UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA A STUDY OF VARIOUS RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES H. R. GUILBERT BULLETIN 418 February, 1927 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRINTING OFFICE BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 1927 A STUDY OF VARIOUS RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES H. R. GUILBERT* Finishing beef cattle for market in the feed lots is a procedure which has not been very extensively practiced in this state. This Experiment Station has not, therefore, carried out feeding experiments, as has been done for many years in the middle western and eastern states. However, feeding of cattle has been carried on particularly with by-products of sugar beets and cottonseed in the southern part of the state and with alfalfa hay in the northern part of the state. A number of feeders in the valleys are using barley or other home- grown concentrates with hay, and a few are fattening cattle on silage and alfalfa hay. Extensive feeding plants are being established in the San Joaquin Valley. Additional by-products are becoming available, some of which, such as raisin, orange, and pineapple pulp, cannot be obtained readily in other parts of the country. Molasses and coconut meal are avail- able at lower prices in California than in most sections of the country. During the past two years questions have often been asked of the Animal Husbandry Division of this station concerning the practica- bility of feeding baby beef. To answer these inquiries, an experiment was planned, the results of which would furnish a basis of comparison of the efficiency of different combinations of feeds common in Califor- nia. It was expected that these results might furnish answers to the following questions : 1. Which practice will produce the greatest number of pounds of beef per acre — feeding alfalfa hay and silage with a full grain ration, or feeding alfalfa hay (no silage) and a full grain ration, to fattening calves ? 2. Does it pay to add cottonseed meal to a ration of alfalfa hay and rolled barley? 3. Can baby beeves be finished on a ration of corn silage, alfalfa hay, and cold-pressed cottonseed cake? 4. Can coconut meal, which, in the past, has been somewhat cheaper than barley, be substituted for one-half the rolled barley in rations for fattening baby beef? 5. What is the value of raisin pulp for fattening baby beef? * Junior Animal Husbandman in the Experiment Station. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION FEEDING PLAN Seventy-four head of good quality Shorthorn calves were pur- chased on September 23, 1925, at the San Julian Ranch in Santa Bar- bara County. They were taken directly from their mothers and shipped to Davis. The average weight of the calves at the ranch was 428 pounds. The weight upon arrival in Davis after 74 hours in transit, including unloading for feed and water in San Jose, was 400 pounds, or a shrink- age of 28 pounds a head. The calves were rested in the feed lots a day, dehorned, treated for ringworm, and vaccinated against black- leg. Twelve days were allowed for them to become accustomed to their new surroundings before the experiment began. During this time all the alfalfa hay they would eat and approximately one pound of barley to the head daily were fed in order that the calves might be accustomed to eating grain when the experiment began. Six lots of 12 head each were selected on the basis of weight and individuality. Each group had access to a shed 24 by 32 feet and an open paved lot 24 by 40 feet. The daily ration for each steer in the different lots was as follows : Lot. 1. Corn silage, full fed; alfalfa hay, 3 pounds; rolled barley, full fed; cottonseed meal, 1 pound. Lot 2. Corn silage, full fed; alfalfa hay, 3 pounds; rolled barley and coco- nut meal, equal parts, full fed. Lot 3. Corn silage, full fed; alfalfa hay, 3 pounds; raisin pulp, full fed; cottonseed meal, 2 pounds. Lot 4. Corn silage, full fed; alfalfa hay, 3 pounds; cold-pressed cottonseed cake, limited ration until the last 60 days, when it was full fed. Lot 5. Alfalfa hay, full fed; rolled barley, full fed. Lot 6. Alfalfa hay, full fed; rolled barley, full fed; cottonseed meal, 1 pound. Method of Feeding. — The grain was fed first; it was followed by silage and then alfalfa hay. Cottonseed meal was fed at first on the silage, as it was thought that in this way the amount eaten would be more equally distributed among the calves, because all ate silage readily, while some did not eat the concentrate well during the first two weeks. It was found later that they ate the raisin pulp much more readily when it was mixed with cottonseed meal. Thereafter in all lots the cottonseed meal was fed with the grain rather than on the silage. All lots had access to salt and water at all times. BUL. 418] RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES The Feeds. — The corn silage was of good quality, and contained approximately 70 per cent moisture. The average yield was 15.55 tons to the acre, and although there was fair yield of grain, the per- centage of grain to roughage was low. The alfalfa hay was fourth cutting, bright green in color, very leafy, and of excellent quality. All the hay came from one field, a fact which assured uniform quality for all lots. The supply of this hay was exhausted three weeks before the close of the experimental period and a coarser hay was fed thereafter. The barley was average California feed barley and was steam rolled. TABLE 1 Chemical Analysis of Feeds (Figures are expressed in percentages.) Feeds Coconut meal Cold pressed cottonseed cake Cottonseed meal Raisin pulp Rolled barley Alfalfa hay Corn silage Moisture 8.20 6.72 6.52 9.73 10.10 7.63 71.58 Crude protein 22.80 26.55 43.80 9.68 9.36 19.18 2.07 Ether extract 9.10 6.17 11.62 6.88 2.83 2.25 1.04 Nitrogen- free extract 44.59 32.14 26. 19 51.11 68.40 30.62 15.36 Crude fiber 9.26 23.40 4.81 15.95 6.54 30.50 7.80 Ash 6.05 5.02 7.06 6.55 2.67 9.82 2.15 The coconut meal had a guaranteed analysis of crude protein not less than 20 per cent, crude fat not less than 9 per cent, crude fiber not more than 13 per cent, ash not more than 7 per cent. The cottonseed meal was choice grade, containing not less than 40 per cent protein. The cold-pressed cake carried a guaranteed analysis of riot less than 28 per cent protein, and not over 19 per cent crude fiber, not less th#n 8 per cent fat, and not more than 5 per cent ash. Raisin pulp, according to information received from the Sun Maid Raisin Growers' Association, Fresno, California, consists of a mixture of dry battery pulp, dry seeder waste, and stemmer waste. The seeder waste contains a few raisins, and stemmer waste contains some fruit adhering to the stems. The dry battery pulp is the residue resulting from the extraction of syrup, and consists of the raisins after most of the sugar has been extracted. Probably more than 95 per cent of the sugar in these raisins is dissolved in the battery, but the gums, proteins, fat, starches, and fiber remain as pulp. After leaving the b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION battery, this is passed through a screw press, which reduces the moist- ure to approximately 60 per cent. The pressed pulp is then passed through a rotary dryer, which reduces the moisture to about 8 per cent. The amount of digestible nutrients in each 100 pounds as determined by a digestion experiment is given on a later page. The chemical composition of the feeds used is given in table 1. Method of Starting on Feed. — Lot 1 may be taken as an example of the method of starting on feed and the changes in the ration throughout the period. At the beginning, 3 pounds of alfalfa hay and 10 pounds of corn silage, y 2 pound of cottonseed meal, and 1 pound of barley were fed. The calves ate the barley readily, since they had been getting some during the preliminary period. The second day the amount of barley was increased to 2 pounds for each head. This amount was fed for the two days following, when it was increased to 3 pounds. Meanwhile, the cottonseed meal was increased to 1 pound and the silage to 12 pounds. After three more days, or on the eighth day, barley was increased to 4 pounds. Two or three days later, some animals began to scour and go off feed. The entire lot was allowed to miss one feeding ; at the next the barley for each head was cut to 2 pounds. After a few days, it was increased % pound at intervals of five or six days, depending upon the appetite. At the end of the first thirty days, the steers were eating 4% pounds of barley and 1 pound of cottonseed meal, 3 pounds of hay and 10 pounds of silage. No difficulty with scouring was experienced in the other lots ; and at the end of thirty days each steer was eating 5 pounds of barley. The grain was gradually increased during each period according to the appetite of the calves. The rations for lot 1 at the end of each thirty-day period are shown in table 2. TABLE 2 The Average Daily Eation for Lot 1 at the End of Each Thirty-Day Period (Expressed in pounds to the head.) Period* Corn silage Alfalfa hay Rolled barley Cottonseed meal 1 10 11 12 12 13 13 13 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4.5 6.0 8.5 10.0 12.5 12.5 13.0 2 3 4 5 6 7 * Each period was of 30 days duration. BUL. 418] RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES 7 The amount of grain was steadily increased, while the amount of roughage remained nearly constant. As the feeding period progresses, more of the gain is fat, which requires a larger amount of feed for a pound of increase than for growth. This fact, together with the neces- sary liberal feeding of grain to put on this fat, makes the gains progressively more costly as the feeding period advances. Weights. — The steers were weighed individually three days in succession at the beginning of the experiment and the average of these three weights was taken as the initial weight. They were weighed at thirty-day intervals throughout the experiment, and an average of the weights on three successive days at the close of the experiment was taken as the final weight. The detailed results are given in table 3. TABLE 3 Eesults of a 210-Day Feeding Experiment in Fattening Baby Beef (All figures are in pounds except where otherwise designated.) Lot No Number in lot Average initial weight. Average final weight.... Average daily gain Total gain per head Average daily ration Corn silage Alfalfa hay Rolled barley Coconut meal Raisin pulp Cottonseed meal Cold-pressed cottonseed cake Feed for 100-lb. gain Corn silage Alfalfa hay Rolled barley Coconut meal Raisin pulp Cottonseed meal Cold-pressed cottonseed cake 1 12 416.87 875.62 2.18 458.75 11.85 2.99 8.73 99 542.58 136.88 399.61 45.12 2 12 420.83 852.23 2.05 431.40 12.62 2.99 4.14 4.04 614.36 145.89 201.41 196.50 3 12 415.62 820.41 1.93 404.79 13.51 3.00 *1. 11 7.71 1.94 700.75 155.47 *57.74 399.79 100.66 4 12 416.39 784.72 1.75 368.33 27.14 2.99 4.34 1547.20 170.22 247.66 5 12 412.98 855.28 2.11 442.30 7.28 9.55 345.50 453.68 6 12 414.03 866.66 2.15 452.63 6.86 9.07 318.09 420.69 45.47 Barley was substituted for raisin pulp during the last 30 days. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION DISCUSSION OF RESULTS Steers in lot 1, receiving a ration of corn silage, alfalfa hay, rolled barley, and one pound of cottonseed meal, were smoothly covered; eight head graded "choice," and the remaining four graded "good." The difference in gain between lots 1 and 6 is not significant ; in fact, on the basis of the cold-dressed weights of the carcasses, the steers in lot 6 were on the average 5.41 pounds heavier than those in lot 1, indicating that the actual increase in weight of carcass was slightly greater in lot 6, while on the basis of the average of the three final weights at the end of the experiment, the live weight of lot 1 was 8.96 pounds more than that of lot 6. The difference was in the dress- ing percentage (see table 4). Figures 1 and 2 show the lot 1 steers at the beginning and close of the experiment. These steers had about the degree of finish to command the highest price on the California markets. Lot 1 required 542.58 pounds of corn silage, 136.88 pounds of alfalfa hay, 399.61 pounds of rolled barley, and 45.12 pounds of cottonseed meal to produce 100 pounds of gain. Lot 2 required 71.78 pounds more silage and 9.01 pounds more alfalfa to produce 100 pounds of gain than lot 1. The amount of rolled barley required to produce 100 pounds of gain in lot 1 was practically the same as the total of the rolled barley and coconut meal required by lot 2, but in addition to the rolled barley, lot 1 consumed 45.12 pounds of cottonseed meal for 100 pounds of gain. Therefore, lot 2 required 46.82 pounds less concentrates and 80.79 pounds more roughage than lot 1 to produce 100 pounds of gain. Ordinarily, this saving of concentrates will more than offset, in cost, the increased amount of roughage required. When the prices of barley and coconut meal are equal, the cost of 100 pounds of gain will be about the same when barley is fed in a balanced ration, as when* coconut meal is substituted, pound for pound, for one-half the barley. The average daily gain in lot 2 was 2.05 pounds, compared with 2.18 pounds in lot 1, and the finish was not quite so high. The coconut meal seemed to have a constipating effect rather than a laxative one, as reported by other investigators. The manure was somewhat dryer in this lot than in any of the other lots ; there was no scouring at any time. One animal had a very obstinate case of intes- tinal obstruction and heavy dosages of purgatives were required to relieve him. Another animal had a mild case of constipation. These cases cannot be definitely attributed to the coconut meal, however. BUL. 418] RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES 9 The fact that these two animals were sick for a short period of time caused a reduction in the average gains of this lot. The gains were erratic throughout the feeding period, being high one month and rather low the next. Fig. 1. — Lot 1 steers at the beginning at the 210-day feeding period. Fig. 2. — Lot 1 steers at the end of the 2 10 -day feeding period. These steers are typical baby beeves. Coconut meal is not so palatable as barley, and the steers in lot 2 would not consume much more than 5 pounds a day with an equal amount of barley. Probably better results could be secured by substi- tuting coconut meal for less than one-half the barley, although this test shows that it may be substituted for this amount with satisfactory results when the price of the coconut meal is equal to or less than that of barley. 10 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION Lot 3, receiving raisin pulp, required more feed to produce 100 pounds of gain than did lot 1. More cottonseed meal too was required to balance the ration, as raisin pulp is low in digestible protein. The supply of raisin pulp ran out at the end of the 180th day of the experiment. Lots 1 and 3 may be compared directly during this period. Lot 1 required 138.51 pounds less silage, 16.55 pounds less alfalfa hay, 62.62 pounds less barley than raisin pulp, and 52.10' pounds less cot- tonseed meal for 100 pounds of gain than did lot 3. The value of the raisin pulp is, therefore, the value of a like quantity of barley, minus the value of the extra amounts of the feeds required to produce 100 pounds of gain when raisin pulp is fed. On the basis of the usual relation in value of barley and roughage, raisin pulp would have a value approximately two-thirds that of barley in production of gain. The difference in the feeding value of raisin pulp and barley is actually greater than the feed for a pound of gain indicates," as the gains were slower with the former. The finish with raisin pulp was not so high, and the carcasses of the steers in this lot as a whole lacked the covering of fat over the back, loin, and round, as compared with the lots receiving a full feed of barley. On the basis of this test, and considering the fact that, because of a lower finish the steers had a lower market value, the value of raisin pulp is slightly less than two-thirds as much as rolled barley. Raisin pulp used in this trial contained 2.32 per cent digestible protein, 29.45 per cent digestible carbohydrate, and 6.19 per cent digestible fat. The total digestible nutrients amount to 45.69 per cent, as compared with 78.83 per cent for barley. The results of the feeding trial are, therefore, in accord- ance with the amount of digestible nutrients in the two feeds. The average daily gain of the steers in lot 4, which were fed a limited amount of cold-pressed cottonseed cake, was 1.75 pounds, as compared with 2.18 pounds for lot 1, which was full fed. The gain in lot 4 was mostly in growth, with practically no fattening until the last 60 days, when the cold-pressed cake was full fed. The average daily gain up to the time the cold-pressed cake was full fed was 1.60 pounds. During the last 60 days, when the calves were fattening appreciably, the average daily gain was 2.13 pounds. The carcasses of these steers were decidedly lacking in finish and showed that the fattening process had just started. Only four steers in this lot graded "good," and the remaining eight head graded "medium." This corresponded with the carcass grades. This lot consumed a large amount of roughage and a comparatively small amount of concen- BUL. 418] RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES 11 trated feed, but the gains were slower, finish was lacking, and the amount of feed to produce 100 pounds of beef was high. The steers in lot 4 improved rapidly in condition during the last 60 days, when they were full fed cold-pressed cake. At the finish each steer was consuming 13.5 pounds daily and none showed ill effects. This lot was not shipped until 20 days after the close of the experimental period. During this time they were continued on the same ration. They ate the heavy allowance of cold-pressed cake for practically 80 days and were thrifty when shipped. When a heavy silage ration is fed, larger quantities of cottonseed meal or cake can be fed over a longer period without danger of poisoning than when fed with dry roughage. Unless the price of concentrates is very high, as compared with the price of roughages, it will prove more profitable to full feed on grain. This lot furnished a good demonstration of the fact that choice baby beef cannot be made without a liberal allowance of concentrated feed. The steers in lot 1, with a ration of rolled barley, cottonseed meal, alfalfa hay, and silage, made slightly more rapid gains than lots 5 and 6, which did not receive silage. The finish was slightly better in lot 1. Eight animals graded ll choice" in this lot, as compared with four steers in lot 5, and five steers in lot 6. The carcasses of the steers in lot 1 graded higher on the average than did lots 5 and 6, being more smoothly covered over the ribs and loin and carrying less caul and kidney fat than did lot 6. Lot 1 required 21.43 pounds less concentrates for 100 pounds of gain than lot 6, and 8.95 pounds less than lot 5. On the basis of the feed for 100 pounds gain in lots 1, 5, and 6, approximately 2V2 to 3 pounds of silage replaced 1 pound of alfalfa hay. At the University Farm, alfalfa hay yields about 7 tons to the acre, and corn silage, under similar conditions, yields about 15 tons to the acre. Since the average yield of silage is only slightly more than twice the yield of alfalfa and the feeding value one-third to two-fifths as much when both are fed with a full grain ration, the production of beef per acre was greater from alfalfa than from a combination of alfalfa and silage. The addition of one pound of cottonseed meal to a ration of alfalfa hay and rolled barley increased the gains and finish slightly. The average daily gain for lot 5 was 2.11 pounds, and for lot 6, 2.15 pounds. The difference in gain is not significant. To produce 100 pounds of gain, 45.47 pounds of cottonseed meal replaced 32.99 pounds of rolled 12 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION barley and 27.41 pounds of alfalfa hay. With the usual difference in the price of cottonseed meal and rolled barley, it is doubtful if the addition of cottonseed meal to a ration of alfalfa hay and barley will prove profitable. The steers in lots 5 and 6 were more difficult to keep on feed during the first part of the period than those receiving silage. This was especially true in lot 5 which did not receive cottonseed meal. The rations in both lots appeared to be too laxative for optimum gains, until the point was reached where the total consumption of barley was more than that of alfalfa hay. The difficulty during the first part of the period was undoubtedly due to consuming large quantities of bright green alfalfa hay. The amount of hay required to produce 100 pounds of gain in lots 5 and 6 is the amount consumed for 100 pounds of gain. It is also very nearly the amount offered, as there was a very small amount weighed back. The total weighed back during the 210-day period in lot 5 was 385 pounds, and in lot 6 it was 686 pounds. This amounts to about 1.8 pounds daily, weighed back from 12 animals in the case of lot 5, and about 3 pounds daily from 12 animals in the case of lot 6. Approximately one-fifth of the total hay left by the steers was refused in each case during the last three weeks of the experiment when the supply of hay of fine quality was exhausted and a coarser hay was fed in its place. The latter was evidently too dry when stacked as the leaves shattered in feeding. This incident illustrates the great difference both in feeding value and in saving of waste made possible by feeding hay of high quality, and emphasizes the necessity, from the standpoint of economy in feeding, of curing and handling alfalfa hay properly. A statistical study of the individual gains indicates that a difference in average total gain of about 45 pounds between any two lots is required for odds of 30 to 1 that the difference is significant. On this basis, the difference in the average gains between lots 1, 5, and 6 has no significance. The difference between the average gain in lot 4 and any other lot, and that between lot 1 and lot 3 are significant. The significance of the difference between lot 1 and lot 2 is question- able. The steers in each lot were graded at the end of the experimental period. These grades are shown in table 4. The difference in grade is largely a difference in degree of finish, as all lots were very similar in quality and conformation. Therefore, these grades, together with the average daily gains, provide a good index of the difference in condition of the various lots at the end of the experiment. BUL. 418] RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES 13 TABLE 4 The Besults of the Grading of Each of the Lots Lot No. Choice Good Medium 1 8 4 2 5 7 3 4 6 2 4 4 8 5 4 6 2 6 5 6 1 SHIPPING AND SLAUGHTER DATA Three shipments of two lots each were made at intervals of one week. Each lot was weighed at the feed lot just before taking to the stock yards for loading. The lots were separated in the car by a panel to facilitate obtaining the weight off the cars in San Francisco. The time on the cars for the different shipments was about the same, being from 15 to 16 hours. TABLE 5 Shrinkage in Transit and Dressing Percentages on the Basis of the Off-Car Weights in San Francisco, 1926 (Figures are in pounds except where otherwise designated.) Lot No Date of shipment Weight before shipping Weight off-car Per cent shrink Warm-dressed weight Cold-dressed weight Dressing percentage (warm) Dressing percentage (cold) ... Per cent shrink in cooler 1 2 3 4 5 May 14 May 21 May 28 May 28 May 21 10550 10475 10070 9690 10600 9930 9670 9245 8896 9700 5.88 7.69 *8.20 *8.20 8.50 6176 6103 5731 5387 6084 6057 5960 5722 5265 5949 62.19 63.14 61.99 60.56 62.72 61.00 61.63 61.89 59.18 61.32 1.93 2.40 .16 2.30 2.20 6 May 14 10580 9750 7.85 6289 6122 64.51 62.79 2.66 * Lots 3 and 4 became mixed in the car and the same shrinkage in transit is assumed for both lots. The shrinkage in transit varied greatly in the different lots. The variation probably would not have been so great, had all lots been shipped at one time and the shrinkage figured on the basis of the final weights of the experiment, when all lots were probably carrying nearly the same fill. Lots 1 and 4 were shipped together in the same car, however; the shrinkage in lot 1 was 5.88 per cent, and in lot 6 14 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION 7.85 per cent. The steers in lot 6 evidently had a greater fill in the afternoon just before loading, as they out-weighed lot 1 slightly, a ranking opposite that at the close of the experiment. Lots 2 and 5 were shipped together and, as in the case of lots 1 and 6, the lot receiving silage shrank less in transit than that receiving dry hay. This is believed to be due to the fact that the steers receiving silage ate all their feed in the morning, while those receiving hay left part until afternoon, and thus had a heavier fill at the time they were weighed. TABLE 6 Besults of a Cutting Test Made by the Washington Market Cut *Average steer per cent Test steer per cent Brisket Chuck Crossrib Shin 5.0 \ 26.0 5.0 9.0 18.0 23.0 7.0 4.0 3.0 7.72 15.81 5.15 5.15 Rib 11.40 Loin 20.40 Round 22.79 Plate Flank 7.72 1.65 Cod fat .37 Fat and waste .37 Kidney and suet 1.47 100.0 100.00 * Morris Beef Chart, Morris Packing Company, Chicago, Illinois. The lowest dressing percentage was in lot 4, which was the lot carrying the least condition. Dressing percentage varies greatly, depending upon the amount of shrinkage in shipping. Thin steers which have been shipped long distances and are practically empty, may dress fairly high on the basis of the off-car weight. However, some packers say that for the same length of haul as that of experi- mental steers it takes a very good grass-fed steer to dress 57 per cent warm weight. The difference in dressing percentage in favor of the steers in this experiment is one of the factors justifying a higher price than for grass-fed cattle. The fact that they were well bred, of good type, and cut out a higher percentage of loin and other high- priced cuts than the average steer, and a smaller amount of cheap meat, is a second reason which justifies a premium. The third reason is that the combination of breeding and feeding produced an excellent BUL. 418] RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES 15 quality of beef. This is the most important factor, as it is the one which makes it possible for the retailer to sell the meat to the con- sumer at a premium. A cutting test of a steer, which was considered to be fairly representative of the average of lots 1, 2, 5, and 6, was made by the Washington Market in Oakland. The results as com- pared with an average steer are given in table 6. The test steer dressed out a higher percentage of loin and rib, practically the same amount of round, and less fore-quarter cuts than the average steer. A representative of the Washington Market made the following statement concerning the meat : ' ' The ribs and loins are thick and full, showing a large eye on the ribs and large fillets in the loins. The fat is smoothly distributed on the outside and well marbled through the meat. When cut, the beef shows a light red color, making a real picture of quality." AMOUNT OF MANURE PRODUCED Manure was hauled from the lots four times during the 210-day period. Approximately three tons of bedding were used in each lot during this time. The first two times the manure was hauled, it was not weighed, but the amount was estimated from the number of loads hauled from each lot, and from the average weight of loads hauled later. Samples were taken from the various lots at the time of hauling, allowed to dry to air-dry condition, and the percentage of loss in weight computed. Table 7 gives the data for each lot: TABLE 7 Manure Data (Figures are in tons except where otherwise designated.) Lot No Total manure as hauled Total manure (air-dry basis) *Per cent moisture Total manure per steer as hauled... Total manure per steer (air-dry basis) 1 35.26 18.26 48.20 2.94 1.52 2 32.89 18.04 45.20 2.94 1.50 3 39.42 20.77 47.30 3.28 1.73 4 37.81 19.87 47.50 3.15 1.65 5 32.50 17.39 46.50 2.71 1.45 36.62 18.92 48.40 3.05 1.58 * The percentage of moisture as given in the table represents the percentage of weight lost in bring- ing the manure as hauled to air-dry condition. The air-dry manure probably still contained from 10 to 15 per cent moisture. 16 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION Lots 3 and 4, which received bulkier feeds, than the other lots, produced the greatest tonnage of manure, but those lots receiving a full feed of concentrates undoubtedly produced manure which was higher in fertilizing value. The manure from lot 6, receiving alfalfa hay, rolled barley, and cottonseed meal, which is a very narrow ration, probably contained the highest percentage of nitrogenous material. No great significance is placed upon the difference in manure production between the various lots. The figures are given to provide a general idea of the quantity of manure produced in feeding operations of this kind. HOGS FOLLOWING THE STEERS Two pigs were placed in each of lots 1, 2, 5, and 6 during the second month of the experiment. The pigs weighed from 120 to 145 pounds. All lost weight and were taken out at the end of two weeks. The average daily loss in weight was 1.27 pounds. It was evident that with calves at this age receiving ground barley, there was not enough waste grain to justify following with hogs. During the last month of the experiment, hogs weighing from 35 to 60 pounds were put into these lots. During this time, the pigs gained an average of 0.38 pound a day. From this experience, it seems that one pig to every six steers of this age will not secure enough waste feed to make satisfactory gains when rolled barley is fed. It does show, however, that there is some waste during the last part of the finishing period and that a few hogs should be used to clean up this waste. If gains are not satisfactory additional grain should be given. FINANCIAL ASPECTS OF FEEDING The first point which any one interested in cattle feeding wants to know is whether there is any money in feeding, and if so, how much. This is a question which cannot be answered definitely because the answer is different for every cattleman and for every season. Moreover, the financial results of feeding operations conducted by the experiment station, or by any feeder, in a particular feeding period form no criterion of what may be expected from cattle feeding year after year. The information which is most useful to the cattleman is the amount of the various feeds necessary to produce a hundred pounds BUL. 418] RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES 17 of gain, the daily gain, and the approximate total gain necessary to produce a desirable finish. With this information at hand, the cattle- man can compute feeding costs, and with a reasonable knowledge of the markets, he can estimate with a fair degree of accuracy what he can do under his own conditions. The amount of feed required to produce 100 pounds of gain, shown in table 2, may be used to compute the cost of gain when similar rations are fed to calves. In order to illustrate how the figures in this paper may be used, examples are given. Example 1. A feeder wishes to know the cost of gain with calves, when alfalfa hay is worth 12.00 a ton and rolled barley is worth $25.00 a ton. According to table 2, lot 5, 345.5 pounds of alfalfa hay and 453.68 pounds of rolled barley were required to produce 100 pounds of gain. Alfalfa hay at $12.00 a ton = 0.6 cents a pound Rolled barley at $25.00 a ton = 1.25 cents a pound 345.5 pounds of alfalfa hay at 0.6 cents a pound= $2.07 453.68 pounds of rolled barley at 1.25 cents a pound= 5.67 Total cost of feed required to produce 100 pounds of gain $7.74 Ordinarily it will be necessary to feed calves until they have doubled their original weight before they are ready for market, and this fact may be used as a basis of arriving at the total feed cost. In the case of lot 5, the total gain was 442 pounds. 4.42 X $7.74 (cost of 100 pounds of gain) = $34.21. Such items as the interest on the investment and labor cost should be added in computing the total cost of a finished steer. These can be figured by the feeder. If the total feed cost and the labor and interest charges are added to the initial cost of the feeder calf, and this total divided by the final weight, the necessary selling price to break even is obtained. Example 2. Cost of 412-pound feeder calf at $8.50 per cwt. = $35. 02 Cost of 442 pounds of gain = 34. 21 Interest on $35.02 at 8 per cent for 7 months = 1. 63 *Labor cost at $0.50 a month for 7 months = 3.50 Total cost $74.36 Final weight of steer = 854 pounds Necessary selling price per cwt. to break even (74.36-^854) =$8.71 Purchase price per cwt. =$8. 50 Necessary margin = $0.21 The labor charge is computed on the basis of one man at $125.00 a month feeding 250 head. 18 UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA EXPERIMENT STATION The cattleman knows approximately the price at which feeder steers can be obtained, and the current feed prices at any time. By making computations as illustrated, and by studying market condi- tions, he can form his own judgment regarding the chances for profit from feeding operations. SUMMARY 1. The steers in lot 1, receiving a ration of silage, alfalfa hay, rolled barley, and cottonseed meal, graded highest both on foot and in the cooler. 2. On the basis of a yield of 15 tons of silage to the acre and 7 tons of alfalfa to the acre, greater returns of beef per acre were obtained when alfalfa hay was fed with a full grain ration, than when silage and alfalfa were fed with a full grain ration. 3. When the price of coconut meal is equal to or less than the price of barley, it can be used to replace, pound for pound, one-half the barley in a fattening ration for baby beeves. 4. Raisin pulp has a feeding value which is approximately two- thirds that of rolled barley. It is low in digestible protein, however, and it requires a larger amount of protein supplement than barley. A longer feeding period would be required to attain the same degree of finish with raisin pulp than with barley. 5. The ration of corn silage, alfalfa hay, and a limited amount of cold-pressed cottonseed cake did not produce satisfactory gains or finish. The gains were satisfactory during the last 60 days, when cold-pressed cake was full fed. The limiting factor in full feeding cold-pressed cake to calves is the possible danger of cottonseed poisoning. 6. The addition of one pound of cottonseed meal to a ration of alfalfa hay and rolled barley increased the gains and finish slightly, but not sufficiently to be profitable with the usual difference in price of barley and cottonseed meal. 7. The warm-dressed weights varied in the different lots from 60.56 to 64.51 per cent of the off-car weight. 8. The shrinkage in the cooler varied from 0.16 to 2.66 per cent of the warm-dressed weight, averaging a little less than 2 per cent. The length of time in the cooler causes variation in the shrinkage. Most of the carcasses hung in the cooler from 5 to 10 days before the chilled weights were taken. BUL. 418] RATIONS FOR FINISHING RANGE CALVES AS BABY BEEVES 19 9. The carcasses in all lots carried a high proportion of "prime" or high-priced cuts and a minimum of cheap meat. This was due largely to the type and quality of the steers. 10. In the lots which were full fed rolled barley, pigs did not secure enough feed to produce satisfactory gains even at the last of the feeding period, when one pig was allowed for every six steers. 11. The initial cost of cattle is an important factor in determining profit from cattle feeding. Rate of gains, economy of gains, and finish, the latter influencing to a large degree the selling price, are also important factors. 12. The financial statement is of transitory value, and has there- fore been omitted, while the amount of feed required for 100 pounds of gain is a constant and may be used at any time in estimating the cost of gain at current feed prices. Acknowledgment. — The author wishes to express his appreciation of the helpful suggestions of Professor Gordon H. True in planning this experiment, and to express his thanks to W. E. Schneider, Assist- ant Marketing Specialist, U. S. D. A., San Francisco, for his assistance in grading the cattle and the carcasses. 13m-3,'27