VALUE OF FERTILIZERS.
In 1857, Prof. S. W. Johnson, in his Report to the Connecticut
Agricultural Society, adopted the following valuation:
Potash 4 cents per lb.
Phosphoric acid, insoluble in water 4½ ” ” ”
” ” soluble ” ” 12½ ” ” ”
Nitrogen 17 ” ” ”
Analyses of many of the leading commercial fertilizers at that time
showed that, when judged by this standard, the price charged was far
above their actual value. In some cases, manures selling for $60 per
ton, contained nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash worth only from $20
to $25 per ton. And one well-known manure, which sold for $28 per ton,
was found to be worth only $2.33 per ton. A Bone Fertilizer selling at
$50 per ton, was worth less than $14 per ton.
“In 1852,” said the Doctor, “superphosphate of lime was manufactured by
the New Jersey Zinc Co., and sold in New York at $50 per ton of 2,000
lbs. At the same time, superphosphate of lime made from Coprolites, was
selling in England for $24 per ton of 2,240 lbs. The late Prof. Mapes
commenced making “Improved Superphosphate of Lime,” at Newark, N.J., in
1852, and Mr. De Burg, the same year, made a plain superphosphate of
lime in Brooklyn, N.Y. The price, in proportion to value, was high, and,
in fact, the same may be said of many of our superphosphate manures,
until within the last few years.”
Notwithstanding the comparatively high price, and the uncertain quality
of these commercial manures, the demand has been steadily on the
increase. We have now many honorable and intelligent men engaged in the
manufacture and sale of these artificial manures, and owing to more
definite knowledge on the part of the manufacturers and of the
purchasers, it is not a difficult matter to find manures well worth the
money asked for them.
“A correct analysis,” said I, “furnishes the only sure test of value.
‘Testimonials’ from farmers and others are pre-eminently unreliable.
With over thirty years’ experience in the use of these fertilizers,
I would place far more confidence on a good and reliable analysis than
on any actual trial I could make in the field. Testimonials to a patent
fertilizer are about as reliable as testimonials to a patent-medicine.
In buying a manure, we want to know what it contains, and the condition
of the constituents.”
In 1877, Prof. S. W. Johnson gives the following figures, showing “the
trade-values, or cost in market, per pound, of the ordinary occurring
forms of nitrogen, phosphoric acid, and potash, as recently found in the
New York and New England markets:
_Cents
per pound._
Nitrogen in ammonia and nitrates 24
” in Peruvian Guano, fine steamed bone, dried
and fine ground blood, meat, and fish 20
” in fine ground bone, horn, and wool-dust 18
” in coarse bone, horn-shavings, and fish-scrap 15
Phosphoric acid soluble in water 12½
” ” “reverted,” and in Peruvian Guano 9
” ” insoluble, in fine bone and fish guano 7
” ” ” in coarse bone, bone-ash,
and bone-black 5
” ” ” in fine ground rock phosphate 3½
Potash in high-grade sulphate 9
” in kainit, as sulphate 7½
” in muriate, or potassium chloride 6
“These ‘estimated values,’” says Prof. Johnson, “are not fixed, but vary
with the state of the market, and are from time to time subject to
revision. They are not exact to the cent or its fractions, because the
same article sells cheaper at commercial or manufacturing centers than
in country towns, cheaper in large lots than in small, cheaper for cash
than on time. These values are high enough to do no injustice to the
dealer, and accurate enough to serve the object of the consumer.
“By multiplying the per cent of Nitrogen, etc., by the trade-value per
pound, and then by 20, we get the value per ton of the several
ingredients, and adding the latter together, we obtain the total
estimated value per ton.
“The uses of the ‘Valuation’ are, 1st, to show whether a given lot or
brand of fertilizer is worth as a commodity of trade what it costs. If
the selling price is no higher than the estimated value, the purchaser
may he quite sure that the price is reasonable. If the selling price is
but $2 to $3 per ton more than the estimated value, it may still be a
fair price, but if the cost per ton is $5 or more over the estimated
value, it would be well to look further. 2d, Comparisons of the
estimated values, and selling prices of a number of fertilizers will
generally indicate fairly which is the best for the money. But the
‘estimated value’ is not to be too literally construed, for analysis
cannot always decide accurately what is the _form_ of nitrogen, etc.,
while the mechanical condition of a fertilizer is an item whose
influence cannot always be rightly expressed or appreciated.
“The _Agricultural value_ of a fertilizer is measured by the benefit
received from its use, and depends upon its fertilizing effect, or
crop-producing power. As a broad general rule it is true that Peruvian
guano, superphosphates, fish-scraps, dried blood, potash salts, plaster,
etc., have a high agricultural value which is related to their
trade-value, and to a degree determines the latter value. But the rule
has many exceptions, and in particular instances the trade-value cannot
always be expected to fix or even to indicate the agricultural value.
Fertilizing effect depends largely upon soil, crop, and weather, and as
these vary from place to place, and from year to year, it cannot be
foretold or estimated except by the results of past experience, and then
only in a general and probable manner.”
“It will be seen,” said the Doctor, “that Prof. Johnson places a higher
value on potash now than he did 20 years ago. He retains the same
figures for soluble phosphoric acid, and makes a very just and proper
discrimination between the different values of different forms of
nitrogen and phosphoric acid.”
“The prices,” said I, “are full as high as farmers can afford to pay.
But there is not much probability that we shall see them permanently
reduced. The tendency is in the other direction. In a public address
Mr. J. B. Lawes has recently remarked: ‘A future generation of British
farmers will doubtless hear with some surprise that, at the close of the
manure season of 1876, there were 40,000 tons of nitrate of soda in our
docks, which could not find purchasers, although the price did not
exceed £12 or £13 per ton.’”
“He evidently thinks,” said the Doctor, “that available nitrogen is
cheaper now than it will be in years to come.”
“Nitrate of soda,” said I, “at the prices named, is only 2½ to 2¾ cents
per lb., and the nitrogen it contains would cost less than 18 cents per
lb., instead of 24 cents, as given by Prof. Johnson.”
“No. 1 Peruvian Guano, ‘guaranteed,’ is now sold,” said the Doctor, “at
a price per ton, to be determined by its composition, at the following
rates:
_Value per pound._
Nitrogen (ammonia, 17½ c.) 21¾ c.
Soluble phosphoric acid 10 c.
Reverted ” ” 8 c.
Insoluble ” ” 2 c.
Potash, as sulphate and phosphate 7½ c.
“The first cargo of Peruvian guano, sold under this guarantee,
contained:
_Value per ton_.
Ammonia 6.8 per cent $23.80
Soluble phosphoric acid 3.8 ” ” 7.60
Reverted ” ” 11.5 ” ” 18.40
Insoluble ” ” 3.0 ” ” 1.20
Potash 3.7 ” ” 5.55
------
Estimated retail price per ton of 2,000 lbs. $56.55
Marked on bags for sale $56.00
The second cargo, sold under this guarantee, contained:
_Value per ton_.
Ammonia 11.5 per cent $40.50
Soluble phosphoric acid 5.4 ” ” 10.80
Reverted ” ” 10.0 ” ” 16.00
Insoluble ” ” 1.7 ” ” .68
Potash 2.3 ” ” 3.45
------
$71.43
Selling price marked on bags $70.00
“It is interesting,” said I, “to compare these analyses of Peruvian
guano of to-day, with Peruvian guano brought to England twenty-nine or
thirty years ago. I saw at Rothamsted thirty years ago a bag of guano
that contained 22 per cent of ammonia. And farmers could then buy guano
guaranteed by the dealers (not by the agents of the Peruvian
Government), to contain 16 per cent of ammonia, and 10 per cent of
phosphoric acid. Price, £9 5s. per ton of 2,240 lbs.--say $40 per ton of
2,000 lbs.
The average composition of thirty-two cargoes of guano imported into
England in 1849 was as follows:
Ammonia 17.41 per cent.
Phosphoric acid 9.75 ” ”
Alkaline salts 8.75 ” ”
At the present valuation, adopted by the Agents of the Peruvian guano in
New York, and estimating that 5 per cent of the phosphoric acid was
soluble, and 4 per cent reverted, and that there was 2 lbs. of potash in
the alkaline salts, this guano would be worth:
Value per ton of 2,000 lbs.
Ammonia 17.41 per cent $60.93
Soluble phosphoric acid 5.00 ” ” 10.00
Reverted ” ” 4.00 ” ” 6.40
Insoluble ” ” .75 ” ” .30
Potash 2.00 ” ” 3.00
-------
$80.63
Selling price per ton of 2,000 lbs. $40.00
Ichaboe guano, which was largely imported into England in 1844-5, and
used extensively as a manure for turnips, contained, on the average, 7½
per cent of ammonia, and 14 per cent of phosphoric acid. Its value at
the present rates we may estimate as follows:
Ammonia, 7½ per cent $26.25
Soluble Phosphoric acid, 4 per cent 8.00
Reverted ” ” 10 ” 16.00
------
$50.25
Selling price per ton of 2,000 lbs. $21.80
The potash is not given, or this would probably add four or five dollars
to its estimated value.
“All of which goes to show,” said the Deacon, “that the Peruvian
Government is asking, in proportion to value, from two to two and a half
times as much for guano as was charged twenty-five or thirty years ago.
That first cargo of guano, sold in New York under the new guarantee, in
1877, for $56 per ton, is worth no more than the Ichaboe guano sold in
England in 1845, for less than $22 per ton!
“And furthermore,” continued the Deacon, “from all that I can learn, the
guano of the present day is not only far poorer in nitrogen than it was
formerly, but the nitrogen is not as soluble, and consequently not so
valuable, pound for pound. Much of the guano of the present day bears
about the same relation to genuine old-fashioned guano, as leached ashes
do to unleached, or as a ton of manure that has been leached in the
barn-yard does to a ton that has been kept under cover.”
“True, to a certain extent,” said the Doctor, “but you must recollect
that this ‘guaranteed’ guano is now sold by analysis. You pay for what
you get and no more.”
“Exactly,” said the Deacon, “but what you get is not so good. A pound of
nitrogen in the leached guano is not as available or as valuable as a
pound of nitrogen in the unleached guano. And this fact ought to be
understood.”
“One thing,” said I, “seems clear. The Peruvian Government is charging a
considerably higher price for guano, in proportion to its actual value,
than was charged 20 or 25 years ago. It may be, that the guano is still
the cheapest manure in the market, but at any rate the price is higher
than formerly--while there has been no corresponding advance in the
price of produce in the markets of the world.”
POTASH AS A MANURE.
On land where fish, fish-scrap, or guano, has been used freely for some
years, and the crops exported from the farm, we may expect a relative
deficiency of potash in the soil. In such a case, an application of
unleached ashes or potash-salts will be likely to produce a decided
benefit.
Clay or loamy land is usually richer in potash than soils of a more
sandy or gravelly character. And on poor sandy land, the use of fish or
of guano, if the crops are all sold, will be soon likely to prove of
little benefit owing to a deficiency of potash in the soil. They may
produce good crops for a few years, but the larger the crops produced
_and sold_, the more would the soil become deficient in potash.
We have given the particulars of Lawes and Gilbert’s experiments on
barley. Mr. Lawes at a late meeting in London, stated that “he had grown
25 crops of barley one after the other with nitrogen, either as ammonia
or nitrate of soda, but without potash, and that by the use of potash
they had produced practically no better result. This year (1877), for
the first time, the potash had failed a little, and they had now
produced 10 or 12 bushels more per acre with potash than without,
showing that they were coming to the end of the available potash in the
soil. This year (1877), they obtained 54 bushels of barley with potash,
and 42 bushels without it. Of course, this was to be expected, and they
had expected it much sooner. The same with wheat; he expected the end
would come in a few years, but they had now gone on between 30 and 40
years. When the end came they would not be sorry, because then they
would have the knowledge they were seeking for.”
Dr. Vœlcker, at the same meeting remarked: “Many soils contained from 1½
to 2 per cent of available potash, and a still larger quantity locked
up, in the shape of minerals, which only gradually came into play; but
the quantity of potash carried off in crops did not exceed 2 cwt. per
acre, if so much. Now 0.1 per cent of any constituent, calculated on a
depth of six inches, was equivalent to one ton per acre. Therefore, if a
soil contained only 0.1 per cent of potash, a ton of potash might be
carried off from a depth of 6 inches. But you had not only 0.1 per cent,
but something like 1½ per cent and upwards in many soils. It is quite
true there were many soils from which you could not continuously take
crops without restoring the potash.”
“In all of which,” said the Doctor, “there is nothing new. It does not
help us to determine whether potash is or is not deficient in our soil.”
“That,” said I, “can be ascertained only by actual experiment. Put a
little hen-manure on a row of corn, and on another row a little
hen-manure and ashes, and on another row, ashes alone, and leave one row
without anything. On my farm I am satisfied that we need not buy
potash-salts for manure. I do not say they would do no good, for they
may do good on land not deficient in available potash, just as lime will
do good on land containing large quantities of lime. But potash is not
what my land needs to make it produce maximum crops. It needs available
nitrogen, and possibly soluble phosphoric acid.”
The system of farming adopted in this section, is much more likely to
impoverish the soil of nitrogen and phosphoric acid than of potash.
If a soil is deficient in potash, the crop which will first indicate the
deficiency, will probably be clover, or beans. Farmers who can grow
large crops of red-clover, need not buy potash for manure.
On farms where grain is largely raised and sold, and where the straw,
and corn-stalks, and hay, and the hay from clover-seed are retained on
the farm, and this strawy manure returned to the land, the soil will
become poor from the lack of nitrogen and phosphoric acid long before
there would be any need of an artificial supply of potash.
On the other hand, if farmers should use fish, or guano, or
superphosphate, or nitrate of soda, and sell all the hay, and straw, and
potatoes, and root-crops, they could raise, many of our sandy soils
would soon become poor in available potash. But even in this case the
clover and beans would show the deficiency sooner than wheat or even
potatoes.
“And yet we are told,” said the Deacon, “that potatoes contain no end of
potash.”
“And the same is true,” said I, “of root-crops, such as mangel-wurzel,
turnips, etc., but the fact has no other significance than this: If you
grow potatoes for many years on the same land and manure them with
nitrogenous manures, the soil is likely to be speedily impoverished of
potash.”
“But suppose,” said the Deacon, “that you grow potatoes on the same land
without manure of any kind, would not the soil become equally poor in
potash?”
“No,” said I, “because you would, in such a case, get very small
crops--small, not from lack of potash, but from lack of nitrogen. If I
had land which had grown corn, potatoes, wheat, oats, and hay, for many
years without manure, or an occasional dressing of our common
barnyard-manure, and wanted it to produce a good crop of potatoes,
I should not expect to get it by simply applying potash. The soil might
be poor in potash, but it is almost certain to be still poorer in
nitrogen and phosphoric acid.”
Land that has been manured with farm-yard or stable-manure for years, no
matter how it has been cropped, is not likely to need potash. The manure
is richer in potash than in nitrogen and phosphoric acid. And the same
may be said of the soil.
If a farmer uses nitrogenous and phosphatic manures on his clayey or
loamy land that is usually relatively rich in potash, and will apply his
common manure to the sandy parts of the farm, he will rarely need to
purchase manures containing potash.