It is a somewhat general belief, that the aftermath, or second cutting, is less nutritious than the first cutting; but there appears to be no chemical difference between the two crops, provided they be saved under equally favorable conditions. According to Dr. Anderson, the composition of clover-hay of the second cutting is as follows:—
| Water | 16·84 |
| Flesh-forming principles | 13·52 |
| Non-nitrogenous matters | 64·43 |
| Mineral matter (ash) | 5·21 |
| ——— | |
| 100·00 |
I have already shown the importance of reaping in proper season—not less necessary is it to mow before the plants ripen fully, and even before they flower. The results of the experiments of Stöckhardt, Hellreigel, and Wolff, in relation to this point, are very interesting, and are well worthy of reproduction here.
| RESULTS OF STÖCKHARDT'S AND HELLREIGEL'S EXPERIMENTS. | ||||||
| Stem. | Leaves. | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Water in Fresh Plant. | Hay. | Water in Fresh Plant. | Hay. | |||
| Flesh-forming Matters. | Ash. | Flesh-forming Matters. | Ash. | |||
| Clover cut on the 4th June, quite young | 82·80 | 13·16 | 9·71 | 83·50 | 27·17 | 9·42 |
| 23rd " ready for cutting | 81·72 | 12·72 | 9·00 | 82·68 | 27·69 | 9·00 |
| 9th July, beginning to flower | 82·41 | 12·40 | 6·12 | 77·77 | 15·83 | 10·46 |
| 29th July, full flower | 78·30 | 9·28 | 4·63 | 70·80 | 19·20 | 9·58 |
| 21st August, ripe | 69·40 | 6·75 | 4·82 | 65·70 | 18·94 | 12·33 |
| RESULTS OF WOLFF'S EXPERIMENT. | ||||||||
| Red Clover. | Alsike Clover. | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Beginning to flower, 11th June. | Full flower, 25th June. | Beginning to flower, 23rd June. | Full flower, 29th June. | |||||
| Fresh. | Hay. | Fresh. | Hay. | Fresh. | Hay. | Fresh. | Hay. | |
| per cent. | per cent. | per cent. | per cent. | per cent. | per cent. | per cent. | per cent. | |
| Water | 83·07 | 16·66 | 76·41 | 10·66 | 86·98 | 16·66 | 82·60 | 16·66 |
| Ash | 1·43 | 7·04 | 1·67 | 5·90 | 1·12 | 7·17 | 1·45 | 6·94 |
| Woody fibre | 4·24 | 20·87 | 8·88 | 37·37 | 3·79 | 24·26 | 5·11 | 24·47 |
| Nutritive substances | 11·26 | 55·43 | 13·04 | 46·07 | 8·11 | 51·91 | 10·84 | 51·93 |
During the operation of converting the grass—"natural" or "artificial"—into hay, there is more or less loss of nutritive matter sustained by fermentation, the dispersion of the smaller leaves by the wind, and other agencies. But this unavoidable loss is trivial when compared with the prodigious waste sustained, in Ireland at least, by allowing the hay to remain too long in cocks in the field. "Within the last three or four years," says Mr. Baldwin, of the Glasnevin Albert Model Farm, "we have made agricultural tours through twenty-five of the thirty-two counties of Ireland; and from careful consideration of the subject, and having in some instances used a tape-line and weighing-machine to assist our judgment, we have come to the conclusion that one-twentieth of the hay-crop of Ireland is permitted to rot in field-cocks. The portion on the ground, as well as that on the outside of the cocks, is too often only fit for manure. And the loss of aftermath, and of the subsequent year's crop (if hay or pasture), suffers to the extent of from sixpence to one shilling per acre. If we unite all these sources, the loss sustained annually in this country is something serious to contemplate. On an average, for all Ireland, it is not under 20 per cent., or a fifth of the actual value of the crop." This is a startling statement; but I do not believe it to be an exaggeration of the actual state of things.
Damaged Hay and Straw.—Damaged corn and potatoes, so much injured as to be unfit for human food, are generally given, and with apparently good results, to the inferior animals. The "meat manufacturing machines," as the edible varieties of the domesticated animals are now generally termed, are not very dainty in their choice of food; and vegetable substances which would excite the disgust of the lords of the creation are rendered nutritious and agreeable by being reorganised in the mechanisms of oxen, sheep, and pigs.
Now, although it is pretty generally known that musty corn and diseased potatoes form good feeding stuffs, it is not so patent whether or not the natural food of stock, such as hay and straw in a diseased state, is proper food for those animals. This question is worthy of consideration. Firstly, I shall describe the nature of the diseases which most frequently affect fodder; these are, "mildew" and "mould." These diseases are produced by the ravages of minute and very low forms of vegetable life, termed by the botanists epiphytical fungi. The mildew (Puccinia graminis) generally attacks the grasses when they are growing, and is more frequently met with on rich and heavily manured soils. In localities where heavy night-fogs and dews are of common occurrence, this pest often destroys whole crops. On the other hand, in light, sandy, and well-drained soils, and in warm and dry districts, the mildew is a rare visitant. The "blue mould" (Aspergillis glaucus) attacks hay and straw in the stack or rick, and without any regard to their origin—no matter whether they were the produce of the wettest or the dryest, the warmest or the coldest of soils. The chief condition in the existence of the blue mould is excessive moisture. If the hay or straw be too green and succulent when put up, or if rain get at them in the rick, the mould is very likely to make its appearance, and the well-known odor termed musty will speedily be developed.
Neither the mildew nor the mould can, strictly speaking, be regarded as parasites, such as, for example, the flax-dodder, which feeds upon the healthy juices of the plant to which it is attached. It appears to me that the tissues and juices of the fodder-plants decay first, and then the mould or the mildew appears and feeds upon the decomposing matter. Now, as these vegetables belong to a poisonous class of fungi, it is more than probable that they convert the decomposing substance of the straw or hay into unwholesome, if not poisonous matter; and it is not unlikely but that the disagreeable odor which they evolve is designed by nature as a sign to the lower animals not to partake of mouldy food. There is no doubt but that most animals will instinctively reject fodder in this state; and the question arises, ought this odour to be destroyed or disguised, in order to induce the animals to eat the damaged stuff? The experience of most feeders who have largely consumed mouldy provender is, that although cattle may be induced to eat it, they never thrive upon such stuff if it form a heavy item in their diet. The reason of this is obvious. The nitrogenous portion of the straw is that which is chiefly assimilated by the fungi. And as this constituent is the one which contributes to the formation of muscle, and is naturally extremely deficient in straw and hay—more particularly the former—it follows that the animals fed upon mouldy fodder cannot elaborate it into lean flesh (muscle).