_Effects of guano upon the crop to which it is applied._--Edward
Stabler, in the American Farmer, thus speaks of an experiment he made in
1845, soon after the introduction of guano to any extent into this
country.
"In a field of some 10 acres, one acre was selected near the middle, and
extending through the field, so as to embrace any difference of soil,
should there be any. On this acre 200 lbs. of Peruvian guano, at a cost
of about $5 was sown with the wheat. Adjoining the guano on one side,
was manure from the barn yard, at the rate of 25 cart loads to the acre;
and on the opposite side (separated by an open drain the whole
distance;) ground bones were applied on the balance of the field, at a
cost of $6 to the acre; the field equally limed two years preceding.
There was no material difference in the time or manner of seeding;
except that the manure was lightly cross-ploughed in, and the guano and
bones harrowed in with the wheat.
"The yield on the guanoed acre was 35 bushels; the adjoining acre with
bone, as near as could be estimated by dozens, and compared with the
guano, was about 27 bushels; and the manured, about 24 bushels. The
season was unusually dry; and the manured portion suffered more from
this cause than either of the others; the land being considerably more
elevated, and a south exposure."
In our opinion Mr. S. is in error in regard to the manured land
suffering most from drouth. In our experience we have always found the
best effects from Guano, in wet seasons, or upon irrigated land. He says
also, "This is one of the most active of all manures; and although he
thinks the effect evanescent, it might aid materially in renovating worn
out lands." Since that time a great many other Maryland farmers have,
undoubtedly come to the same conclusion, for notwithstanding the price,
which he thinks too high to justify its extensive use, has not been
materially reduced, there is more guano sold in Baltimore than any, or
perhaps all the ports in the United States; and the benefits derived
from its use upon the worn out lands of Maryland, have been of the most
satisfactory character.
In speaking of the after crop of grass upon the land above mentioned, he
says:
"The field has since been mowed three times; the first crop of grass was
evidently in favor of the boned part; the second, and third, were fully
two to one over the guano, and also yielding much heavier crops of
clover seed. On a part of one land, 18 bushels to the acre of the finest
of the bone were used; on this, the wheat was as heavy as on the
guanoed, and the grass generally lodges before harvest, as it also does
on much of the adjoining land with 12 bushels of bone."
This is all right; it should never be mixed with lime, and it should be
plowed in. In his experiments, the lime in the soil had the effect to
disengage the ammonia, and not being sufficiently buried or mixed up
with the earth to prevent its escape during a very dry season, much of
its value went afloat in the atmosphere. If he had given a bushel of
plaster as a top dressing, there is no doubt the effect upon the grass
crop would have been entirely different. The action of guano is very
variable upon different soils, as well as upon the same kinds of soil in
different seasons, or from the different manner of applying it; but
there is one thing in its favor, it seldom fails to pay for itself, as
Mr. Newton remarks, in the first crop; and if properly applied, that is,
plowed in with wheat, upon poor, sandy, "worn out land," and followed by
clover, and that dressed with plaster, it will pay far better in the
succeeding years than the first. This has been fully proved in a hundred
cases, since Mr. Stabler tried his experiments; for two years after, in
writing upon the same subject, he says "Harrowing in the guano with the
wheat will generally produce a better crop; but its fertilizing
properties are more evanescent. I prefer plowing it in for all field
crops; and when attainable, would always use it in conjunction with
ground bones, for the benefit of succeeding grass crops. This is
pre-supposing that you determine to improve more land than the resources
of the farm will accomplish, and are willing to do it by the aid of
foreign manures; and being 'far removed from lime.' If the object is to
realize the most in a single crop, and to obtain the quickest return for
the outlay, use the guano alone, and harrow it in with the wheat; but
the land, according to my experience, will derive but little benefit
from the application, unless the amount is large. By plowing it in,
particularly if mixed with one third its bulk of plaster, the effect is
decidedly more durable; nor is it then necessary that the seeding should
so immediately follow its application. If, however, the object is to
improve the land at the same time; and surely it should be a primary
object with every tiller of the soil--and lime, from your location, or
the price, is unattainable, I would advise about half the amount
determined on, to be expended for ground bones. This may be harrowed in
with the wheat."
It is surprising what an effect a few bushels of ground bones to the
acre will produce; reference is made to a single experiment, and not an
isolated one either. Some six years since, we applied ten to twelve
bushels of coarsely ground bones to the acre, on about half of a twelve
acre field; on two lands adjoining, was guano, at the rate of 200 pounds
to the acre, (the cost of each about the same,) and extending nearly
through the field; both were applied in the spring, on the oat crop--and
which was decidedly better, by the eye, on the two lands with guano. In
the fall, the field was sown with wheat, manuring heavily from the barn
yard, adjoining the guano, but not spread on the two lands, or on the
boned portion of the field.
There was but little difference perceived in the wheat, except from the
manure, which was the best--the field having been limed for the
preceding corn crop, 80 bushels to the acre. The experiment was made to
test the comparative durability of the three kinds of manure; the guano,
ground bones, and manure from the barn yard; and the ultimate profit to
be derived from each, in a full rotation. After the first crop of grass,
and perhaps the second, which was in favor of the manured portion, the
succeeding crops of hay and clover seed, have been decidedly better on
the boned part of the field. At the present time, and also the past
season, this being the fourth year in grass, the guanoed lands present
about the same appearance, that does a small adjoining space, purposely
left without manure of any kind, lime excepted. The manured part affords
good pasture, but is quite inferior to the boned, which would give a
fair crop of hay, and probably three times as much grass as the two
lands with guano. It is believed that the increased crop of clover seed
on the boned, over the guanoed portion, paid for the former; and that
the two crops of clover since taken from the field, have paid, or nearly
so, for the lime or other manures applied.
This evidence corresponds with the opinion of Professor Mapes; that is,
that the value of an application of guano is greatly enhanced by the
addition of phosphate of lime, in some shape; the guano acting
immediately and producing a direct profit, while the slow action, for
which some farmers cannot wait, keeps up the fertility for years, or
until the owner may find time to profit by another application of guano.
We quote again a few more of the very sensible remarks of friend
Stabler. "I am an advocate for the liberal use of all kinds of manure,
guano included, if the price will justify it. A farmer had better buy
manure than to buy grain, if compelled to do either; for we cannot
expect much from nothing, or reasonably calculate upon improving very
poor land without manure of some description, unless plaster will act
with effect; nor is this generally the case without the land possesses
naturally, some particular source of fertility, not wholly exhausted by
bad or improvident tillage.
"It is probable those will be disappointed who expect to do everything
with guano--make fine crops and improve the land, while they take
everything off, and dispense almost, if not entirely, with the more
permanent manures, all equally within their reach. True, we may exist
for a time, only half fed and half clothed; but it is just as reasonable
to expect to improve under such a regimen, as to calculate upon
continued, not to say increased fertility of the soil, without an ample
supply, of the right kind of manure.
"With all its acknowledged advantages, it may be questioned whether there
is not one drawback to the introduction of guano. It is used with less
profit in direct connexion with lime, than with most kinds of manure;
and its facility of application, and quick return, has induced many to
give up the lime entirely, if not also to some extent, to neglect the
resources of the farm. Others again, in improving poor land, advise the
guano first, and the lime afterwards. This may do very well; but is
often better in theory than in practice, for the lime is omitted
altogether, and perhaps at some risk of loss, in both time and money, as
regards permanent improvement. To use a figure of speech--the prudent
architect will first secure a solid foundation to build upon, and with
materials of known durability; this accomplished, he need have no fears
of the stability of the structure, and may, at pleasure add thereto,
either for ornament or utility."
"That thin lands may be brought to a very productive state, by the
liberal and repeated applications of guano, there is no doubt; but at
what cost and how durable the improvements might be, I am not prepared
to say. In two instances, from 700 to 800 lbs. were applied at one time
to an acre; but in neither did the results correspond with the expense,
or induce a repetition of the experiment. My own experience so far, is
in favor of more limited applications, say 100 to 200 lbs. to the acre,
(taking in consideration the price of both grain and guano,) and also
used in connection with other manures, which is found to be the most
profitable, and probably more durable in its effect; in two experiments,
with from 50 to 150 lbs. of guano to the acre applied three years since
with barnyard manure, for wheat, the effect on the grass crop at this
time, is quite marked; applied in this way, it hastens maturity--thus,
in a degree, guarding against rust--renders the grain more perfect, and
is believed to be one of the most profitable modes of using guano."
Nothing could be more sensible than the advice of this gentleman, not to
rely upon guano alone. To waste or neglect stable and home made manures,
or throw away bones or other valuable fertilizers, because we could buy
guano, would be as insensible as it would for a man to throw away a
handful of bank bills, because he happened to have just then a pocket
full of gold and silver coin.
We never have, nor shall we recommend guano to the exclusion of
everything else; but we do recommend every farmer in America, to whom an
additional quantity of manure would be an object, to buy guano; because
he will be almost sure to derive a certain and immediate profit from the
investment. It will make poor lands rich, and rich lands richer.