WHAT CROPS SHOULD MANURE BE APPLIED TO.
“It will not do any harm on any crop,” said the Deacon, “but on my farm
it seems to be most convenient to draw it out in the winter or spring,
and plow it under for corn. I do not know any farmer except you who uses
it on potatoes.”
My own rule is to apply manure to those crops which require the most
labor per acre. But I am well aware that this rule will have many
exceptions. For instance, it will often pay well to use manure on
barley, and yet barley requires far less labor than corn or potatoes.
People who let out, and those who work farms “on shares” seldom
understand this matter clearly. I knew a farmer, who last year let out a
field of good land, that had been in corn the previous year, to a man to
sow to barley, and afterwards to wheat on “the halves.” Another part of
the farm was taken by a man to plant corn and potatoes on similar terms,
and another man put in several acres of cabbage, beets, carrots, and
onions on halves. It never seemed to occur to either of them that the
conditions were unequal. The expense of digging and harvesting the
potato-crop alone was greater than the whole cost of the barley-crop;
while, after the barley was off, the land was plowed once, harrowed, and
sowed to winter wheat; and nothing more has to be done to it until the
next harvest. With the garden crops, the difference is even still more
striking. The labor expended on one acre of onions or carrots would put
in and harvest a ten-acre field of barley. If the tenant gets pay for
his labor, the landlord would get say $5 an acre for his barley land,
and $50 for his carrot and onion land. I am pretty sure the tenants did
not see the matter in this light, nor the farmer either.
Crops which require a large amount of labor can only be grown on very
rich land. Our successful market-gardeners, seed-growers, and nurserymen
understand this matter. They must get great crops or they cannot pay
their labor bill. And the principle is applicable to ordinary farm
crops. Some of them require much more labor than others, and should
never be grown unless the land is capable of producing a maximum yield
per acre, or a close approximation to it. As a rule, the least-paying
crops are those which require the least labor per acre. Farmers are
afraid to expend much money for labor. They are wise in this, unless all
the conditions are favorable. But when they have land in a high state of
cultivation--drained, clean, mellow, and rich--it would usually pay them
well to grow crops which require the most labor.
And it should never be forgotten that, as compared with nearly all other
countries, our labor is expensive. No matter how cheap our land may be,
we can not afford to waste our labor. It is too costly. If men would
work for nothing, and board themselves, there are localities where we
could perhaps afford to keep sheep that shear two pounds of wool a year;
or cows that make 75 lbs. of butter. We might make a profit out of a
wheat crop of 8 bushels per acre, or a corn-crop of 15 bushels, or a
potato-crop of 50 bushels. But it cannot be done with labor costing from
$1.00 to $1.25 per day. And I do not believe labor will cost much less
in our time. The only thing we can do is to employ it to the best
advantage. Machinery will help us to some extent, but I can see no real
escape from our difficulties in this matter, except to raise larger
crops per acre.
In ordinary farming, “larger crops per acre” means fewer acres planted
or sown with grain. It means more summer fallow, more grass, clover,
peas, mustard, coleseed, roots, and other crops that are consumed on the
farm. It means more thorough cultivation. It means clean and rich land.
It means husbanding the ammonia and nitric acid, which is brought to the
soil, as well as that which is developed from the soil, or which the
soil attracts from the atmosphere, and using it to grow a crop every
second, third, or fourth year, instead of every year. If a piece of land
will grow 25 bushels of corn every year, we should aim to so manage it,
that it will grow 50 every other year, or 75 every third year, or, if
the _climate_ is capable of doing it, of raising 100 bushels per acre
every fourth year.
Theoretically this can be done, and in one of Mr. Lawes’ experiments he
did it practically in the case of a summer-fallow for wheat, the one
crop in two years giving a little more than two crops sown in
succession. But on sandy land we should probably lose a portion of the
liberated plant-food, unless we grew a crop of some kind every year. And
the matter organized in the renovating crop could not be rendered
completely available for the next crop. _In the end_, however, we ought
to be able to get it with little or no loss. How best to accomplish this
result, is one of the most interesting and important fields for
scientific investigation and practical experiment. We know enough,
however, to be sure that there is a great advantage in waiting until
there is a sufficient accumulation of available plant-food in the soil
to produce a large yield, before sowing a crop that requires much labor.
If we do not want to wait, we must apply manure. If we have no barn-yard
or stable-manure, we must buy artificials.
HOW AND WHEN MANURE SHOULD BE APPLIED.
This is not a merely theoretical or chemical question. We must take into
consideration the _cost_ of application. Also, whether we apply it at a
busy or a leisure season. I have seen it recommended, for instance, to
spread manure on meadow-land immediately after the hay-crop was removed.
Now, I think this may be theoretically very good advice. But, on my
farm, it would throw the work right into the midst of wheat and barley
harvests; and I should make the theory bend a little to my convenience.
The meadows would have to wait until we had got in the crops--or until
harvest operations were stopped by rain.
I mention this merely to show the complex character of this question. On
my own farm, the most leisure season of the year, except the winter, is
immediately after wheat harvest. And, as already stated, it is at this
time that John Johnston draws out his manure and spreads it on
grass-land intended to be plowed up the following spring for corn.
If the manure was free from weed-seeds, many of our best farmers, if
they had some well-rotted manure like this of John Johnston’s, would
draw it out and spread it on their fields prepared for winter-wheat.
In this case, I should draw out the manure in heaps and then spread it
carefully. Then harrow it, and if the harrow pulls the manure into
heaps, spread them and harrow again. It is of the greatest importance to
spread manure evenly and mix it thoroughly with the soil. If this work
is well done, and the manure is well-rotted, it will not interfere with
the drill. And the manure will be near the surface, where the young
roots of the wheat can get hold of it.
“You must recollect,” said the Doctor, “that the roots can only take up
the manure when in solution.”
“It must also be remembered,” said I, “that a light rain of, say, only
half an inch, pours down on to the manures spread on an acre of land
about 14,000 gallons of water, or about 56 tons. If you have put on 8
tons of manure, half an inch of rain would furnish a gallon of water to
each pound of manure. It is not difficult to understand, therefore, how
manure applied on the surface, or near the surface, can be taken up by
the young roots.”
“That puts the matter in a new light to me,” said the Deacon. “If the
manure was plowed under, five or six inches deep, it would require an
abundant rain to reach the manure. And it is not one year in five that
we get rain enough to thoroughly soak the soil for several weeks after
sowing the wheat in August or September. And when it does come, the
season is so far advanced that the wheat plants make little growth.”
My own opinion is, that on clayey land, manure will act much quicker if
applied on, or near the surface, than if plowed under. Clay mixed with
manure arrests or checks decomposition. Sand has no such effect. If
anything, it favors a more active decomposition, and hence, manure acts
much more rapidly on sandy land than on clay land. And I think, as a
rule, where a farmer advocates the application of manure on the surface,
it will be found that he occupies clay land or a heavy loam; while those
who oppose the practice, and think manure should be plowed under, occupy
sandy land or sandy loam.
“J. J. Thomas,” said I, “once gave me a new idea.”
“Is that anything strange,” remarked the Deacon. “Are ideas so scarce
among you agricultural writers, that you can recollect who first
suggested them?”
“Be that as it may,” said I, “this idea has had a decided influence on
my farm practice. I will not say that the idea originated with Mr.
Thomas, but at any rate, it was new to me. I had always been in the
habit, when spading in manure in the garden, of putting the manure in
the trench and covering it up; and in plowing it in, I thought it was
desirable to put it at the bottom of the furrow where the next furrow
would cover it up.”
“Well,” said the Deacon, “and what objection is there to the practice?”
“I am not objecting to the practice. I do not say that it is not a good
plan. It may often be the only practicable method of applying manure.
But it is well to know that there is _sometimes_ a better plan. The idea
that Mr. Thomas gave me, was, that it was very desirable to break up the
manure fine, spread it evenly, and thoroughly mix it with the soil.
“After the manure is spread on the soil,” said Mr. Thomas, “and before
plowing it in, great benefit is derived by thoroughly harrowing the
top-soil, thus breaking finely both the manure and the soil, and mixing
them well together. Another way for the perfect diffusion of the manure
among the particles of earth, is, to spread the manure in autumn, so
that, all the rains of this season may dissolve the soluble portions and
carry them down among the particles, where they are absorbed and
retained for the growing crop.
“In experiments,” continues Mr. Thomas, “when the manure for corn was
thus applied in autumn, has afforded a yield of about 70 bushels per
acre, when the same amount applied in spring, gave only 50 bushels.
A thin coating of manure applied to winter-wheat at the time of sowing,
and was harrowed in, has increased the crop from 7 to 10 bushels per
acre--and in addition to this, by the stronger growth it has caused, as
well as by the protection it has afforded to the surface, it has not
unfrequently saved the crop from partial or total winter-killing.
“In cases where it is necessary to apply coarse manures at once, much
may be done in lessening the evils of coarseness by artificially
grinding it into the soil. The instrument called the drag-roller--which
is like the common roller set stiff so as not to revolve--has been used
to great advantage for this purpose, by passing it over the surface in
connection with the harrow. We have known this treatment to effect a
thorough intermixture, and to more than double the crop obtained by
common management with common manure.”
TOP-DRESSING WITH MANURE.
The term “top-dressing” usually refers to sowing or spreading manures
on the growing crop. For instance, we top-dress pastures or meadows by
spreading manure on the surface. If we sow nitrate of soda, or guano, on
our winter-wheat in the spring, that would be top-dressing. We often sow
gypsum on clover, and on barley, and peas, while the plants are growing
in the spring, and this is top-dressing.
“If the gypsum was sown broadcast on the land before sowing the seed,”
said the Deacon, “would not that be top-dressing also?”
Strictly speaking, I suppose that would not be top-dressing.
Top-dressing in the sense in which I understand the term, is seldom
adopted, except on meadows and pastures as a regular system. It is an
after-thought. We have sown wheat on a poor, sandy knoll, and we draw
out some manure and spread on it in the winter or early spring; or we
top-dress it with hen-manure, or guano, or nitrate of soda and
superphosphate. I do not say that this is better than to apply the
manure at the time of sowing the wheat, but if we neglect to do so,
then top-dressing is a commendable practice.
Dr. Vœlcker reports the result of some experiments in top-dressing
winter-wheat on the farm of the Royal Agricultural College at
Cirencester, England. The manures were finely sifted and mixed with
about ten times their weight of fine soil, and sown broadcast on the
growing wheat, March 22. A fine rain occurred the following day, and
washed the manure into the soil. The following is the yield per acre:--
No manure 27 bushels and 1984 lbs. of straw.
280 lbs. Peruvian guano 40 ” ” 2576 ” ”
195 ” nitrate of soda 38 ” ” 2695 ” ”
180 ” nitrate of soda, and
168 lbs. of common salt 40½ ” ” 2736 ” ”
448 lbs. Proctor’s wheat-manure 39½ ” ” 2668 ” ”
672 ” ” ” ” 44¼ ” ” 3032 ” ”
4 tons chalk-marl 27 ” ” 1872 ” ”
The manures in each case cost $7.80 per acre, except the large dose of
Proctor’s wheat-manure, which cost $11.70 per acre. The wheat was worth
$1.26 per bushel. Leaving the value of the straw out of the question,
the profit from the use of the top dressing was:
With guano $8.70 per acre.
” nitrate of soda 6.00
” nitrate of soda and common salt 9.33
” 448 lbs. wheat-manure 7.94
” 672 ” ” ” 10.16
The marl did no good.
The nitrate of soda and common salt contained no phosphoric acid,
and yet produced an excellent effect. The guano and the wheat-manure
contained phosphoric acid as well as nitrogen, and the following crop of
clover would be likely to get some benefit from it.
John Johnston wrote in 1868, “I have used manure only as a top-dressing
for the last 26 years, and I do think one load, used in that way, is
worth far more than two loads plowed under on our stiff land.”