Contribution from the Bure&u of Anima! Industry JOHN R. MOHLER, Chie’ Washington, D. C. Vv November 15, 1918 |THE OPEN SHED‘COMPARED WITH THE CLOSED BARN FOR DAIRY COWS. i By T. E. Woopwarp, W. F. Turner, W. R. Hatz, and J. B. McNuury, of the Dairy Division. CONTENTS. Page. Page. Present dairy practice regarding open and Tabor required! ..4..s42-csecnss-acne- cen e soe 10 MSNA TNS ac)..5 cian one Ohee se hese 1 Preparing cows for milking-..........--. 10 i) Review of previous work............-.------ 2 Removing manure and flushing out milk The experimental work ............-..--.--- 3 FOOTER Ces Lhe) beef ta Sek See il Description of the open shed--.---....-. 3 Bedding—time required, pounds needed, PDHENClOSAO: DATE. 5. S26 oom acemcrcie sini si + - 4 UConn shoe te oe at aeons sso 11 PHB COWE Ise eeLEELL ER. fA OSes o 24... 4 | Health and contentment of the cows. .-..-.-- 12 Production records.<...¢2.....-...2--. 4 | Manure—preservation, handling, etc. -..-..-.. 13 LGR Gatco ee Hh | OUIMIIARY eet oo. ccc sect e aes ee cece ee 13 Discussion of resullts..../........-222..022--- vB PRESENT DAIRY PRACTICE REGARDING OPEN AND CLOSED BARNS. In order that milk and butterfat may be produced economically, i) it is necessary to provide shelter of some kind for dairy cattle during i the cold, stormy seasons of the year. While the length of the stabling i) period varies in different sections of the United States, most dairy iu cows are now housed for at least five months, from November to Hi March, inclusive. mai An open-shed barn is usually partly or entirely closed on three Hie sides, leaving one side, usually the south or east, open. The shed is i) large enough to allow each animal sufficient room for comfort and exercise, the space allowed varying from 35 to 150 square feet for each cow. The animals are allowed the freedom of the shed except fat milking time. Usually there is a separate room into which the lcows are driven for milking. This room may accommodate all or only a part of them. In the latter case they are milked in groups. @ In the milking room the cows are groomed, milked, and fed grain, after which they are driven out and another group takes their place. | Roughage is fed in racks and troughs provided for that purpose in the open shed. 74848°—18—Bull. 736 Monogra, on 2 BULLETIN 736, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. The closed barn consists of a barn entirely inclosed with stall room enough to accommodate the entire herd. The animals are kept in the barn during most of the late fall and winter, and in some dairies the entire year. It is almost the universal practice of dairymen to keep their cows in a closed barn of some type, although in recent years some have used the open shed. Advocates of the latter have maintained that the manure is handled more easily and is better preserved and that the cows yield more milk and butterfat and are healthier, cleaner and more comfortable than when confined in a closed barn. Dairy- men who have had experience in stabling cows both in closed barns and in open sheds disagree as to the merits of the two. In order to obtain definite and reliable information on the problem the experi- _ mental work hereinafter described was carried on at the Dairy Di- vision Experiment Farm, Beltsville, Md., near Washington, D. C. The results should be applicable to other parts of the country in a sim- ilar latitude. REVIEW OF PREVIOUS WORK. Fraser’ of the University of Illinois Agricultural Experiment Sta- tion, investigated the open-shed system of housing dairy cattle by sending out a list of 21 questions to dairymen in Illinois who used the open shed. The answers of the 18 dairymen who replied indi- cated that the milking barn was kept cleaner when the open shed was used, and that the cows and the milk were cleaner. In almost every case more bedding was required, and the cows showed no tendency to injure one another. In the latter connection it must be remembered that in the opinion of the Illinois dairymen mentioned above dehorning was believed to be necessary to the success of the open shed. All who replied to Prof. Fraser’s inquiry had either dehorned or polled cattle. In answer to the question ‘“‘ What do you consider the chief advantage of keeping cows in this way over ordi- nary stabling?” no one fact was so generally emphasized as the labor- saving feature of the open shed. In an investigation at the Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station conducted by Buckley and Lamson? the open stable was compared with the closed stable. ‘The following is a brief summary of the conclusions drawn from the experiment: The cost of construction for the open shed is smaller than for the closed barn. The cost of labor and the cost of milk, based on quality of feed consumed, is slightly less in the open shed than in the closed barn. In the open shed, manure is better pre- served and cows are kept cleaner. The supply of fresh air and light is also better. 1 Fraser, W.J. “Should Dairy Cows be Confined to Stalls?’’ Tllinois Circular 93, 1904. 2 Buckley, 8S. S., and Lamson, R. W. Open Shed Versus Closed Stable for Dairy Cows. Maryland Agricultural Experiment Station, Bulletin 177. p. of B. NOV 25 9818 S F239 WV FY OPEN SHED COMPARED WITH BARN FOR DAIRY COWS. 3 The effects of extremely low temperatures are practically negative in reducing the flow of milk. No bad results were experienced from cows horning or butting one another when allowed the freedom of the open shed. Davis,* at the Pennsylvania Agricultural Experiment Station, conducted an experiment in which the effect of open-shed housing for dairy cows was compared with the closed stable. He concludes as follows: It appears that the cows kept under the open shed have keener appetites and con- sume more roughage than those kept in stables. Sufficient protein was consumed under both systems to meet the requirements of milk and maintenance, The milk yield of the outside group decreased more rapidly each winter than that of the inside group. Sudden drops in atmospheric temperature caused decreases in milk yield for both groups, the outside group having slightly greater decrease. More bedding was required outside, but less labor was necessary to keep the cows clean. Both groups finished each winter trial in good health. THE EXPERIMENTAL WORK. The following details of three years’ experiments carried on at the Dairy Division Experiment Farm at Beltsville, Md., show the conditions under which the work was done. DESCRIPTION GF THE OPEN SHED. The shed used was of frame construction, 58 fect in length and 35 feet in width, inside measurements. On the north end a space of 18 feet was partitioned off and inclosed for a milking room with stalls for 8 cows. It had a concrete platform, gutter, and alleyway. The cows were allowed the freedom of the shed except at milking time. The north end of the shed and the east and west sides up to within 18 inches of the plate were kept closed, while the south end, except for a fence to keep the cows inside when desired, was entirely open. On the south was a small dry paddock where the cows were permitted to exercise. The space available for the cows within the open shed, excluding the space of the feeding troughs, was a little more than 1,200 square feet, which allowed each of the 16 cows housed in the shed approximately 75 square feet of floor space. Two doors opened into the milking room from the shed, one through which the cows were driven in to be milked and the other through which they were driven out after milking. This was the type of shed used during the first year of the experi- ment. For the last two years a new shed, entirely open on the south side, replaced the old one. The north side and both ends had large doors which swung from the top. In summer the doors were raised to permit a better circulation of air, but in the winter months, a I EE EI SIRES 2 EEA OEE SINE BN TER OLGA. nai A OS 1 Davis, H. P. The Effect of Open-Shed Housing as Compared with Closed Stable for Milch Cows,” ~ Separate No. 14 (pp. 183-226), Annual Report, 1913-14, Pennsylvania State College. 1916. 4 BULLETIN 136, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. while the experiment was in progress, the doors were lowered. For the purpose of the experiment there was no difference in the two structures. The new shed was built only a short distance from the main milking barn, so it was convenient to drive the cows from the open shed into the main barn to be milked; consequently both groups of cows were milked in the same structure during the last two years of the experiment. THE CLOSED BARN. The closed barn was of concrete construction, 36 feet by 594 feet, with stall room for 26 cows, and was equipped with concrete floors, mangers, and gutters. The cows faced the outside walls, and the alleyway behind them was 8 feet wide. The feed alleys in front of the cows were 4 feet wide, and there was a 5-foot alleyway at each end of the barn. The 17 windows, 7 on each side, 1 on the north end, and 2 on the south end, provided 176 square feet of lighting space. A modification of the King system of ventilation was used. The concrete floors on one side of the barn were covered with various kinds of insulators, such as cork brick, creosoted blocks, and planks. One-half of the cows used in the experiment stood on the floors and the other half on the concrete. THE COWS. The herd throughout the entire investigation consisted of 1 pure- bred Guernsey, 2 pure-bred Holsteins, 10 grade Jerseys, and 8 cows of miscellaneous breeding. The records of all the animals stabled under the two systems could not be used, on account of the irregu- larity of calving, etc. PRODUCTION RECORDS. ‘The herd was divided into two groups. During the first year one group was kept in the open shed and the other in the closed barn. The second year the groups were reversed. The third year the groups were again reversed, which gave three years’ records for comparison. Owing to the irregularity in calving, all the cows have not three years’ records which are comparable. Four cows had two years’ records in the open shed, an average of which was taken and compared with their one year in the closed barn. Seven cows had two years’ records in the closed barn, an average of which was compared with their one year’s record in the open shed. Since the results of the housing are determined quite largely, if not entirely, upon the stabling period—November to March, in- clusive—only the records obtained for the five months were studied. . These records do not in any case cover the entire period of five months, owing to the irregularity of some of the cows in calving, OPEN SHED COMPARED WITH BARN FOR DAIRY COWS. 5 though all records come within the five months mentioned. Only comparable records have been included. By way of illustration: Cow 201 calved October 26, 1914, while in the open shed. In 1915 she calved September 26, while in the closed barn. Therefore, in order that there should be no difference in the records due to time of freshening, records for December, 1914, and January, February, and March, 1915, in the open shed, were compared with the records for November and December, 1915, and January and February, 1916, in the closed barn. In a similar way other production records covering the same length of time in the two barns and taken the same time after calving have been compared. The weight of each milking was recorded, and composite samples for two days were taken in the middle of the month and tested for butterfat. The butterfat test of the composite samples taken during . the two days was used to calculate the total butterfat production for the month. FEED RECORDS. The grain mixture used throughout the experiment was the same for both groups of cows, and usually consisted of 2 parts corn meal, 2 parts wheat bran, and 1 part cottonseed meal. In some instances the mixture was varied slightly in the case of individual cows. The roughage consisted of silage and of such hay as was available on the farm—cowpea, crimson clover, and red clover. All grain fed was accurately weighed out for each animal, and records were kept during the periods covered by the production record. The hay, silage, and other roughage fed to the cows in the open shed the first year were weighed out in quantities sufficient for the entire lot, and it was assumed that equal quantities were con- sumed by the various individuals. During the last two years of the experiment the roughage was weighed out to each animal. The quantity of grain fed was determined largely by the production of the individual cow, but consideration was given also to her physical condition. It was desired to keep all cows in good condition and to maintain each individual at a uniform weight. They were fed all the silage and hay they would consume without waste. The cows in the open shed were bedded often enough to keep the inclosure clean, which was almost every day. In the closed barn the cows were bedded daily, and bedding enough was used to make them comfortable and to absorb the liquid manure. For the five months of the year during which data were taken wheat straw was used with both groups. DISCUSSION OF RESULTS. The milk and butterfat production records made under both the open-shed and closed-barn conditions are shown in Table 1 BULLETIN 736, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 6 TP Ler PL GS 60 9TT Ly L9 €¢ 0S 6L OF G0 8S GG “EL G6 “69 T8 06 9F “99 09 “TS PP OL GP SL CL °L9 88 “GP 6h 99 69 “6S L998 €€ “68 10°86 GL ‘PE “spunog "yey -10}1ng 1209 ‘T 6169 'E 6 LIFT 9 P02 ‘T & 6F9 Go F68 ‘T F26L ‘T 8 898 T 0968 ‘T 0 70S ‘T € #00 ‘T Z 698 ‘T o PPP T € seg ‘T F 666 G 89S ‘T 9 ‘986 ‘T “620 ‘Z Z F66‘T 1°88 ‘T GCP. *“spunodg TAL 2868 ‘Te \ { { { ‘udAId st UoTjonposd ,sreat Z at} JO asVIEAe OY ‘poUIqUIOD ore sIvak Z AIO M—' ALON ee ee ee en CT ‘Seg ‘T 609 ‘FE i settee gT6I ‘Areniqeg ‘Arenuer ‘oT6T ‘1equieveq | sT6T‘T “ydeg scodene stor ss" "767 “Gorey ‘Areniqeg ‘Arenuer | g16T‘Z *400J|| ¢z ‘08 LOGS | ST6T “Youre ‘Areniqey ‘Arenuee “OT6T Seay arena i ‘eit “soquresod peerinieto NI rey ae bens 2°CET | O'L6L‘E | STST ‘Youeyy ‘Areniqayg ‘Arenuer “FT6T ‘1equreoeq Sieiiniaiaa Tél ‘Arenaiqoaq, BP “GI6L ‘leq ule00q if OTe) . . rr ttse seers scene G § C CIES noone ‘anenagag “Azenuey | gror‘te oof] 64 0F | 86 Uses eee se 6a ear Bie a TUnUCOut Ceres [SELeRiSea gest TRO S2: Ge| G°any. T *hecer Mes" rnc eo- ese sarap ponu yy ek roe i aE eae BOL G Se ek pase, rer a ee sleet aie Pans Se ge SIer ‘Areniqag ‘Arenues prec eegey * ose e "- *pler ‘Arenaqag ‘Asenues | eter ‘0g any 89 $9 NGO Palca lt coer Soe ae. hes ae a ST6I “yore ‘Areniqay ee AIenU , aq ‘oq UIeAO “ot * . nao Ble cee ( i ae OE oe oe ee tay etn anmey epee soa yHopbNee ol eeyee CT6l ‘Aawnaqay ‘renues ‘PTET ‘Jequieoeq ee eS “GTOL, “Worwyy ‘Arensqag ‘Arenuve | PI6L 420, || 406 O60 a at Bets PIGL ‘Yorvyy ‘Areniqay ‘Arenues agen renue equteoey “19q UI9A0 } “oly : . 2 2SEOS ‘fk ‘ ‘ oe Orc eta RreTasey Aaenter err ’G ide Oo BYES | eee leae GTOL ‘Arenaqog ‘Arenuvye “PTET ‘xequiadeq < ey, OT6T ‘Yoreyy ‘Areniqe, ‘Arenuer poems tee bee eror ‘yoreyy ‘Arensqayg ‘Kxenuee | F16t‘T “390 |] 2P'6F ¥ Ser TL 4\--- FIGL ‘Yorepy ‘Areniqeg ‘Arenues SSeIg a aaorbe OSE 3a5. 36 Tél ‘Arenaqoy ‘Arenuee | F161 ‘gE “4deg || zr “E9 LSSTT Joos ctr a6 “ore “Areniqeg 68 "ZL o-rre't {122222 OT6T ‘Areniqeq ‘Arenuee ‘sT6T ‘19qu1800q 2 SSE SR SSO OCR 2004 cT6I ‘yore ‘Areniqeg ‘Arenuee | P16 ‘st “ydog soosss reese ssss* “S767 “yore ‘Areniqeg ‘Arenues Be ee se ee yaa eoenitiee cesaauer Peroni any moog | eg99T [o-oo GOT “Gomeyy ‘Arensqog ‘Arenuee FOSS Ee ee CR ap oore See CoB BEC asec eae A 5 ! : “10 G Ope" sien'Tas'4O Lego | OGRA es erin ee ely Ukmariie Arent pi "oo" GT6T ‘Arwniqeg ‘Arenuer | FI6T ‘Ge “any || 19°92 TOS OFeccg litre biarene er ah (2 PLOT “ore “Arensqog ana8Ge "SIGE ‘Youeyy ‘Aronia ‘Arenuel | FIGT ‘SZ “AON || 88°28 T'90'@ joo 7777177077177 PTET “Wore “Areniqeg ‘Arenuer een ST6I ‘Aruna ‘Awnues | FI6T‘% “eq || 91 “¢9 GTSg*] [vc torr tra iitis "per “wore “Areniqeg ae eS ap se cee eae “Op’-**"| FI6I‘Z °490 || 66°86 RCTS ciel cs alae ae gia eme = ee gee ae Soe ro) oe Sine Tee, “-=""""-@T6T “Gorey ‘Areniqeag ‘Arenuee | FI6T‘T *90q || 68°66 CAGES Ole ee a ee 0 piace OE SSS St6r ‘Areniqay ‘Arenas “FI6T ‘Jequeoed | F16T‘S ATE || 68 "FOL | OLST‘S [0777777777777 7 PIGT Sqoueyy ene eenee Fae ees Sate ‘ ‘ ‘ Gece ; = trrerstsscsssss*-gTey ‘qorem ‘Areniqeg ‘Arenuer SIGE ‘Yoreyy “Areniqeg ‘Arenuve | $161 ‘6T “sny || &% FE F808 { BORE SRO SAC ADEG FIGL ‘Worry ‘Areniqeg ‘Arenues “Sspunod | ‘spunog *porrad SUTIN ‘peaqea ered |) oting | “MUN “poried SUPT “UIBCL Paso[D *peys uedg ‘worjonp -oid = [B40 FI6T ‘9¢ “3dag FI6I “9% FI6I ‘2 FIBI ‘ZS PI6I ‘ZT PFIGL ‘FT FIGI ‘OT SI6T ‘6 “ydeg FIGI ‘gt “ydeg SI6I ‘LT “490 S161 ‘FZ “490 S161 ‘6 “adeg SI61‘¢ ae S161 ‘9 ‘4deg PI6L ‘ge “deg \ S161 ‘2 “AON. €I61 ‘8ST deg e161 ‘% “AON FI6I ‘OL ‘uer SI6T ‘8Z “190 €I61 ‘9 “90q S161 ‘6 “sv CI6I ‘8 ee SI6l‘F “sny, *~O “AON 0 “4ydag zYe) “ydag *poareo eq 10% OT ‘oN MOD “spLodas qwfia}jng puv yyy —'T AIAV OPEN SHED COMPARED WITH BARN FOR DAIRY COWS. 7 TABLE 2.—Feed consumed. OPEN SHED. Cotton-| Red- | Crim- | Cow- Cow No. Corn | Wheat| seed | clover | son- pea Corn Miscellaneous. meal, | bran. | meal. | hay. | clover] hay. | silage. hay. Pounds, Pounds.| Pounds.| Pounds, Pounds.| Pounds, Pounds. 196 158 79 TAN Faewciree 405 | 2,970 | Corn stover, 155. 443 296 4 ( 462 308 460 | 306 299 200 446 297 181 121 206 166 Corn stover, 81. 276 276 342 255 Corn stover, 115. 295 196 263 263 Corn stover, 155. 487 361 Fish meal, 63. 448 300 392 280 Fish meal, 56. 378 126 188 188 354 118 276 276 654 654 432 432 7,478 | 5,587 | 2,849 | 2,620] 2,085 | 4,691 | 61,419 a CLOSED BARN. USS oc oes Masia 164 164 82 134 295) Ws -cisceee 2, 700 DEBE os). tL SSA 360 360 IRS eos Se Se Se 337 75 | 3,010 AGEN oe ok BSS ci 362 362 232 15 > Ay (All eee Se 2, 805 Cee hulls, 138, - |fCottonseed hulls, 138. 7 Bead Te A es 297 297 190 15 PAY) | Peoresce 2, 805 (one meal, 31. ; Bieei dette wee cha aed 206 206 HOS aes eee 236) |S Seceeee 1,770 OR Mie a. S38 SOS. 276 276 138 124 24) on eee 2, 540 Dee cina Leite sux si 213 213 1OGMResecsse 267i) 2 se oee 1,770 1S Aen eee ee 236 236 TC eee Os 236))|-