silos: an agricultural success story - the learning store · pdf filesilos: an agricultural...

Many people would be surprised to know the same

progressive spirit that characterizes Wisconsin’s political

history also colors its agricultural past—especially in the area of

agricultural technology.

During the Progressive era, college agricultural experiment

stations across the country promulgated scientific agriculture, or

“book farming.” In Wisconsin, this movement focused on the

development of an efficient method of storing winter fodder for

the burgeoning dairy industry. Silos were the result. Silos allowed

farmers to engage in year-round dairying, laying the groundwork

for the state’s thriving dairy industry.

Wisconsin has more silos than any other state, and they can

rightly be viewed as symbols of the dairy industry’s development.

These structures chronicle the geographic range of Wisconsin

dairying and graphically illustrate the changes in farm buildings

over the years, serving as markers of the state’s cultural heritage.

Silos: an agriculturalsuccess storyPeggy Lee Beedle

Barn and silo on a Vernon County farm.

Givingold barnsnew life

4G3660

University of Wisconsin-Extension

State Historical Society of Wisconsin

Wisconsin Trust for HistoricPreservation

C O N T E N T S

2 Changes for farmers

3 Early silos

6 Working out problems

8 Stone silos

9 New building materials

12 Location of the silo

13 Choosing the right silo

14 Innovations

15 Legacy of silos

18 Bibliography

Changes for farmers

In Wisconsin, the 1870s were atime of transition for farmers. Wheathad been the state’s main crop fromearly settlement through the CivilWar, but crop failures and open landin the West forced farmers to look forother ways to use their land. Manytried various cash crops and mixedfarming.

The 1870s also saw the rise ofthe fledgling dairy industry. At thattime, farmers generally considereddairying a seasonal business. Cowsproduced milk in the spring andsummer and were dry for the rest ofthe year. As a result, prices for dairyproducts were always higher in thewinter.

Some farmers practiced winterdairying, which meant keeping theircows in production throughout thewinter. This allowed farmers to takeadvantage of the higher prices theycould command in the cold weathermonths. But the main obstacle towinter dairying was finding sufficientsucculent food to maintain cows’ milkproduction through the winter.

The answer to a dairyman’s prayer

European ensilage reports musthave seemed like the answer to a dairy-man’s prayers. Ensilage was the termused to describe the process of makingand storing silage—green fodder usedin the winter. Some Americans alsoused the term to refer to the final,processed product.

The silo served as the airtightreceptacle for the ensilage, usually corn,that was chopped and placed inside.Air particles in the corn caused fermen-tation until all the air was expended. Bystoring the silage in an air-tight con-tainer, further fermentation was pre-vented, thereby preserving the silageuntil it was needed for feed.

G I V I N G O L D B A R N S N E W L I F E▲■

� 2 �

Silo with collapsed barn. Manitowoc County.

Silo and barn ruin. Manitowoc County.

Silage and a workable silo openedthe door to year-round dairying,making it a lucrative full-time occupa-tion. At first there was some resistanceto the idea of using silage, but theWisconsin Agricultural ExperimentStation, the Wisconsin Farmers’Institutes, and farm journals such asHoard’s Dairyman all promoted it. Bythe turn of the century, silos hadbecome an accepted part of the farmstead.

Early silosAs first introduced from Europe,

silos were underground pits or long,shallow masonry buildings. Farmers inthis country soon began “Americani-zing” the silo—making it more effi-cient and affordable. Agriculturalexperiment station personnel and dairyfarmers were involved in this effort,experimenting with different shapes,sizes and construction materials.

Early silos were rectangular orsquare, but gradually the advantages ofthe round form led to its domination.Wood, stone, brick, tile and pouredconcrete all served as constructionmaterials. Silos that exemplify thesechanges in technology and materialscan be seen throughout the state,often remaining when other farmsteadbuildings have disappeared.

The word silo comes from theGreek siros—an air-tight pit forstoring grain. Greek and Romanfarmers used silos to store maturegrain. Besides this tradition, whichwas described by the Roman writersMarcus Varro, Columella and Plinythe Elder, the Germanic and Asiaticpeoples traditionally stored greenfodder and food in pits.1 The 1800sbrought a renewed interest in thesestorage methods and Europeanfarmers began to experiment withthem. The Report of the Commissionerof Agriculture for the Year 1875 con-tained the article “French Mode ofCuring Forage” which described the

efforts of French and German farmersto store green fodder over winter.August Goffart, a French farmer whoexperimented with ensiling corn formany years, wrote The Ensilage ofMaize and Other Green Forage Crops,an account of his elliptical masonrysilo and ensiling methods. This wastranslated into English in 1879. Bothof these publications made an imme-diate impact on American farmers.

S I L O S — M A R K E R S O F A G R I C U L T U R A L P R O G R E S S ▲■

� 3 �

Silos on a Fond du Lac County farm illustrate different forms andsizes.

Square stone silo. Waukesha County.

Levi P. Gilbert of Fort Atkinsonbuilt the first silo in Wisconsin in18772 following the methods outlinedin an 1875 United States Departmentof Agriculture (USDA) bulletin. Hissilo was an underground pit, 32 feetlong, 12 feet wide and six feet deep,lined with straw. After using it forthree years, Gilbert reported on its

effectiveness to a meeting of theWisconsin Dairymen’s Association.“The cows ate it [silage] with relish,”he noted, “and it produced the sameeffects of green feed just from thefield.”3

The second Wisconsin farmer tobuild a silo, Dr. L. W. Weeks, fol-lowed the precepts of August Goffartafter hearing about them in Europe.4

Dr. Weeks’ double silo, constructed in1880, was built of masonry, with eachside about 12 feet by 30 feet and 12feet deep. William Henry, the dean ofthe University of Wisconsin Collegeof Agriculture, came to visit Weeksand look at his silo. In 1881 DeanHenry received money from the legis-lature to build a silo on the experi-mental farm.5 This silo was con-structed of sandstone rubble and was30 feet long, 15 feet wide and 15 feetdeep, about halfway underground.The inside was coated with cement.In all of these early silos the silage wasweighted down with earth or stone,about 100 pounds per foot, to keepair from entering and spoiling thesilage.


� 4 �

Goffart’s triple masonry silos. From The Ensilage of Maize, and other GreenFodder Crops.

Silo built by John Hays in 1882 in DodgeCounty. Stone with wood jacket. Collegeof Agriculture Archives.

From these early endeavors, wordof the silo spread throughout thestate. Many farmers visited those whohad built silos to see them firsthand.Articles in farm journals and newspa-pers also provided the impetus forsome farmers to try the new inven-tion. Most of the early silos in thestate were built of stone, followingGoffart’s silo design.

Early silos were consideredexpensive to build; in addition, theyrequired the services of a mason.Dean Henry and others were inter-ested in making the silo affordable forall farmers. Henry wanted a silo thatcould be easily constructed of wood—the cheapest construction material ofthe time. Henry believed that silagedid not cure as well in stone silos andthat wood was superior because silagewould not freeze when stored in it.6

Farm journals of the time used theword “Americanizing” to indicate thechange from expensive to affordablefor all. Although some farmers believedthat underground silos were better,most built them above ground, whichmade them easier to unload. In 1881,Levi Gilbert built his second woodensilo, above ground. These silos lookedlike any other rectangular wood out-building with a stone foundation.

The drought of 1886 and 1887proved to be a turning point in theacceptance of the silo in Wisconsin.Farmers attending the WisconsinFarmers’ Institutes meetings declaredthat having silos had kept them inbusiness during the drought.7


� 5 �

Barn of A. A. Arnold, Trempealeau County. Interior silo is filledthrough the dormer on the left.

Arnold’s interior silo, constructed in 1887 of brick with a cementlining.

Working outproblemsF. H. King

Estimates around 1887 indicatedthat between 500 to 2,500 silos hadbeen built. In 1889, the WisconsinAgricultural Experiment StationBulletin 29 estimated that there wereabout 2,000 silos in the state. Manyof these were made of wood. Butthere were problems with rectangularwood silos. The walls bowed out,letting in air and the silage acidsrotted the wood lining. Preventativemeasures, such as painting the liningwith gas tar or linseed oil, were noteffective.

This was the situation when F.H. King, a professor of agriculturalphysics at the University ofWisconsin, took an interest in silobuilding. He had designed a roundbarn with a round silo in the centerfor his brother, a dairy farmer inWalworth County.

In 1891, King undertook a silosurvey in which he cataloged the con-struction problems of the silos he saw.King identified three basic flaws inwood construction: 1. The structures were not built

strongly enough to withstand thelateral pressure of the silage.

2. Air pockets in the corners resultedin spoilage.

3. The inside lining rotted due tocontact with silage acids.8

While King did not invent theround silo, he designed a roundwooden structure that solved the con-struction problems. The walls of theround silo were strong enough towithstand pressure from the silage andthe cylindrical form eliminated theproblem of air pockets in the corners.The interior wall was separated fromthe outside by air spaces; Kingbelieved that adequate ventilationwould reduce lining decay.


� 6 �

Bowed-out walls of a woodrectangular silo. Bulletin 59.

King silo built in 1899 near Racine. Thesilo is 36 feet tall with a diameter of 24feet.

A related discovery about thenature of silage led to a change in thesilo’s form from horizontal to upright.This happened when it was discov-ered that the weight of the silage itselfproduced enough compression toexclude air—provided the silo wasdeep enough. King decreed that aminimum depth of 24 feet (laterrevised to 30) was necessary to avoidweighing down the silage. This roundwood silo with horizontal sidingbecame known as the King, orWisconsin, silo. The USDA still rec-ommended using a modified versionof it up until the 1920s.

Another type of wooden silo, thevertical stave, was also introduced inthe late 1890s. Stave silos utilized asingle layer of wood, secured by circu-lar iron bands, in a manner similar towater barrels. These silos worked wellwhen full, but while empty in thesummer, the dry staves shrank and thesilos sometimes collapsed duringrough weather.

King did not recommend thestave silo because it was associatedwith a high loss of silage,9 but it wasinexpensive and easier to constructthan his own design; in fact, this ver-tical stave silo was the first commer-cial success. Many companies soldstaves of different kinds of wood. Thequality of the staves varied, but thebest were beveled, tongued andgrooved to fit together securely. Alsobuilt were double-walled wood stavesilos that did not wrack and twistwhen empty.


� 7 �

King silo with roof variations. 8th Annual Report.

Wood stave silo. La Crosse County.

Stone silosWisconsin farmers continued to

build and use stone silos made of field-stone or quarried rock. Early settlersfound an abundance of fieldstone leftby glaciation. Using this fieldstone forsilos had the added benefit of helpingto clear the fields for cultivation.

Richard Perrin, Wisconsin’seminent architectural historian, out-lined three methods of building withfieldstone. The earliest probablyinvolved using the stones as they werefound, with plenty of mortar to holdthem together. A later technique usedby professional stonemasons was tosplit the fieldstones and place thefaced sides out, using smaller stonesfor infill. The third method, origi-nated in the 1870s, was to split all thefieldstone and lay it with a smallamount of mortar. Building with

fieldstone had started withWisconsin’s early settlement andlasted until the turn of the centurywhen it was mainly used for barnfoundations and silos.10 Stone siloswere built in Wisconsin using allthree building styles. Other stone siloswere built of quarried rock, such aslimestone.

Professor King’s silo survey foundthat the owners of stone silos weregenerally satisfied with the structures’effectiveness. The principal problemwith stone silos was that, over theyears, the mortar inside became softthrough contact with silage acids.King recommended lining the insideof stone silos with a mix containing ahigh proportion of cement to sand,and emphasized that the interior wallshad to be perfectly smooth.

Wisconsin AgriculturalExperiment Station bulletins pub-lished in 1897, 1900 and 1905 con-tained instructions for building bothround and square stone silos. The1905 bulletin stated, “There are agreat many stone silos in Wisconsin.In general they are found to be verysatisfactory.” 11 Stone silos were builtinto the teens, gradually falling out offavor as poured concrete became thepreferred construction material.


� 8 �

Quarried limestone silo. La Crosse County.

Stone silo construction. Bulletin 83. Stone silo built in 1912. Jefferson County.

New buildingmaterials

Around the turn of the centuryseveral strong, fireproof buildingmaterials were used to build silos, aswell as barn foundations and otherfarm outbuildings. These materialsincluded reinforced concrete, concreteblock and tile. The durability of silosbuilt with these materials contrastedsharply with the flimsiness of woodstave construction.

ConcreteConcrete and cement were actu-

ally used as building materials goingback to ancient times, but in the 19thcentury new technology increasedtheir effectiveness. Portland cementwas developed in the early 1800s.This cement was harder than naturallime mortar and was readily availableby the turn of the century. Reinforcedconcrete, consisting of embeddingmetal rods in the concrete forincreased strength, was invented in1850.12

In 1911 the WisconsinAgricultural Experiment Station pub-lished Bulletin 214, Concrete SiloConstruction, which gave detailedinstructions for building a silo of rein-forced concrete. The first step was toconstruct the silo forms, or woodframes that held the wet concrete.When the concrete was set, the formswere removed and set up for the nextlevel. Formulas for the correct concretemixture were given in the bulletin.

For reinforcement, wire was pre-ferred over steel rods. The reinforce-ment was placed about one inch fromthe outside of the forms. Charts pro-vided the amount of horizontal andvertical reinforcement needed for silosof different diameters and heights.Instructions were also provided forbuilding a conical concrete roof. Thistype of silo proved to be very popularin Wisconsin in the early part of the20th century.

Concrete blocks were also used tobuild silos. The blocks could be pur-chased commercially or constructedfrom molds. Reinforcement wasadded between the block layers. Theinside was coated with a cement washto prevent silage acids from corrodingthe mortar. These silos were not con-sidered as strong as the monolithicconcrete construction because theblocks were made with sand, cementand fine gravel rather than thecrushed rock used in the solid con-crete wall.13 Block silos were slightlymore expensive to construct thanpoured concrete,14 and they neverachieved the widespread acceptance ofthe other concrete types.


� 9 �

Homemade concrete block silo. Manitowoc County.

Rock face and plain concreteblocks in a Jefferson County silo.

Concrete stave silos were thethird type of concrete silo introducedat this time. The stave was designedwith interlocking convex and concavesides, which eliminated the need formortar. Concrete stave silos wereencircled with iron rods in the samemanner as wood stave silos. Thesesilos proved to be very popular, andseveral companies developed differentdesigns for them.

Concrete stave silos were alwaysbuilt by commercial companies. Oneof the early Wisconsin companies toconstruct them was the MadisonCement Stave Silo Company, whichbegan in 1914.15 This firm sold 15silos in its first year of business; thenumber rose to 200 in 1918. Thesewere mainly sold in southeasternWisconsin but were also built as farnorth as Barron County.

Tile and brickTile silos were also developed at

this time. At the turn of the century,tile, like reinforced concrete, under-went a period of experimentation as aconstruction material for farm build-ings. Barn foundations, milk housesand even some houses were built oftile. It was extremely durable, withone drawback—although the tilesthemselves were impervious to silageacids, the mortar used in joining thetiles was not, requiring an interiorcoating of cement. There are somesilos built of tile staves, but they arevery rare.


� 10 �

Concrete stave silo, built before 1919 inWalworth County.

Tile silo construction. SHSW Whi (V2)906.

Two monolithic concrete silos. Fond du Lac County.

Some early silos were built ofbrick or had a brick lining. A double-walled brick silo was designed andpatented by a Wisconsin farmer,James P. Christensen, who hadlearned brick masonry techniques inhis native Denmark. The inner andouter brick walls of the Christensensilo were constructed with an “inge-nious arrangement of openings in theheader courses. These chambers areconverted into flues, and used toconduct heat through the wall toprevent freezing.”16 Fireplaces werebuilt on both sides of the door.“Occasional” fires kept the silage fromfreezing throughout the winter. Steelrods were used in the outer layer ofbricks for reinforcement. This designwas illustrated in the 1905 WisconsinAgricultural Experiment Station silobulletin.


� 11 �

Tile stave silo. Jefferson County.

Cream city brick silo in Manitowoc County.

Natco “Imperishable” silos. Oconomowoc. College ofAgriculture Archives.

Location ofthe silo

When silos first made theirappearance, many thought theyshould be placed inside the barn toprevent silage from freezing. However,barn construction plans made noallowances for silos—a silo in a barntook up space designated for otherpurposes.

After silos became morecommon, barn plans were designedthat included a silo located adjacentto the barn and connected to thefeeding area. In University ofWisconsin Department ofAgricultural Engineering barn plans,the silo was located either at the gableend or along the side of the barn. Theside location allowed a driveway intothe barn. It also allowed for barnexpansion, which was usually accom-plished by an extension on the gableend. Silos were located in the centerof round barns, where they providedroof support. Although convenient forfeeding out, the silo in a round barnwas considered difficult to fill.17

By 1910, silo form and construc-tion in Wisconsin had become fairlyuniform. Round silos were the norm.These were built outside the barnwith a connecting feeding room.Diameter and height were standard-ized: a silo should be about two andone-half to three times taller than itsdiameter. The average diameter wasabout twelve or fourteen feet. Thiswas the optimum size for one man toefficiently fork down the amount ofsilage needed daily. The resultantheight for this diameter was 35 to 40feet—usually level with the barn roof.In the upper Midwest silo roofs werecommonly used. Silo depth varied,but four to six feet below the feedingfloor was preferred.18


� 12 �

Wisconsin Agricultural Engineering Departmentbarn plans illustrating silo location.

Wisconsin Agricultural Engineering Department barn plansillustrating silo location.

The patriotic siloIn 1916 the Wisconsin

Department of Agriculture estimatedthe number of silos in the state at60,000. Of these, more than half(33,000) were wood. The rest wereconcrete (18,000), tile (5,000), andbrick (3,500). These were not distrib-uted evenly across the state.Southeastern counties that had beeninvolved in dairying for a long timehad a greater concentration of woodsilos. In areas where dairying wasnewer, concrete silos were morenumerous.19

During World War I, the StateCouncil of Defense, which was incharge of organizing communityefforts to support the war, initiated acampaign to convince farmers to buildsilos as part of a larger food raisingand conservation effort. Building a silowas equated with patriotism. Thiscampaign was a success; in 1917 over10,000 silos were built in Wisconsin—more than in any previous year.20 In1920 Wisconsin became the leader inthe number of silos in the country. By1924, Wisconsin boasted more than100,000 silos.21 For the next twodecades silo form and constructionmaterials remained consistent, withconcrete and wood being the mostpopular.

Thirty years later, in 1946, 57percent of Wisconsin’s silos were con-crete. Two thirds of these were mono-lithic concrete and one third concretestave. Wood stave silos had declinedproportionally, to only 27 percent ofthe total. Concrete block and tile silosaccounted for six percent each.22

Choosing the right silo

How did a farmer choose a silo?For some, price was the most impor-tant factor; others chose to buildmore costly silos that lasted longer. In1908, a model barn was built at theWisconsin State Fair. Two silosadjoined the barn, one of brick andone wood stave. Many farmers visitedthis exhibit. Later a tile and mono-lithic concrete silo were added. Inaddition to this, wood stave silo com-panies set up demonstration silos onthe fairgrounds. Companies alsoadvertised in newspapers and farmjournals and sent agents to talk tofarmers.

Wood stave silo companies pro-moted either the quality of their stavesor some other unique feature, such asthe “Self Adjusting, Automatic Take-upHoop,” which never needed manualadjusting.23 The Wood Tire SiloCompany of Sheboygan, in businessfrom 1914 to 1936, developed adouble-walled wood stave silo. The“wood tire” was a four-inch ring towhich inner and outer layers of staveswere attached, forming an insulating airspace and making the silo stronger. Thedouble wall eliminated the need formetal hoops. The inner wall was madeof redwood staves, which were not sup-posed to swell or shrink; the outer wasconstructed of pine or fir. There was a20-year guarantee against decay and thecompany stated that the silo would not“rack, sag, twist or collapse.”24


� 13 �

World War I poster promoting silo construction.SHSW Lot 5-1183.

“The Silo Beautiful”Some companies promoted their

silos’ attractiveness. The Christensenbrick silos were advertised as “hand-some” and “an ornament to any set offarm buildings.”25 The PrestonLansing Company advertised its tilesilo as “The Silo Beautiful.” Concretesilos of all kinds were advertised asdurable and safe from frost, fire andvermin. Photographs of silos stillstanding after fire had destroyed thebarn were used to promote their per-manence, and insurance companiescharged low rates for concrete silosbecause of their durability.26

Wisconsin Experiment Stationpersonnel advocated the use of certaintypes of silos. In the 1890s, theyfought a losing battle against thewood stave silo, wanting farmers tobuild a more permanent structure. Inthe early decades of the 20th centurythe monolithic concrete silo wasextensively promoted by both theStation and Farmers’ Institutes. Siloforms could be rented from bothgroups. Miniature forms were avail-able at the meetings to illustrate howthey worked. Talks at the Institutemeetings covered the advantages.Although concrete silos were origi-nally meant to be built by farmers,around 1915 the Experiment Stationdeclared that silos should be built byexperts with farmers helping asneeded. This development signaledthe end of the homemade silo era.

InnovationsThe Harvestore silo

Two major technological innova-tions occurred in the 1940s. The firstof these began when the A. O. SmithCompany of Milwaukee, an industrialequipment manufacturing firm, devel-oped a process that fused glass tosteel. Originally developed to buildstorage tanks for the brewing industry,the conversion of this technology toagricultural use began when a farmercommented to the president of thecompany, “If you were to set one ofthose glass-lined tanks up on end itwould make a good silo.”27

After discussing conventional siloproblems with officials at theUniversity of Wisconsin College ofAgriculture, a new type of silo, theHarvestore, was developed. It was dis-played at the Wisconsin State Fair in1948, just as silos of the early 20thcentury had been. The glass lining ofthe Harvestore successfully resistedsilage acids. Silage did not freeze andthere was less spoilage than with othertypes of silos. It could be filled at thetop at the same time it was beingunloaded at the bottom—an advan-tage over traditional silos. The cobaltblue color was also quite striking inthe farm landscape. Since they weremore expensive than concrete silos,Harvestore silos often indicated pros-perous dairy areas.


� 14 �

Filling the silo in 1930. Manitowoc County Historical Society.

Automatic silo unloaderThe second innovation, the auto-

matic silo unloader, allowed farmers tounload silage without having to fork itdown from the top of the silo, makingthe feeding process easier and moreefficient. The automatic unloader alsofreed the silo from the size limitationsimposed upon it by manual feedingout. The diameter and height of silosgradually increased to an average of20' x 60' in the 1960s.

Silage bagsThe most recent development in

silo technology is the silage bag, madeof heavy-duty plastic. These resemblelong white garbage bags laid out onthe ground. Silage is blown in and thebags are sealed by weighting down theends with earth. These inexpensivesilage bags work well unless they aredamaged. They are often placed in thepasture for convenient feeding wherethey make a noticeable impact on thelandscape.

The legacy of silos

In the past 50 years the numberof farms in Wisconsin has declined.Cities have encroached on farmland,and farmsteads once on the outskirtsof town are now surrounded byhousing developments. As farms grewlarger, farmsteads in the country wereabandoned. While many of thewooden buildings have been razed orhave fallen down, many silos remain.

Stone silos are particularly char-acteristic of Wisconsin. Square andround, made of quarry stone andfieldstone, they were constructedusing all the methods described byRichard Perrin. It is not known howmany were built and how many stillexist. Stone silos were never built inlarge numbers; they were not evencounted as a distinctive type on the1916 silo census. But in some areas ofthe state, clusters of stone silossurvive. They are excellent examplesof vernacular building techniques,rooted in the earth, and one of thelast examples of the fieldstone build-ing traditions of Wisconsin.


� 15 �

Asbestos silo in Jefferson County. Asbestoswas used as silo construction materialduring World War II.

Double tile silos with barn skeleton. La Crosse County.

The monolithic concrete silo isalso representative of Wisconsin. Theuse of this structure was promoted bythe Wisconsin AgriculturalExperiment Station and theWisconsin Farmers’ Institutes. Formsfor its construction, made byWisconsin companies and used bylocal builders, were rented, built orbought. Some of these concrete silosare fairly well-preserved, with theiroriginal roofs and chutes intact. Theystand as sentinels of a former prosper-ity—and some are still in use. Onefarmer stated that his was difficult tofill but still made good silage.

Before silos became standardizedin the ‘40s and ‘50s, stone and con-crete silos were hallmarks of theWisconsin countryside. As such theirimportance should be recognized.

Silos, as much as any other farmbuilding, have made a significantimpact on the rural landscape ofWisconsin. They are a symbol of thestate’s prosperous dairy industry andthe embodiment of the WisconsinIdea—university people and farmersworking together, applying new tech-nology to a practical structure that allfarmers could use.

Much of Wisconsin’s early 20thcentury rural landscape is still visibletoday—its style and charm enhancedby the silo’s distinctive silhouette. It isimportant to recognize silos as morethan adjuncts to the barn. Theyshould be studied for insight theyreveal into American technologicalprogress and preserved for their rolein the history and development of theWisconsin dairy industry.


� 16 �

Stone silo. Racine County.

Monolithic concrete silo construction forms. WisconsinAgricultural Engineering Department.

Notes1 Tacitus Germania, p. 99; Quintus

Curtius Historiarum AlexandriMagni Macedonis, p. 157.

2 Fish, Norman, “The History of theSilo in Wisconsin,” WisconsinMagazine of History, December1924, pp. 161–162.

3 Gilbert, L. P., “Ensilage,” EighthAnnual Report of the WisconsinDairymen’s Association, p. 117.

4 “Silo,” Wisconsin Free Press, n.p.5 Henry, W., “The Ensilage of

Fodders,” Experiments in AmberCane and the Ensilage of Fodders atthe Experimental Farm, p. 60.

6 Henry, W., “Silos and Silage I,”Breeders’ Gazette 13, p. 515.

7 Gould, John, “Has the Silo ProvedIts Claims?” Wisconsin Farmers’Institutes Sessions of 1886–7, p. 181; Lampard, Eric, The Rise ofthe Dairy Industry in Wisconsin: AStudy in Agricultural Change1820–1920, p. 159.

8 King, F. H., The Construction ofSilos, Bulletin 28.

9 King, F. H., “The Round Silo BuiltWith Hoops and Staves,” Hoard’sDairyman 25, p. 221.

10 Perrin, Richard W. E., HistoricWisconsin Buildings, p. 69.

11 Knapp, G. N., Silo Construction,Bulletin 125, p. 59.

12 Nashert, America’s Builders, p. 116.13 Knapp, G. N., Silo Construction,

Bulletin 125, p. 77.

14 Universal Portland, Concrete Silos,p. 30.

15 “Madison Silo Concern GrowingEnterprise,” Community Business 3,pp.1–2.

16 Knapp, G. N., Bulletin 125, p. 56.17 Zeasman, Humphrey and

Schlindler, Dairy Barns, p. 16.18 White, Frank M., Silos: Questions

and Answers, Wisconsin AgriculturalExtension Service, Circular 87, p. 3.

19 Biennial Report of the WisconsinDepartment of Agriculture for 1915,1916.

20 Russell and Hatch, ServingWisconsin Farmers in Wartime, p. 6.

21 Packard, et al., Silos and Silage, p. 43.

22 Packard, pp. 22–23.23 International Silo Company, The

Story of the Silo, p.16.24 Sheboygan County Atlas, n.p.25 Wisconsin Country Magazine, n.p.26 Gaylord and Wilson, “Concrete

Silos,” p. 7.27 Suter, The Courage to Change, p. 46.


� 17 �

BibliographyAdams, L. H. April 1889. Notes on

Ensilage. University of WisconsinAgricultural Experiment StationBulletin No. 19. Madison:Democrat Printing Company,State Printers.

Agricultural Engineering Department.April 1918. Farm Building Plans.Wisconsin Agricultural ExtensionService Circular 104. Madison:Extension Service of the Collegeof Agriculture, University ofWisconsin.

Columella, Lucius Junius Moderatus.1960. Res Rustica, translated byHarrison Boyd Ash. Cambridge,Massachusetts: HarvardUniversity Press.

Commissioner of Agriculture. 1876.“French Mode of CuringForage.” Report of theCommissioner of Agriculture forthe year 1875. Washington, D. C.: Government PrintingOffice.

Community Business. 16 December1918. “Madison Silo ConcernGrowing Enterprise.” CommunityBusiness 3:1-2.

Fish, N. S. December 1924. “TheHistory of the Silo inWisconsin.” Wisconsin Magazineof History 8:160-170.

Fish, N. S. “Silo History and Records,College of Agriculture,Agriculture Engineering Series9/12/4.” Steenbock Library,University of Wisconsin–Madison.

Gaylord, C. W. and Percy H. Wilson.March–April 1909. “ConcreteSilos.” The Concrete Review 3:1-66.

Gilbert, L. P. 1880. “Ensilage.” EighthAnnual Report of the WisconsinDairymen’s Association. Madison:David Atwood, State Printer.

Goffart, Auguste. 1879.The Ensilageof Maize, and Other Green FodderCrops, translated by J. B. Brown.New York: New York PloughCompany.

Gould, John. 1887. “Has the SiloProved Its Claims?” WisconsinFarmers’ Institutes Sessions of1886-7. Milwaukee: Cramer,Aikens & Cramer, Printers.

Henry, William A. 1883.“Experiments with Ensilage.”Experiments in Amber Cane andthe Ensilage of Fodders at theExperimental Farm of theUniversity of Wisconsin, SecondAnnual Report. Madison:Democrat Printing Company,State Printers.

Henry, William A. 1882. “The Silo.”Experiments in Amber Cane andthe Ensilage of Fodders at theExperimental Farm, Madison,Wisconsin, 1881. Madison:David Atwood, State Printer.

Henry, William A. 23 May 1888.“Silos and Silage I.” Breeder’sGazette 13:515-516.

International Silo Company. c. 1910.“The story of the silo: in which isset forth a few facts of a helpfuland bank account swellingnature, for the live and up-to-date farmer, dairyman or stockraiser.” Linesville, Pennsylvania:International Silo Company.

King, F. H. July 1891. TheConstruction of Silos. Universityof Wisconsin AgriculturalExperiment Station Bulletin No.28. Madison, Wisconsin:Democrat Printing Company,State Printers.

King, F. H. 1892. “The Constructionand Filling of Silos.” EighthAnnual Report of theAgricultural Experiment Stationof the University of Wisconsinfor the Year Ending June 30,1891. Madison: DemocratPrinting Company, State Printers.

King, F. H. May 1897. TheConstruction of Silos and theMaking and Handling of Sileage.University of WisconsinAgricultural Experiment StationBulletin 59. Madison: DemocratPrinting Company, State Printers.

King, F. H. “F. H. King Material,University of Wisconsin Collegeof Agriculture Series 9/22/3.”Steenbock Library, University ofWisconsin–Madison.

King, F. H. 25 May 1894. “TheRound Silo Built With Hoopsand Staves.” Hoard’s Dairyman25:221.

King, F. H. May 1900. Sileage, andthe Construction of Modern Silos.University of WisconsinAgricultural Experiment StationBulletin 83. Madison: DemocratPrinting Co., State Printer.

Knapp, G. N. April 1905. SiloConstruction. University ofWisconsin AgriculturalExperiment Station Bulletin 125.Madison, Wisconsin: Universityof Wisconsin AgriculturalExperiment Station.

Lampard, Eric E. 1963. The Rise ofthe Dairy Industry in Wisconsin:A Study in Agricultural Change1820–1920. Madison: StateHistorical Society of Wisconsin.

Linse, Charles. 1909. “Twenty-EightYears of Silo Experience.”Wisconsin Farmers’ InstitutesHandbook of Agriculture.Madison: Democrat PrintingCompany.

Nashert, Walter. 1975. America’sBuilders. Malibu, California:Pepperdine University Press.

Nesbit, Don, compiler. 1882. Silosand Ensilage: A Record of PracticalTests in Several States and Canada.Department of AgricultureSpecial Reports No. 48.Washington, D. C.: GovernmentPrinting Office.


� 18 �

Ocock, C. A. and F. M. White. July1911. Concrete Silo Construction.University of WisconsinAgricultural Experiment StationBulletin 214. Madison:University of WisconsinAgricultural Experiment Station.

Packard, Ross L., C. D. Caparoonand Arthur D. Richardson.January 1956. Wisconsin Silos andSilage. Wisconsin StateDepartment of AgricultureSpecial Bulletin No. 58.

Perrin, Richard W. E. HistoricWisconsin Buildings: A Survey ofPioneer Architecture 1835-1870.Publications in History No. 4.Milwaukee, Wisconsin:Milwaukee Public Museum.

Pliny. 1950. Naturalis Historia, trans-lated by H. Rackham.Cambridge, Massachusetts:Harvard University Press.

Quintus Curtius. 1956. HistoriarumAlexandri Magni Macedonis,English version translated byJohn C. Rolfe, Cambridge,Massachusetts: HarvardUniversity Press.

Russell, H. L. and K. L. Hatch. July1918. Serving Wisconsin Farmersin Wartime. Bulletin 294.Madison: Extension Service ofthe College of Agriculture,University of Wisconsin.

Sheboygan County Atlas, 1920.

Suter, Robert. 1964. The Courage toChange. Danville, Illinois:Interstate Printers and Publishers.

Tacitus, Cornelius. 1893.Germania,translated by Alfred John Churchand William Jackson Brodribb.London: Macmillan and Co.

Universal Portland Cement Company.1911, second edition. ConcreteSilos. Chicago: Universal PortlandCement Company.

Varro, Marcus Terrentius. 1934. ReumRusticarum, English translationby William Davis Hooper,revised by Harrison Boyd Ash,Cambridge, Massachusetts:Harvard University Press.

White, Frank M. July 1917. Silos:Questions and Answers. WisconsinAgricultural Extension ServiceCircular 87. Madison: ExtensionService of the College ofAgriculture, University ofWisconsin.

Wisconsin Department ofAgriculture. 1916. BiennialReport of the WisconsinDepartment of Agriculture for theYears 1915 and 1916. Madison:State of Wisconsin.

Wisconsin Country Magazine. March1912. “The Old ReliableChristensen Silo.” WisconsinCountry Magazine, n. p.

Wisconsin Free Press. 12 February1881. “Silo.” Wisconsin Free Press(Oconomowoc),

Zeasman, O. R., G. C. Humphreyand L. M. Schlinder. January1921. Dairy Barns. AgriculturalExperiment Station of theUniversity of Wisconsin Bulletin325. Madison: University ofWisconsin.


� 19 �


Author: Peggy Lee Beedle is a landscape historian with the Louis Berger Group, Inc.

Geoffrey Gyrisco of the State Historical Society and Charles Law of the University of Wisconsin-Extension Local GovernmentCenter served as project managers. Larry Reed of Wisconsin’s Rural Preservation Advisory Council provided editorial assistance.

This publication is the fourth in a series of publications designed to enhance the appreciation of Wisconsin’s culturally significantbarns and to assist in their preservation.

Issued in furtherance of Cooperative Extension work, Acts of May 8 and June 30, 1914, in cooperation with the U.S. Department ofAgriculture, University of Wisconsin–Extension, Cooperative Extension. University of Wisconsin–Extension provides equal opportu-nities in employment and programming, including Title IX and ADA requirements. If you need this information in an alternativeformat, contact the Office of Equal Opportunity and Diversity Programs or call Extension Publishing at (608)262-2655.

Funding for this publication was provided by the State Historical Society of Wisconsin.

© 2001 by the State Historical Society of Wisconsin and the Board of Regents of the University of Wisconsin System. Send inquiriesabout copyright permission to: Director, Cooperative Extension Publishing, 201 Hiram Smith Hall, 1545 Observatory Dr.,Madison, WI 53706.

You can obtain copies of this publication from your Wisconsin county Extension office or from Cooperative Extension Publications,45 N. Charter St., Madison, WI 53713, 608-262-3346. Outside Madison, call our toll free number: 1-877-WIS-PUBS (947-7827).Before publicizing, please check on this publication’s availability.

To see more Cooperative Extension publications, visit our web site: www.uwex.edu/ces/pubs/

Giving Old Barns New LifeSilos: An Agricultural Success Story (G3660-4) I-4-2001-3M-300

Stone silo built circa 1900. Manitowac County.

silos: an agricultural success story - the learning store · pdf filesilos: an agricultural...

Documents