FEEDING TRIALS OF LAMBS.

Timaru Herald, Volume CXXV, Issue 18520, 18 March 1930, Page 4

FEEDING TRIALS OF LAMBS.

WHEAT AND GRASS. The Department of Animal Nutrition of Lincoln College has been conducting feeding trials of lambs on wheat and grass. The result of the trials has been keenly awaited by a large number of farmers, and an interim report on the subject l*is now been issued as follows: Farm, No. 1. Trial began January 30, 1930; number lambs, 100; live weight at start 69.3; days on trial, 25; live weight at end, 77.7; increase per lamb, 8.5; increase per lamb per day, .331 b; average amount of wheat eaten per day.33lb; total live weight increase, 823; value

of meat at Bid per lb, 3145 pence; total lamb—week’s grazing, 357; bushels of wheat eaten, 14. The returns per bushel of wheat were as follows: When grazing is worth 3d per lamb per week, 12/4; 4d, 10/2; sd, 8/1; 6d, 5/11; 7d, 3/10. Farm, No. 2. First Lot.—Trial began February 3, 1930; second lot February !■•.; number lambs 52 and 41; live weight at start, 60.9 and 71.8; days on trial, 33 and 25; live weight at end, 71.6 and 77.8; increase per lamb, 10.7 and 6.0; increase per lamb per day, .321 b and .241 b; aver-

age amount of wheat eaten per day .16 lb; total live weight increase. 800; value of meat at per lb, 3060 d; total lamb, week’s grazing, 381; bushels of wheat eaten, 7. Returns per bushel of wheat, when grazing is worth 3d per lamb, per week, 22/10; 4d, 18/3; sd, 13/9; 6d, 9/2; 7d, 4/7. The report further stated there were two deaths on each farm definitely due to lambs being gorged with wheat, and

these were charged against the wheat and returns per bushel were reduced by about 4/3 on all the figures quoted. The deaths, however, were preventable by using a little care at i the beginning, and so the losses should not be charged to the wheat. The difference in returns per bushel of wheat on these two farms might be due to the fact that the lambs ate less wheat per day on Farm No. 2, but had they eaten twice as much the wheat

would still have given nearly as good a return as that obtained on Farm No. 1. The reason they ate less wheat was that the grass on Farm No. 2 was very much better than on Farm No. 1, and if the grass on Farm No. 1 was worth 3d per head per week, then the grass on No. 2 was certainly worth 5d per head per week. It was possible, of course, that grass alone gave such a return that it was worth 6d or 7d per head per week, and as a consequence wheat was giving a return of less than 6/- per bushel, but such a high value for grass was not generally recognised. (Later information on Farm No. 2 showed that the grass there actually gave a gross return of just under 5d per head per week.) Although the report was only an interim one, the returns per bushel obtained from feeding wheat were as promising, the consequences of being able

to use wheat in this way were as far i reaching, and the facts that there were I about 2,000,000 lambs still to be killed i in the South Island, and that grass j growth could usually be depended on j in March and April, all these things ' combined pointed to the advisability of making the information they now had available immediately. The report went on to say that about 6 inches of trough length per head was required, i.e. 50 feet of troughs for 100 lambs or sheep. This was a minimum quantity, and could with advantage be increased to 9 inches per head or 75 feet for 100 lambs or sheep. For a start a mixture about l-20th of 11b crushed oats and l-20th lb of whole I wheat per head should be put out twice < per day, and the lambs held round the troughs for 20 minutes or so night and morning. At the end of about three daj's, they would be cleaning up this

amount if the holding was done care- } fully, particularly If a few old ewes, j used to eating out of troughs were included in the mob. At the end of three days the oats could be discontinued, 1 and about l-3th of a' lb of wheat per j head night and morning, put out. This should be left out for an hour or so : and what was left should then be cleaned up. After the first cleaning up] it would not be difficult to put out the | right amount and so avoid subsequent | cleanings up. This amount could be 1 increased each day while they cleaned j it up till the lambs were eating lib per head per day. Whatever happened, it was unwise to leave wheat in the ! troughs in front of the lambs all day, at least in the early stages of feeding, and if this fact was borne in mind for the first fortnight there should be little j danger of lambs gorging. Once the lambs got used to eating wheat, after 10 days or a fortnight, it did not appear necessary to take any precautions at all.