Newspaper Page Text
430
GKIADIAG IIAV AM) STRAW FOR FEED.
TJiis matter is beginning tube seriously deba
ted in the system of advanced agriculture. Like
other new things, it makes but slow progress in
the agricultural mind at first, but the advance of
the age in using steam-power on farms, points
out the possibility, and indeed likelihood, of as
great an advance in this as in any other direction
Advocates of the system of grinding hay and
straw for feed naturally argue in this way : —The
nourishment in the fibre of hay and straw, is on
ly attainable by the breaking down of the fibre
of the material, and thus opening to the action
of the stomach of the animal the cells of the
plant, which contain the starch, the sugar, and
the oily particles which have been carried into
the stem of the dried plant by its natural growth.
1 liese broken cells are then acted on by the jui
ces and liquids of the mouth and stomach, are
dissolved and assimilated into tlie system of the
animal. Hence, the more perfect the crashing
and comminution of the stem, the more easily
do the animal’s digestive organs take hold of the
nourishment which the stem of hay and straw
contains, and therefore, the more the fibres are
so crushed and'divided, the more nourishment is
obtained lrom them. Then again, in proof of
this theory, they show that grass (which is only
undried hay) is much more congenial to the ani
mal than hay, that lie lives better on it, and fat
tens quicker, and that therefore the consumption
of grass is more profitable than that of hay.—-
This, they afiiirm, is because the grass, being
softer and more easily crushed, is more thorough
ly broken down by the mastication of the animal
than can be the case with the dried vegetable,
and being altogether in a softer state, nearly, if
not quite the whole of the nourishment it con
tains is at once available, which is not the case
with hay.
To prove this, examine the excrement from a
grass-feeding animal. Wash it in a fine sieve
until all the colouring matter and the animal ad
ditions which it lias received in the stomach of
the beast are removed, and you will find it to
have been ground infinitely finer and more com
pletely than excrement from a hay or straw-eat
ing animal treated in a similar manner. The fi
bre from a grass fed animal is nearly as fine as
the stuff from which they manufacture brown
and coarse paper, while the fibre from tlie liay
cating animal is quite as coarse as the material
which the paper-makers use to make what is call,
ed straw board. These are facts demonstrable
SOUTHERN CULTIVATOR.
any day by every farmer who chooses to try them,
and they consequently cannot be denied.
Admitting, therefore, for argument’s sake, that
the finer the particles to which hay and straw
can lie reduced before it is placed in the stomach
of the animal, the more nourishment is derived
from it, and consequently, the more profitable it
becomes, we come to the consideration of the
q .estion : Can this be more easily attained by
the natural grinding and mastication of the ani
mal, or by artificial means?
Many will argue that mastication of cattle food
is most natural, and therefore best. In reply to
this, the answer is: True in many cases, but not
in the fattening of cattle. In this operation we
want to avail ourselves of every particle of fat
tening matter in the food in the shortest possible
time. Animals can assimilate more than they
do in a natural state, and the farmer’s object is to
make them do so. lie wants to reduce liis oper
ations to certainty, not leaving them in any way
to chance. Young animals grind their food
quicker and more perfectly than old ones. Some
animals, from greediness of disposition or other
natural causes, swallow their food before it gets
thoroughly masticated ; and although in the case
of ruminants it is all brought to the mouth a sec
ond time, and even oftener, and re-masticated,
after having been softened in the stomach or
paunch, yet it is of necessity only masticated in
sufficiently fine particles to pass to the second
stomach and other digestive organs, and it by no
means follows, that even the ruminants grind
the food as fine as the profits of the farmer re
quire. His object is to make all feed alike. He
pays as much for a beast which does not grind
food well, as for one which does—for the lazy
chewer as for the more active and industrious
one. He wants all the beasts in liis byre finished
off at one time, and that each and all shall have
taken from the hay the last particle of fattening
matter. And to make this certain, he applies tlie
help of science in the construction of a machine,
to break down and comminute the fibre of the
dried plant, having recourse to steam for power
necessary to effect that object.
If this is the case with hay, how much more
must it be with strawy wdiose fibre is harder and
more intractable, and wdiose fattenning matters
are more sparse and difficult to get at ? And if
it be true with respect to ruminants, it is of ten
times more force with horses, tlie object in feed
ing which is to spare tlie animal all the labour
possible, and give him tlie greatest amount of