Show DAIRY BARN OR OPEN SHED much mooted question atron tion among fraternity for many me y years year dats data offered by government prepared M b the be veiled department or of asad blim cows consumed uv u somewhat more am fold feed suit and produced slightly more milk when sem kept in open sheds than in clowd closed be barns while unit thal increased pred thild did it it out not the ill extra cot cast of fund feed reports the united states department depart mm ol of agriculture train from the results suit ot of investigations conducted at shuib md bid which tile the open shed or 01 closed barn b tor for call dally y cows we be has brou a much mooted question quert lon among na I 1 interior of a dairy bam the dairy fraternity for r many any bearg lea bad ad the data do yet kia by b the it federal f cral it department la Is illuming illuminative h I 1 in it set li up P th the problems irani I 1 raw present 1 knowl on abit edge I 1 jac the open shed la Is not thought thong h to I 1 I 1 adapted to regiana of extreme cold deep broas oms or at high wind considering all operations other thao than milking and felding feeding slightly more mom labor was n s required d to care a to foi cow under the te open ope lashed shed east of it while there was waa a tem demy fur far boa base cows to depe dep e the somins of if ecal maill tl tj e normal ad ol of the shed bed which rr abul in 1 decreased d production on the zi be part art of at the ill more timid bas d the naine was apparently PP OY a ell lire ser lan cerveri blancle cle veri until it could be hauled to the lie land under the open a P shed system end ad at 41 ft mos as handled more mare than ul in the I 1 closed boned turn barn furthermore I 1 in the mt manure wout were bldr decomposed to he be handled suc mic cess cese full fully I 1 Y with will the manum spreader under the open shed system 68 per seat cent more an m bedding bedd ng was as required for web m cow but th the low cowa were ire clem cleaner old an wore couff comfortable table liters was wai little it difference forgave in 1 the ill a time if in a required to bed the animals under the two tas sis tow but tile the rapt rapid d rotting of the coin milk or other mame coarse material under the open shed method makes their ass 1 I tor far litter 1 in ill the up open shed asti ell despite other results to the th contrary the results of this man expert ment nt showed that there them TICS nm little it me a anny dIff difference elowe lo in the frequency of 0 in I 1 juries to more cowa under either open shed or closed III bibla bum comati h I 1 n general gi inal little difference could be noted aided in the content contentment c of the iowa cows biker open p shed or closed 1 db barn n I 1 con editions some of the animals up ap julind to list he more a contented wat in I 1 burn in smile others ollie room more at ease in the open am tied shed while still tilt others other alpar fully had ao a f preference fleet re however undo antler clustered open shed co conditions the cows had more annes frold not us as they could coula lie e own and get up with ease and ad could old selecta icat a clean place on which to lie I 1 heu vez they chose ruf tI 0 I 1 libey y had bad access to nn abundant t sup n ply of reah air if I 1 in luany my poorly yen a witted dairy do worth rj barua bams the air supply i doubtless would be up an important fm fac tor for in making the open shed had more mom d de as an a of law cow comfort data collected by the department of agriculture shows that in ill the in s tame of 21 was COBS which were new lap dept under the tt to systems 15 s 1 pio d ducca led more milk and butterfat mill kept in the open shed while six cows a showed a higher Po production duchon uhl TV iiii 1 maintained I and I 1 in 1 11 1 closed I 1 it how barn th the I 1 total pea production h lles I 1 in the up oam shed was 84 9 pounds no I 1 of if 1 hlll I I 1 con babig I 1 W P pounds title ot of both butterf 18 nt and ad that 1 la the closed barn 1 I was a fi P pounds do ot containing I 1 bat 41 pounds pound of 0 but hat hIst accord angly under the open shed system ill thuc was tt total I 1 for far t the in 1 period co ide 7 about eighty do dai of a pounds wc of and OT 74 pounds ot of butt butterfat Z 1 or an average tor for web each row law of 1301 1 pounds of allic it k and ad pounds ol of bulter bUtterf taE kL tile the total i rumber ot of man months the compared under der each catch system w was 57 7 a and it the average time me waa id about ont et eighty days calella llona ft fro from thew these figures fig areas indicate that them here was a an average monthly I 1 in crease of air 48 tie pounds do of conk aud ad 3 7 pounds pound of butterfat but cat for far each it ww cow naile stabled 1 in the oil open bed it Is 16 largely matter ot of personal far or the former farmer to det determine under ul which I 1 h system eyB tein open filled or closed on dairy try be barn a it I 1 is an t prof melds for im to main Bin his bis dairy wn |