THE COST OF DRAINAGE.
Draining no more expensive than Fencing.--Engineering.--Guessing
not accurate enough.--Slight Fall sufficient.--Instances.--Two
Inches to One Thousand Feet.--Cost of Excavation and
Filling.--Narrow Tools required.--Tables of Cubic contents of
Drains.--Cost of Drains on our own Farm.--Cost of Tiles.--Weight
and Freight of Tiles.--Cost of Outlets.--Cost of Collars.--Smaller
Tiles used with Collars.--Number of Tiles to the Acre, with
Tables.--Length of Tiles varies.--Number of Rods to the Acre at
different Distances.--Final Estimate of Cost.--Comparative Cost of
Tile-Drains and Stone-Drains.
A prudent man, intending to execute a work, whether it be "to build a
tower," or drain a field, "sitteth down first and counteth the cost,
whether he hath sufficient to finish it." There is good sense and
discretion in the inquisitiveness which suggests so often the inquiry,
"How much does it cost to drain an acre?" or, "How much does it cost a
rod to lay drains?" These questions cannot be answered so briefly as
they are asked; yet much information can be given, which will aid one
who will investigate the subject.
The process of drainage is expensive, as compared with the price of land
in our new settlements; but its cost will not alarm those who have been
accustomed to see the improvements made in New England upon well
cultivated farms. Compared with the labor and cost of building and
maintaining FENCES upon the highways, and in the subdivisions of lots,
common in the Eastern States, the drainage of land is a small matter.
We see in many places long stretches of faced walls, on the line of our
roads near towns and villages, which cost from two to five dollars per
rod. Our common "stone walls" in these States cost about one dollar per
rod to build originally; and almost any kind of wooden fence costs as
much. Upon fences, there is occasion for annual repairs, while drains
properly laid, are permanent.
These suggestions are thrown out, that farmers may not be alarmed
without cause, at the high cash estimates of the cost of drainage
operations. Money comes slowly to farmers, and a cash estimate looks
larger to them than an estimate in labor. The cost of fencing seems no
great burden; though, estimated in cash, it would seem, as in fact it
is, a severe charge.
Drainage can be performed principally by the same kind of labor as
fencing, the cost of the tiles being a small item in the whole expense.
The estimates of labor will be made at one dollar per day, in
investigating this matter.
This would be the fair cash value of work by the day, perhaps; but it is
far more than farmers, who have work in hand on their own farms, which
may be executed in the leisure season after haying, and even into the
Winter, when convenient, will really expend for such labor. Few farm
operations would pay expenses, if every hour of superintendence, and
every hour of labor by man and boy and beast, were set down at this high
rate.
The cost of the tiles will, ordinarily, be a cash item, and the labor
may be performed like that of planting, hoeing, haying, and harvesting,
by such "help" hired by the mouth or day, or rendered by the family, as
may be found convenient.
The cost of drainage may be considered conveniently, to borrow a
clerical phrase, "under the following heads."
1. _Laying out, or Engineering._--In arranging our Spring's work, we
devote time and attention to laying it out, though this hardly forms an
item in the expense of the crop. Most farmers may think themselves
competent to lay out their drainage-works, without paying for the
scientific skill of an engineer, or even of a surveyor.
It is believed, however, that generally, it will be found true economy,
to procure the aid of an experienced engineer, if convenient, to lay out
the work at the outset. Certainly, in most cases, some skill in the use
of levelling instruments, at least, is absolutely essential to
systematic work. No man, however experienced, can, by the eye, form any
safe opinion of the fall of a given tract of land. Fields which appear
perfectly level to the eye, will be found frequently to give fall enough
for the deepest drainage. The writer recently had occasion to note this
fact on his own land.
A low wet spot had many times been looked at, as a place which should be
drained, both to improve its soil, and the appearance of the land about
it; but to the eye, it seemed doubtful whether it was not about as low
as the stream some forty rods off, into which it must be drained. Upon
testing the matter carefully with levelling instruments, it was found
that from the lowest spot in this little swamp, there was a fall of
seven and a half feet to the river, at its ordinary height! Again, there
are cases where it will be found upon accurate surveys, that the fall is
very slight, so that great care will be requisite, to lay the drains in
such a way that the descent may be continuous and uniform.
Without competent skill in laying out the work, land-owners will be
liable not only to errors in the fall of the drains, but to very
expensive mistakes in the location of them. A very few rods of drains,
more than are necessary, would cost more than any charge of a competent
person for laying them out properly.
Again, experience gives great facility in judging of the underground
flow of water, of the permeability of soil, of the probability of
finding ledges or other rock formation, and many other particulars which
might not suggest themselves to a novice in the business.
The laying out of drains is important, not only with reference to the
work in hand, but to additional work to be executed in future on
adjoining land, so that the whole may be eventually brought into one
cheap and efficient system with the smallest effective number of drains,
both minors and mains, and the fewest outlets possible; with such wells,
or other facilities for inspection, as may be necessary.
In the English tables of the cost of drainage by the Drainage Companies,
an estimate of $1.25 per acre is usually put down for "superintendence,"
which includes the engineering and the supervision of the whole process
of opening, laying and filling, securing outfalls, and every other
process till the work is completed. The general estimate of the cost of
drainage is about $25.00 per acre, and this item of $1.25 is but a small
per centage on that amount. The point has been dwelt upon here, more for
the purpose of impressing upon land-owners, the importance of employing
competent skill in the laying out of their drainage works, than because
the expense thus incurred, forms any considerable item of the cost of
the whole work.
2. _Excavation and Filling._ The principal expense of drainage is
incurred in the excavation of the ditch, whether it be for tiles or for
stones. The labor of excavation depends much upon the nature of the soil
to be moved.
"Draining on a sound clay," says the writer of a prize essay,
"free from stones, may be executed at a cheaper rate per rod, in
length, than on almost any other kind of soil, as, from the
firmness of the clay, the work may be done with narrow spades, and
but a small quantity of soil requires to be removed. The draining
of wet sands or grounds, or clays in which veins of sand abound, is
more expensive than on sound clays, because a broader spade has to
be used, and consequently a larger amount of soil removed; and
draining stony or rocky soils is still more expensive, because the
pick has to be used. This adds considerably to the expense."
Great stress is laid, by all experienced persons, upon using narrow
spades, and opening ditches as narrow as possible.
It is somewhat more convenient for unskillful laborers to work in a wide
ditch than in a narrow one, and although the laborers frequently protest
that they cannot work so rapidly in narrow ditches, yet it is found
that, in contract work, by the rod, they usually open the ditches very
narrow.
Indeed, it will be found that, generally, the cost of excavation bears a
pretty constant proportion to the number of cubic feet of earth thrown
out.
It will surprise those unaccustomed to these estimates, to observe how
rapidly the quantity excavated, increases with the increased width of
the ditch.
To enable the reader accurately to compute the measurement of drains of
any dimensions likely to be adopted, a table and explanations, found in
the Report of the Board of Health, already quoted, are given below. The
dimensions, or contents of any drain, are found by multiplying together
the length, depth, and _mean_ width of the drain.
"Thus, if a drain is 300 yards long, and the cutting 3 feet deep,
20 inches wide at the top, and 4 inches wide at the bottom, the
mean width would be 12 inches (or the half of the sum of 20 and 4),
and if we multiply 300, the length, by 1, the depth in yards, and
by 1/3, the mean width in yards, and the product would be 100 cubic
yards. The following table will serve to facilitate such
calculations.
_Table showing the number of Cubic Yards of Earth in each Rod (5-1/2
Yards in length), in Drains or Ditches of various Dimensions._
=================================================
DEPTH. | MEAN WIDTH.
-------+------+------+------+------+------+------
Inches.|7 In. |8 In. |9 In. |10 In.|11 In.|12 In.
-------+------+------+------+------+------+------
30 |0.89 |1.02 |1.146 |1.27 |1.40 |1.53
33 |0.98 |1.12 |1.26 |1.40 |1.54 |1.68
36 |1.07 |1.22 |1.375 |1.53 |1.68 |1.83
39 |1.16 |1.324 |1.49 |1.655 |1.82 |1.986
42 |1.25 |1.426 |1.604 |1.78 |1.96 |2.14
45 |1.34 |1.53 |1.72 |1.91 |2.10 |2.29
48 |1.426 |1.63 |1.833 |2.04 |2.24 |2.444
51 |1.515 |1.73 |1.95 |2.164 |2.38 |2.60
54 |1.604 |1.83 |2.06 |2.29 |2.52 |2.75
57 |1.69 |1.935 |2.18 |2.42 |2.66 |2.90
60 |1.78 |2.036 |2.29 |2.546 |2.80 |3.056
=================================================
=================================================
DEPTH. | MEAN WIDTH.
-------+------+------+------+------+------+------
Inches.|13 In.|14 In.|15 In.|16 In.|17 In.|18 In.
-------+------+------+------+------+------+------
30 |1.655 |1.78 |1.91 |2.04 |2.164 |2.29
33 |1.82 |1.96 |2.10 |2.24 |2.38 |2.52
36 |1.986 |2.14 |2.29 |2.244 |2.60 |2.75
39 |2.15 |2.32 |2.48 |2.65 |2.81 |2.98
42 |2.32 |2.495 |2.674 |2.85 |3.03 |3.21
45 |2.48 |2.67 |2.865 |3.055 |3.246 |3.438
48 |2.65 |2.85 |3.056 |3.26 |3.46 |3.667
51 |2.81 |3.03 |3.25 |3.46 |3.68 |3.896
54 |2.98 |3.20 |3.44 |3.666 |3.895 |4.125
57 |3.14 |3.38 |3.63 |3.87 |4.11 |4.354
60 |3.31 |3.564 |3.82 |4.074 |4.33 |4.584
=================================================
"Along the top of the table is placed the mean widths in inches,
and on the left-hand side the depths of the drains, extending from
30 inches to 5 feet. The numbers in the body of the table express
cubic yards, and decimals of a yard. In making use of the table, it
is necessary first to find the mean width of the drain, from the
widths at the top and bottom. Thus, if a drain 3 feet deep were 16
inches wide at the top, and 4 inches at the bottom, the mean width
would be half of 16 added to 4, or 10; then, by looking in the
table for the column under 10 (width), and opposite 36 (inches of
depth), we find the number of cubic yards in each rod of such a
drain to be 1.53, or somewhat more than one and a half. If we
compare this with another drain 20 inches wide at the top, 4 inches
at the bottom, and 4-1/2 feet deep, we have the mean width 12, and
looking at the table under 12 and opposite 54, we find 2.75 cubic
yards, or two and three-quarters to the rod. In this case, the
quantity of earth to be removed is nearly twice as much as in the
other, and hence, as far as regards the digging, the cost of the
labor will be nearly double. But in the case of deep drains, the
cost increases slightly for another reason, namely, the increased
labor of lifting the earth to the surface from a greater depth."
Under the title of the "Depth of Drains," other reasons are suggested
why shallow drains are more easily wrought than deeper drains. The
widths given in English treatises, and found perfectly practicable
there, with proper drainage-tools, will seem to us exceedingly narrow.
Mr. Parkes gives the width of the top of a four-foot drain 18 inches,
of a three-and-a-half foot drain 16 inches, and of a three-foot drain 12
inches. He gives the width of drains for tiles, three inches at bottom,
and those for stones, eight inches. Of the cost of excavating a given
number of cubic yards of earth from drains, it is difficult to give
reliable estimates. In the writer's own field, where a pick was used to
loosen the lower two feet of earth, the labor of opening and filling
drains 4 feet deep, and of the mean width of 14 inches, all by hand
labor, has been, in a mile of drains, being our first experiments, about
one day's labor to three rods in length. The excavated earth of such a
drain, measures not quite three cubic yards. (Exactly, 2.85.)
In work subsequently executed, we have opened our drains of 4 foot
depth, but 20 inches at top, and 4 inches at bottom, giving a mean width
of 12 inches. In one instance, in the Summer of 1858, two men opened 14
rods of such drain in one day. In six days, the same two men opened,
laid, and filled 947 feet, or about 57-1/2 rods of such drain. Their
labor was worth $12.00, or 21 cents per rod. The actual cost of this job
was as follows:
847 two-inch tiles, at $13 per 1,000 $11.01
100 three-inch " " for main 2.50
70 bushels of tan, to protect the joints .70
Horse to haul tiles and tan .50
Labor, 12 days, at $1 12.00
-------
Total $26.71
This is 46-1/2 cents per rod, besides our own time and skill in laying out
and superintending the work. The work was principally done with Irish
spades, and was in a sandy soil. In the same season, the same men
opened, laid, and filled 70 rods of four-foot drain, of the same mean
width of 12 inches, in the worst kind of clay soil, where the pick was
constantly used. It cost 35 days' labor to complete the job, being 50
cents per rod for the labor alone. The least cost of the labor of
draining 4 feet deep, on our own land, is thus shown to be 21 cents per
rod, and the greatest cost 50 cents per rod, all the labor being by
hand. One-half these amounts would have completed the drains at 3 feet
depth, as has been already shown.
But the excavation here is much greater than is usual in England, Mr.
Parkes giving the mean width of a four-foot drain but 10-1/2 inches,
instead of 14 or 12, as just given. Mr. Denton gives estimates of the
cost, in England, of cutting and filling four-foot drains, which vary
from 12 cents per rod upwards, according to the prices of labor, and
other circumstances.
In New England, where labor may be fairly rated at one dollar per day,
the cost of excavating and filling four-foot drains by hand labor, must
vary from 20 to 50 cents per rod, according to the soil, and half those
amounts for drains of three-foot depth.
Of the aid which may be derived from the use of draining plows, or of
the common plow, or subsoil plow, our views may be found expressed under
the appropriate heads. That drains will long continue to be opened in
this vast country by hand labor, is not to be supposed, but we give our
estimates of the expenses, at this first stage of our education in
drainage.
3. _Cost of the Tiles._ Under the title of "The Cost of Tiles," we have
given such information as can be at present procured, touching that
matter. It will be assumed, in these estimates, that no tiles of less
than 1-1/2 inch bore will be used for any purpose, and for mains, usually
those of three-inch bore are sufficient. The proportion of length of
mains to that of minors is small, and, considering the probable
reduction of prices, we will, for the present, assume $10 per 1,000 as
the prices of such mixed sizes as may be used.
Add to this, the freight of them to a reasonable distance, and we have
the cost of the tiles on the field. The weight of two-inch tiles is
usually rated at about 3 lbs. each, though they fall short of this
weight until wet.
4. _Outlets._ A small per-centage should be added to the items already
noticed, for the cost of the general outfall, which should be secured
with great care; although, from such examination as the writer has made
in this country, and in England also, in the large majority of cases,
drains are discharged with very little precaution to protect the
outlets. Works completed under the charge of regular engineers, form an
exception to this remark; and an item of 37 cents per acre, for iron
outlets and masonry, is usually included in the estimated cost per acre
of drainage.
5. _Collars._ It is not known to the author that collars have been at
all used in America, except at the New York Central Park, in 1858; round
pipes, upon which they are commonly used abroad, when used on any, not
being yet much in use here.
In the estimates of Mr. Denton, in his tables, collars are set down at
about half the cost of the mixed tiles. The bore of them being large
enough to receive the end of the tile, increases the price in proportion
to the increase in size. It is believed, however, that a smaller size of
tiles may prudently be used with collars than without, because the
collars keep the tiles perfectly in line, and freely admit water, while
they exclude roots, sand, and other obstructions. A drain laid with one
and a half inch tiles with collars is, no doubt, better in any soil than
two-inch tiles without collars. Some compensation for the cost of
collars may thus be found in the less price of the smaller tiles.
6. _Laying._ The cost of laying tiles is so trifling as hardly to be
worth estimating, except to show its insignificance. The estimate, by
English engineers, is two cents per rod for "pipe laying and finishing."
What is included in "finishing," does not appear. From the personal
observations of the writer, it is believed that an active man may lay
from 60 to 100 rods of tiles per day, in ditches well prepared. Indeed,
we have seen our man James, lay twelve rods of two-inch tiles, in a
four-foot ditch, in forty-five minutes, when he was not aware that he
was working against time. This is at the rate of sixteen rods an hour,
which would give just 160 rods, or a half-mile, in a day of ten hours.
7. _Number of Tiles to the Acre._ The number of tiles used depends, of
course, upon the distances apart of the drains, and upon the length of
the tiles used.
The following table gives the number of tiles of various length, per
acre, required at different intervals:
========================================================================
Intervals between |Twelve inch|Thirteen inch|Fourteen inch|Fifteen inch
the Drains, | Pipe. | Pipe. | Pipe. | Pipe.
in feet. | | | |
------------------+-----------+-------------+-------------+-------------
15 | 2904 | 2680 | 2489 | 2323
18 | 2420 | 2234 | 2074 | 1936
21 | 2074 | 1915 | 1778 | 1659
24 | 1815 | 1676 | 1555 | 1452
27 | 1613 | 1489 | 1383 | 1290
30 | 1452 | 1340 | 1244 | 1161
33 | 1320 | 1219 | 1131 | 1056
36 | 1210 | 1117 | 1037 | 968
39 | 1117 | 1031 | 957 | 893
42 | 1037 | 958 | 888 | 829
========================================================================
The following table gives the number of rods per acre of drains at
different distances:
=====================================================================
Intervals between the Drains, in feet. | Rods per acre.
------------------------------------------+--------------------------
15 | 176
18 | 146-2/3
21 | 125-5/7
24 | 110
27 | 97-7/9
30 | 88
33 | 80
36 | 73-1/3
39 | 67-9/13
42 | 62-6/7
=====================================================================
It may be remarked here, that tiles, moulded of the same length, vary
nearly two inches when burned, according to the severity of the heat. It
may be suggested, too, that the length of the tile, in the use of any
machine, is entirely at the option of the maker. It is not, perhaps, an
insult to our common humanity, to suggest to buyers the propriety of
measuring the length as well as calibre of tiles before purchasing. In
the estimates which will be made in this detail, it will be assumed that
tiles will lay one foot each, with allowance for imperfections and
breakage. This is as near as possible to accuracy, according to our best
observation; and, besides, there is convenience in this simple estimate
of one tile to one foot, which is important in practice.
We have now the data from which we may make some tolerably safe
estimates of the cost of drainage. With labor at one dollar per day, and
tiles at $10 per 1,000, or one cent each, or one cent a foot, and
ditches four feet deep, opened and filled at one-third of a day's labor
to the rod, we may set down the principal items of the cost of drainage
by the rod, as follows:
Cutting and filling per rod 33-1/3 cts.
Tiles 16-2/3 "
----
50
This is putting the tiles at one cent a foot, and the labor at two cents
a foot, or just twice as much as the cost of tiles, and it brings a
total of half a dollar a rod, all of them numbers easily remembered, and
convenient for calculation.
By reference to the table giving the number of rods to the acre, the
cost of labor and tiles per acre may be at once found, by taking half
the number of rods in dollars. At 42 feet distance, the cost will be
$31.42 per acre; at 30 feet distance, $44; and at 60 feet, half that
amount, or $22 per acre.
Our views as to the frequency of drains, may be found under the
appropriate head.
Our estimate thus far, is of four-foot drains. We have shown, under the
head of the "Depth of Drains," that the cost of cutting and filling a
four-foot drain is double that of cutting and filling a three-foot
drain. There is no doubt, that, after all the good advice we have given
on this subject, many, who "grow wiser than their teachers are," will
set aside the teachings of the best draining engineers in the world, and
insist that three feet deep is enough, and persist in so laying their
tiles.
This _shallowness_ will reduce the cost of labor about one half, so that
we shall have the cost of labor and tiles equal--one cent a foot, making
33? cents per rod, or one-third of a dollar, instead of one-half a
dollar per rod. To the cost of labor and tiles, we should add a fair
estimate of the cost of the other items of engineering and outlets.
These are trifling matters, which English tables, as has been shown,
estimate together, at about $1.67 per acre.
Briefly to recapitulate the elements of computation of the cost of
drainage, we find them to be these: the price of labor, the price of
tiles, and freight of them; the character of the soil, the depth of the
drains, and their distance apart, with the incidental expense of
engineering and of outfalls, and the large additional cost of _collars_,
where they are deemed necessary.
COMPARATIVE COST OF TILE AND STONE DRAINS.
It is not possible to answer, with precision, the question so often
asked, as to the comparative cost of drainage with tiles and stones.
The estimates given of the cost of tile drains, are based upon the
writer's own experience, upon his own farm mainly; and the mean width
of four-foot tile drains, may be assumed to be 14 inches, instead of
10-1/2 inches, as actually practiced in England.
For a stone drain of almost any form, certainly for any regular
water-course laid with stones, our ditch must be at least 21 inches wide
from top to bottom. This is just 50 per cent, more than our own
estimate, and 100 per cent., or double the English estimate for tile
drains.
It will require at least two ox-cart loads of stones to the rod, to
construct any sort of a stone drain, costing, perhaps, 25 cents a load
for picking up and hauling. In most cases, where the stones are not on
the farm, it will cost twice that sum. We will say 25 cents per rod for
laying the stones, though this is a low estimate. We have, then, for
cutting and filling the ditch, 50 cents per rod, 50 cents for hauling
stone, and for laying, 25 cents per rod, making $1.25 a rod for a stone
drain, against 50 cents per rod for tile drains.
Then we have a large surplus of earth, two cartloads to the rod,
displaced by the two loads of stone, to be disposed of; and in case of
the tiles, we have just earth enough. There are many other
considerations in favor of tiles: such as the cutting up of the ground
by teaming heavy loads of stones; the greater permanency of tiles; and
the fact that they furnish no harbor for mice and other vermin, as the
English call such small beasts. In favor of stones, is the fact, that
often they are on the land, and must be moved, and it is convenient to
dispose of them in the ditches.
Again, there are many parts of the country where tiles are not to be
procured, without great cost of freight, and where labor is abundant at
certain seasons, and money scarce at all seasons, so that the question
is really between stone drains and no drains.
Stone drains, if laid very deep, are far more secure than when shallow;
because, if shallow, they are usually ruined by the breaking in of water
at the top, in the Spring time, by the action of frost, and by the
mining of mice and moles. If laid four feet deep, and the earth rammed
hard above the stones, and rounded on the surface to throw off surface
water, they may be found efficient and permanent.
The conclusion, however, is, that where it can be procured, at any
reasonable cost, drainage with tiles will generally cost less than
one-half the expense of drainage with stones, and be incomparably more
satisfactory in the end.