot learn it all in his own experience, but he can be in the world and of it, and learn to profit by the experience of others. There is a fascination about 216 Missouri Agricultural Report. the pure bred business, aside from the commercial feature, that appeals to me, and I believe most of the actual breeders find it so. This thing of improvement — of doing something better than it has ever been done before — of making a better animal than its ancestors — brings a sense of satisfaction and pride that is of itself its own reward. AN EXPERIMENT IN PORK PRODUCTION. (E. B. Forbes, Assistant Professor Animal Husbandry, Missouri Agricultural College.) In the spring of 1905 the Missouri Experiment Station made a comparison of several of the best concentrated supplements to corn for dry-lot fattening of hogs, and the practical outcome of this test is set forth in the following table : Live Stock Breeders' Association. 217 us a> o CO rH CO d o IM o 1-H IN 00 CO CO I-H Average ini- tial weight. Pounds. i-H 00 O) »-H -H CO CO I-H I-H CO CD T-H I~l I-H o -H Value of supplement. Ton. «o o l-H CD O o CO (N CO IN I- 00 CO o IN *= en o a O i-H 1^ CO «0 CO CO 00 i-H CO OJ 05 05 M 05 CO Average daily feed. Pounds. *-< fO 00 o o CO CO O 05 CD IN Average daily gain. Pounds. 1-H 05 1-H Ol CO T-H CO I-H CO O i-t Grain per cwt. gain. Pounds. CO CO 00 CO CO CO o CO 00 CO I-H I-H O 3 c o IN 00 m C •c a -^ cj O) J3 e 00 r-( E a o ) 1-H 0) _E o •a m w C &^ oo a> S C o o 6' o IN u. c (U > g o 00 n s c o O 00 D, D, a p, n a, o o o o o o •<1< o o o o o O O ■* •* ■^ CO O (N CO CO 'I" (N (U CO d cS d fli r-H •d -3 •- -d d >> S !n r: O ;S H^ ^ fH O 218 Missouri Agricultural Report. The rations are in each case, except the first which is corn meal alone, "balanced" in the sense that the proteids and carbohy- drates are furnished in the proportion in which they are required by the animals. In each of the mixed rations the nutritive ratio of the digestible nutrients was 1 :6.5 — that is, each contains 6.5 times as much starch equivalent as protein. Five young hogs were fed in each lot, and at the beginning of the experiments they weighed between 114 and 120 pounds each. They were fed for sixty days and sold at weights of from 170 to 220 pounds. The feed was all ground and fed mixed up with water into a thick slop, and each ration was fed twice daily to the limit of the appetite of the lot receiving it. The first column of figures in the table shows us that lots 3, 4 and 5, in which the corn was supplemented by linseed oilmeal, soy beans and tankage, required just about the same amount of feed to make 100 pounds of pork. These three rations were considerably more efficient than those containing wheat middlings and germ oil- meal as fed to lots 2 and 6. All of these mixed rations were de- cidedly more efficient than corn alone as fed to lot 1. The second column of figures shows that the average daily gain per head corresponded very closely with the efficiency of the feeds as shown by the grain requirement per hundred pounds of increase in weight. The linseed oilmeal, soy beans and tankage rations each produced average daily gains of about 1.7 pounds per head, while the three other rations were much inferior to these. The more efficient rations were also the most palatable ones as is shown in the third column of figures. Since the hogs regulated the amount consumed to suit themselves, these figures show which feeds were relished best. • The feeds are considered to have cost at the farm, as indicated by the prices given below the table, allowance being made for freight in the case of those food stuffs requiring shipment from a distance. The soy bsans were assumed to have a cost the same as the linseed oilmeal just for comparison, it being considered that if the beans produced pork as cheaply as the oilmeal, when figured at the same price, attention might be called to the profitability of producing this feed upon the farm. The soy bean and tankage rations produced pork at 3 cents per pound, while the linseed oilmeal ration produced pork at $3.18 per hundredweight. The ration of corn alone was not as profitable as the three Live Stock Breeders' Association. 219 above mentioned ones, but because of its cheapness produced pork at a lower cost than the rations containing middlings and germ oilmeal. The fifth column of figures shows the values of the supple- ments. These are the values at which it is an even thing, whether they be fed with the corn in balanced rations or whether the corn be fed alone. As long as these feeds cost less than the values as here stated, pork may be produced more cheaply from the use of the supplements than from corn alone. One must also bear in mind the fact that the supplemented rations produce pork much more rapidly than corn alone. The middlings costing $20 per ton were worth but $17.06; the germ oilmeal costing $26.00 per ton was worth only $20.68, but the linseed oilmeal, soy beans and tankage all returned handsome profits. The tankage was bought from Swift and Company at Kansas City, Missouri. It is dried and ground meat scrap, is thoroughly sterilized and is a safe and profitable food. It is so concentrated that but little of it need be handled. The less concentrated supple- ments, wheat middlings especially, require too much labor in haul- ing from town. The showing made by soy beans is especially favorable to the farmer since he can produce this feed himself. The beans may be cut a little early and stored as hay for winter feeding or they may be hogged off in the fall, corn being fed in addition. This last method has much to commend it and will grow and fatten hogs very rapidly at a minimum cost in feed and labor. GALLOWAY CATTLE. (R. W. BROWN, CARROLLTON, MO.) Galloway is the name of a province situated in the southwest part of Scotland. In ancient times it was composed of six coun- ties and enjoyed a sort of independent government. Its surface is very irregular, but among the high hills are many fertile valleys and numerous small lakes. It borders upon the North Channel and its climate is mild and moist. In the histories of this province, as early as the twelfth cent- ury, we find mention made of a breed of polled black cattle. Ortel- lios, the celebrated geographer, writing in 1573, says: "In Car- 220 Missouri Agricultural Report. rack (a patt of Galloway) are oxen of large size, whose flesh is tender, sweet and juicy." The fame of these cattle gradually reached out into England and Scotland, and they soon became known as the Galloway cattle. After England and Scotland became united the farmers of Galloway found a market for their cattle among the feeders and graziers of England. This trade grew until toward the end of the eighteenth century as many as thirty thousand head were sent annually to the counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, where they were fitted for the London market. Smith, in his agricul- tural survey of Galloway, says : "What above all may be regarded as decisive of the merits of the Galloway breed is the uniform testi- mony of the Norfolk graziers, who have long given them the pref- erence to every other breed of cattle. Their average price is two pounds per head above that of any other breed the same weight." Aiton, speaking of these cattle, says: "It is well known that the Galloway breed of cattle have, by the attention of the inhabitants, been brought to a degree of perfection for feeding equal or superior to any breed in Great Britain. They possess all the excellences of shape, size, constitution and qualities that can recommend them to the English graziers. They are of a tolerable size and very handsome. They are spirited, strong, very healthy and hardy, and no cattle whatever feed better or yield beef that is more relished at table, as can be well attested in all parts of South Britain." The object of the breeder at that time was to raise as many good animals as he could for the market. The best heifers were retained in the herd and the rest sent south with the steers. Thus the breed was improved by the systematic mating of the best speci- mens of each sex, and not by the crossing of any other breed. In winter the cattle ran out, much as they do here on our western ranches. This improved the hardiness of the breed. With the introduction of turnips and modern methods of farming into Gal- loway, improvement became more rapid, and after the advent of railways many of the cattle were fattened at home. About this time a trade sprang up with the farmers of Scotland and England for bulls to cross on other breeds, mostly Shorthorn and Ayrshire cows. This was the birth of the pure bred business, and it became apparent that to maintain the purity of the breed some kind of a record must be kept. Unfortunately, all early records and docu- ments were lost in the fire that destroyed the Highland Agricultural Society's museum and records in Edinburgh in 1851. In 1862 the Polled Herd Book was published, and it contained the records of the Aberdeen Angus and the Galloways. In 1877 the present Gallo- Live Stock Breeders' Association. 221 way Cattle Society was organized. In 1853 was made the first importation to America and in 1872 registration was begun, and a few years later the American Galloway Breeders' Association was organized. Since the first importation to America many improvements have been made upon the type of the Galloway, but many of his characteristics remain unchanged. Nothing is known of the origin of this breed of cattle, but from time immemorial they have been hornless. The unvarying test of the purity of a Galloway is, there must not be the slightest trace of a horn or scur. In color, the Galloway is black, not a pure black, but with a brownish tinge. The calves with their first coat of hair are usually a dark mahogany brown. Many families have more or less white on the underline, but above or below that any white may not be, but is considered a sign of impurity, and debars the animal from registration. Accustomed as the Galloway has been for cen- turies to an outdoor life,' he now has a soft undercoat of thick, mossy hair, with a long, wavy outside covering. Coarse, curly hair is very objectionable. The hardiness of the Galloway is proverbial. If necessary, he will face the wind and the snow, and travel miles for food or water. They acclimatize readily and feed on a large variety of plants. In Scotland herds are maintained where no other breed can exist. Quite recently Prof. C. C. Georgeson, who has charge of govern- ment experiments in Alaska, shipped a car load of breeding cattle to that cold climate, and recent advices from there inform us that they are doing even better than Prof. Georgeson had expected. He says there is no other breed of cattle that will stand the Alaska climate. On the other hand, there have been several shipments to the Republic of Mexico, and they are doing equally well there. As a beef producing breed, the Galloways have a reputation that is excelled by no other. They topped the market centuries ago, and are topping it today. Joseph Hill, the English butcher, says : "As a beef producing breed, there are no other cattle equal to the Galloway. The quality is superior to any I ever killed." John Cross, another English butcher, says : "It is my opinion that Galloway cattle are the best butcher's beast, both as regards quality of beef and proportion of offal. They are without doubt what is wanted at present — beef, not bone and fat." From the fact that the meat is evenly marbled and laid on the best cuts arises its superiority. The statement is sometimes made that the Galloway is not an early maturing animal. The nature of the country, the 222 Missouri Agricultural Report, diverse methods employed by the farmers of Galloway, originated or developed two distinct types of the breed. Away up among the hills and mountains was developed a type that matured at two to four years of age, while in the low lying valleys, where pastures are more luxuriant and other feeds plentiful, the calves remain fat the year round, and thus originated the modern Galloway, the popular, early maturing type of to-day. The former has almost been eliminated, but we occasionally see specimens of this High- land type today, but I dare say no more often than we see the same specimens in other breeds. The Smith field fat stock show has records of Galloway two-year-old steers weighing over two thou- sand pounds and yearlings over fourteen hundred, and even in the early days of the breed they frequently topped the London market, weighing from nine hundred to fourteen hundred pounds as year- lings. In our own feeding experience, we have purchased range bred steer calves weighing less than five hundred pounds, and re- turned them to market in a year's time weighing over thirteen hundred. Mr. Leslie Smith, manager of the Meadow Lawn herds of Shorthorn and Galloway cattle, told me during the recent In- ternational Live Stock Show that in his judgment (and no man is more competent to judge) that the four Galloway female calves exhibited in their young herd this year were the equal of and were as well matured as the four females of any young herd of any breed in the show. One of the other important characteristics of the breed is the prepotency of the bulls and their ability to impress their character- istics on the offspring. Ninety-five per cent, of the calves from any cross will not only be uniform in quality, but will be black and with- out horns. There is no breed of cattle that will breed up a scrub herd quicker than a Galloway. It is also a fact that tuberculosis is almost unknown in this hardy breed of cattle. The true index of what a breed is doing is shown by its associ- ation records. This tells us that the Galloway is spreading out in every section of the United States and Canada. Recent shipments have been made from the corn belt to Utah, California, Alaska, Virginia, Florida and into the Republic of Mexico. It tells us the increase in membership in 1905 was double that of 1904 — that the receipts of the association were thirty-five per cent, greater in 1905 than in 1904. It tells us that the range men in the west, south- west and northwest are picking up good Galloway bulls as fast as they are produced. The Galloway is making a name for himself today, as he did centuries ago, when he was driven four hundred Live Stock Breeders* Association. 223 miles across Old England to the market of London. On the range, in the feed lot, in the breeding herd, he is proving his merit, but it is probably in the show ring that he has made the most improve- ment in recent years. One of the most frequent remarks heard at the shov^ is : "The Galloways are making better progress than any other breed," meaning, of course, improvement toward show yard conditions, for it is only a few years since the Galloway breeder, a novice to the art of fitting for exhibition, sought en- trance at the gates of our national shows. Today there are more good Galloways seen at our shows, in proportion to the number of animals, than any other breed. For example, at the recent Inter- national, there were about seventy-five Galloways in breeding classes. Had the exhibits been in proportion to the number of registered animals in each breed, there should have been fifteen hundred Shorthorns, six hundred Herefords, three hundred Angus. In classes where they come into competition with other breeds, they win their share of the honors. In the range-bred feeder class, Galloways won three of the six grand champion prizes offered by the American Royal and the International since these shows were established, or as many as all the other breeds together. Few Galloway steers have been fitted for these fat stock shows for two reasons : first, the breeders have always had an active market for their best bulls and the steers that come from this source are second class animals. Secondly, the great majority of Galloway steers are marketed by feeders who are not interested in any particular breed. The popularity of the Angus breed today has been made so by such men as Funk, Kerrick, White and Krambeck, men who make it their business to raise high class steers, whose sires and dams are the best specimens of the breed. Mr. Jacob Funk said of his champion load of steers : "The foundation of this load was laid over fifty years ago by Isaac Funk. Some of these steers were from pure bred cows and all of my own breed- ing." Mr. Deane Funk, commenting upon this load, says : "During a series of efforts to capture this trophy, extending over six years, I have ridden the country night and day, always with both eyes open, for a promising animal. Frequently I have secured one that looked a part of a winner, standing alone, but he degenerated to the value of about thirty cents when turned in with the rest." As the Gazette puts it : "You must be a breeder as well as a fitter," and the Galloway breeder, as well as any other who aspires to cham- pionship honors, must adopt similar methods and sacrifice their very best bulls. In the carcass contest, the Galloways, with their finely 224 Missouri Agricultural Report. marbeled meat, have been more successful, always standing well up in line and have won championships both in this country and at Smithfield. The remark is frequently made that "there are not so many men going into the Galloway business," but it is equally true that there are not so many going out. "That they do not bring as high prices" — neither do they bring such low prices as some of the other breeds. It is a fact that we hardly ever sell a bull in our own county, because the farmers can go out and buy pure bred bulls of some of the other breeds at from thirty-five to fifty dollars. I am sure if we could get at the returns of the sales of pure bred cattle, you would find that the Galloway averages as high, if not higher, than any other breed. I attended two dispersion sales of pure bred cattle in my home county last year, one a Galloway herd, the other of another breed. The Galloway herd had not been kept up and had dwindled down to three old cows from thirteen to fifteen years old, that averaged over sixty dollars. The other herd was as well kept and as well bred, some of the animals having been added to the herd at a cost of eight hundred dollars per head. This herd was just in its prime and their average was not quite seventy dollars. I am not giving you these comparisons in an unfriendly spirit. If there is anything that the Galloway is proud of, more than another, it is of the company he keeps, the white face, the doddie and the red, white and roan. Not a competitor but a co-partner with these magnificent breeds in their fight against the scrub. Mis- souri for pure bred cattle and better beef. "THE RED, WHITE AND ROAN." (Address by Ool. W. A. Harris, of Kansas.) Mr. Chairman, Ladies and Gentlemen : I cannot tell you how pleased I am to have an opportunity to be with you this after- noon. I did not know what I was to talk about until a day or two ago, when I came across a copy of your program. I found that I had been put down as W. A. Harris of Chicago. I felt somewhat aggrieved at that, because that has been the means of inflicting some very deep scars upon my political body in the past; in fact, it has inflicted more than any other one thing. I am glad, how- ever, that your chairman has located me properly in introducing me to you. Live Stock Breeders' Association. 225 I am from Kansas. Let that be distinctly understood. The subject of the romance I am to relate to you broadens out, as I think of it, more and more, and it seems almost impossible that in a brief off-hand talk I could give you any idea of the wonderful romance, of the wonderful extent and the wonderful interest con- veyed by those simple words, "The Red, White and Roan." It has been said that the beat of the British drum salutes the rising sun around the globe incessantly. It may also be said that wherever the British have beat the drum to salute the rising sun, they have taken with them the red, white and roan. It is a well- known fact that there is no island in the sea, no corner of any continent, no land or realm where the English race have entered, but where you will find the blood of the red, white and roan. It seems to have been a perpetual custom on the part of the English- speaking people to carry with them this magnificent animal, and I think the world is a great deal richer for it. After having devoted nearly a lifetime to the study of the red, white and roan, and endeavoring to upbuild its fortunes as well as I could in this great new west of ours, I had the pleasure of traveling over the wonderful country where this great animal first came to light, and a remarkable country it is, indeed. That portion of England lying in Cumberland, Yorkshire and Durham counties, extending from the city of York north, until you reach Durham, situated on a magnificent bluff, overlooking a beauti- ful stream, towering above everything with its wonderful cathedral, is a perfect garden; a beautiful undulating country, filled with rich meadows and gently flowing streams. There seems to be no broken or worthless land anywhere. And as I traveled along from spot to spot, connected with the early history of the shorthorns, it seemed to me the birthplace was worthy of its offspring. It was a wonderfully rich country, and, as you know, away back in the early ages those regions were seized upon by the monastic orders, and all through this portion you find traces of the wealth and power to which those monasteries reached. The monastery of York is probably the most worthy example of cathedral archi- tecture to be found anywhere, and as you go north from York to Durham you find everywhere traces of its institutions. The monks were intelligent men for their time; they understood good living and knew how to practice it and enjoy it; they understood good farming, and they sought the richest and best land; they culti- vated it to the highest possible extent known to that day; and A-15 226 Missouri Agricultural Hevort. they took up the subject of improved cattle and horses, and it is simply wonderful to go away back — as far as we can — in the old records and find that for thousands of years those old monks, by careful selection of grades, built up new standards in live stock, and to study the elements that were to be found at the beginning in the herds of large white cattle which were to be found in Chilling- ham Park, and one or tw^o other places in England. They are typ- ical shorthorns in many respects — white, with red ears and white noses ; straight hind leg and quarter ; and, except for their diminu- tive size, one would think they were more or less of the shorthorn blood of today. Probably some importations from Holland were made a good many centuries ago, and thus additional milking quality infused in the strain. They went on century after century, but all the way through we can trace their growth. The cathedral at Durham was founded in the year 1099, nearly a thousand years ago. The present structure is a reproduction of the original or old build- ing, and yet on the walls of the main entrance there is a cow, with two dairy maids by her side, and she is to all intents and pur- poses of shorthorn type. This shows that at that early day they had a conception of the same qualities that we note as desirable. It has the old double udder, but seems to lack size and scale. The illustration shows it was not as large as we would have cattle to- day. But there was, nevertheless, the beginning of this wonder- ful progress, the beginning of this wonderful change, and as I spoke awhile ago of the tastes of those old monks for good roast beef and the good things of this life, it seems to me the most perfect hotel, so far as comfort is concerned, I ever saw in my life is the station hotel at York, the center of the clergy in England. The Archbishop of York is the great ecclesiastical agent of the king, and there attend upon him clergy of all ranks, and I find the clergy of today equally as fond of the many comforts of this life as the monks of the olden day must have been. That is a most delightful hotel; it is most beautifully furnished; it is quiet; at- tentive servants with limp slippers attend them; beautiful wax candles complete the effect of the scene at night. They feast upon the finest wines and the finest meats it is possible to produce or obtain. So I imagine this love of luxuries has been handed on down from the old monastic orders in the years five and six hun- dred. Was this not a fitting birthplace for the greatest of beef ani- mals? The work of carefully selecting and breeding these animals Live Stock Breeders* Association. 227 went on for centuries, and was no doubt somewhat similar to what we are doing today. It went on until gradually these characteristics that were desired came to be almost fixed in the animals, and this thing we call "prepotency" became impressed in this breed of cat- tle as in no other. No other cattle, no other tribe of domestic animals has it to such a wonderful extent as the *'roan." About the end of the eighteenth century, however, they began to preserve what we call pedigrees instead of mere tradition, as that a certain ani- mal was from F. Brown's red bull or J, Dixon's bull. Those are the only sires, as you know, at the bottom of shorthorn pedigrees today. Charles and Robert Colling deserve, more than any other two men, credit for bringing all this scattered material into one sys- tematic compact whole, and they did it by introducing novel ideas in regard to breeding. About that time Mr. Blackwell, in the southern part of England, had achieved considerable success in improving the long horn cattle of that day. He had also wonder- fully improved the Leceister sheep of that day. Charles Colling was an enterprising young man who had just taken the beautiful farm of Quentin, which I viewed with a great deal of interest, as it is today just as he left it. He spent a week with Mr. Blackwell, and finally that gentleman explained the mystery of his operations and success, which was simply a scientific application of the prin- ciples of in-breeding. It was the beginning of his breed, but Mr. Blackwell found that by breeding sire to daughter and brother to sister for generation after generation, he absolutely fixed the type he desired to hand down. Charles Colling went home with that idea. He had been suc- cessful, as you know, in finding a wonderful red bull called "Hub- bard," but he was recognized as a pure short horn bull. His dam was a cow recognized as possessed of wonderfully mellow skin, beautifully developed form and symmetry, and it was known that he was out of a beautiful short-horn bull. Mr. Colling took this bull "Hubbard" and used him freely. He did not continue to breed him as long as he should have done, but parted with him. How- ever, he found that the descendants of Hubbard were remarkably fine and similar specimens, and, as you know, when he obtained "Favorite," a direct descendant of Hubbard, he actually used three crosses in succession of Favorite upon his own offspring. The result was the bull "Comet," the most wonderful animal that had been seen up to that time. And when Mr. Colling, because of failing health, retired from the business, he sold Comet for six thousand pounds. The introduction of Comet was a nepot in short- 228 Missouri Agricultural Report. horn breeding. The doctrine that like produces like or the likeness of some ancestor was thoroughly substantiated, and from Hub- bard on down to Comet it was shown that pedigree, rightly used, was the only safe plan for breeding improved cattle. When Mr. Colling's herd was dispersed, we see wonderful de- velopment again, when Mr. Bates, who lived hardly five miles away from the Colling brothers, went on with the work. He had ridden over to the Colling's one morning and found Miss Colling milking a beautiful cow called "Lady Maynard," and Mr. Bates was much impressed with the cow, and he succeeded afterwards in obtaining her and her heifer calf called "Duchess." That was the foundation of a wonderful herd of cattle. About the same time Booth brothers, in Northumberland, ob- tained some Colling blood, so we see Mr. Bates and the Booths, who were destined to become leaders of two great rival factions of shorthorns, obtaining their material at the same fountain head. Bates was proud of the milking qualities of his shorthorns, and was also fond of their stj'le and fashion ; and he was prouder of those qualities than of their thick, heavy flesh. T. C. Booth laid greatest importance upon the thick, heavy flesh, and asked his friends if the broad backs of his cows were not worth a few pints of milk. He cared little about the shape of the head, and the result was that the Booth cattle grew to have homely and unprepossessing heads, while Mr. Bates carefully watched the development of the finer points of beauty of his cattle. The quarrel between the Bates idea and the Booth idea grew to be almost as bitter as the War of the Roses, which had so ter- rificly crossed England. Men became alienated from each other, and friends lost their friendship for each other, because of devo- tion to one or the other of these strains. I wandered all one sum- mer afternoon over the fields of Northumberland with one of the descendants of Mr. Booth, and found that those cattle were at that time absolute facsimiles of those which had gone before. On the walls of their plain and unostentatious dining room there were pictures of Matchmaker, Tim, Brother Ben and bulls that had lived seventy-five to eighty years before, and yet out in the pasture was the precise prototype and facsimile of those bulls. And that is proof positive that it is to pedigree alone that we can trust for good succession, and I allude to pedigree, gentlemen, because I was amused this morning at the discussion of this question. (Ap- plause.) Mr. Bates and Mr. Booth continued breeding the same cat- Live Stock Breeders' Association. 229 tie, introducing fresh blood when required and inbreeding, sooner or later, going over to the other side and securing fresh blood. While it is absolutely impossible to dispense with inbreeding in founding a herd, if carried to excess it tends to reduce the strength of the animals, and ultimately to sterility and weakness in every possible direction. Mr. Bates used fresh blood over and over in order to restrain the waning fertility of his herd. The Booth family had been more careful, but frequently were compelled to introduce fresh blood, again welding the material together by in- breeding stronger and stronger. You know the history of the two strains in this country. Shorthorns were brought over at an early time. With the colonists came to this country good Shorthorn cattle. I can remember hear- ing my grandfather talk about the "Roan Durhams" in Loudoun and Fauquier counties, Virginia, one hundred years ago or more. So we see everywhere the English people have gone they have car- ried the Shorthorn. We began at first with the most catholic idea. We accepted anything that was brought over here. When Felix Rennick went to England in 1733, he cared little for family or pedigree, so far as a particular strain was concerned, and Mr. Bates attempted to convince him no strain other than his was worth bringing to this country. He labored with single eye as to purity and individual- ity, but not with regard to any particular strain. And he secured some of the best individuals in England. We have brought over immense numbers of cattle from that time on. In 1817 Sanders' herd was composed of splendid cattle and well bred, but that was prior to the establishment of a herd book. About 1815 old George Coates rode around Northumberland picking up information in re- gard to the pedigrees of cattle, and in 1822 he published the first English herdbook. That was the first time anything had been given out as a guide to people in purchasing cattle ; and these cows brought over to this country in 1817 had no record, but it seems fairly certain that they were carefully selected and purely bred in every possible way. We had other importations, and from time to time other enterprising men went over. It was a serious propo- sition in those days to go to England and import cattle. We have gone on and we have discarded the line-bred Bates cattle and the line-bred Booth cattle, because we found that a limit had been reached in this line-breeding and in-breeding; that it was coming to be detrimental and injurious, because these cattle would not respond to the demands we made upon them and did 230 Missouri Agricultural Rejmrt. not possess the essentials we must have in our western cattle. About the same time there had been discovered an old Quaker way up in Scotland. Shorthorns were not indigenous in Scotland, and it is, therefore, absolutely absurd to talk about straight Scotch cattle. There is no such thing. You might as well talk about straight rail fences. They cannot exist. Captain Barclay of Ura was about the first to take the Shorthorns into Scotland from Eng- land. About 1819 Mr. Cruikshank bought some cattle of Captain Barclay of Ura, and he bought them absolutely without reference to pedigree or fashion or family. He said he must have cattle in Scotland which the average farmer could not afford to be without, and it seems to me in that little sentence is all the law and gospel in regard to cattle. Shorthorn breeders today must breed cattle which the farmers around us can not afford to be without. (Ap- plause.) Mr. Cruikshank bred them wrong for a great many years. He told me that himself. At the time I was over there on this visit I spoke of, I went to see the old man. We found "Siterton" to be a plain, unpretentious stone house with five or six rooms. On the north side was a plain, substantial stone barn with a few enclos- ures about it. The old man was wandering about them. He had dispersed his herd, but told us the history of each one of the indi- viduals that had made his herd complete and his name famous. Now, I commenced importing in 1882 cattle direct from Mr. Cruikshank's herd. I found the cattle I got sired by Roan Gaunt- let, by Pride of the Isle, by Quarantine, were very much superior to those sired by their sons and grandsons. I found that the blood was a little too delicate, was a little infertile, and I brought the question right up to Mr. Cruikshank himself. I said, "Do you not think the time has come when your cattle need fresh blood? Have you not carried this inbreeding to its absolute and extreme limits?" He said, "There can be no question that that is the truth," but he said, "The younger men must do that. I am too old to go out and try the fresh blood, which must necessarily be done." As I recall that instance, I v. ant my friends here to remember that we must do as Mr. Cruikshank did and told us we must do, and not continue to inbreed and inbreed, or we are going to reach the same end precisely. This herd, however, had obtained about that time absolute supremacy over the Bates and Booth herds. Notwithstanding their wonderful character and purity, and notwithstanding the de- votion and friendship I would lavish upon them, yet the question Live Stock Breeders' Association. 231 of practical utility, as put by the old Quaker at Siterton, became absolutely the thing of all things to be desired in this country, and in England as well. And though we had adopted this standard before it was adopted in England, today it is the blood of this herd which is supreme over all the world. The question is, what is the duty of the Shorthorn breeder of today ? We are using this Scotch blood because there is no purity in any Scotch blood except as it came from Siterton. Mr. Cruik- shank was the man who established the separate and distinct type for what we call Shorthorns. We must not follow the examples of Mr. Bates or Mr. Booth in continuing to inbreed and to line- breed, but we must use fresh blood, in order to preserve the scale, size and fertility of our cattle. And there is another reason why we must do that. I dislike, when I attend a Shorthorn sale, to hear it said that an animal is "pure Scotch," when, perhaps, it traces back to the herds of Mr. Rennicke or Mr. Warfield or Mr. Ellis, because those gentlemen purchased the very best cattle to ba found in England at that time, and the descendants of those herds compose nine-tenths of the cattle in this country of this breed. I dislike to see their value absolutely destroyed and men breaking their necks, and their bank accounts as well, in an effort to buy what they call "absolutely straight Scotch." I have seen cases where absolutely inferior individuals reputed as "pure Scotch" commanded higher prices than superior individuals not so reputed. But I believe in pedigree. I believe it is the only possible means we can depend on in the production of good qualities, I be- lieve like produces like ; but we must not be slaves to pedigree. We must not carry it so far that it absolutely destroys the whole pur- pose and aim of pedigree, which is improvement all the time. When an animal is inbred, or by some means becomes inferior, it is the most dangerous thing in the world to our herds, because its in- ferior qualities have just as much prepotency as its superior quali- ties, and we are as sure to propagate the inferior qualities as the superior qualities it may possess. I remember reading a few years ago an article written by Mr. Maynard hims