Page 1 |
Previous | 1 of 16 | Next |
|
|
Loading content ...
cu9^/~ VOL. LXVI1I INDIANAPOLIS, MAY 31, 1913 NO. 22 The Problem of Keeping up Soil Fertility In a report recently sent out by the National Conservation Congress, this remarkable statement appears: "During the forty years from 1860 to 1900, the United States lost more fertility on Its old acreage than It gained by the addition of virgin acres. America has been mining its soil rather than farming lt." If true, this is a most important matter. The verb "to mine," has various meanings, but the one that seems to best fit the case in hand is this: "To ruin or destroy by slow methods." Most scientific agriculturalists and noil chemists know it to be true that farming methods in the United States, have been wearing out the land, working Bteadlly toward the exhaustion of its fertility. There needs to be persistent a-Hation of the matter—and hence this article. Any System of Cropping is DangefOUA. l.ft it be admitted at the beginning, that raising a crop and removing it from the field where it grew, carries away a portion of the supply of plant food. Such a process, if continued, must certainly impoverish the soil. How long it will take to exhaust its fertility, depends on circumstances. Some soils have more plant food than others, and some crops consume more than others; but this only means that, under certain circumstances, it will take long, and under others shorter time, to complete the ruin. In either case, however, ruin is Inevitable. That we have been losing fertility for forty years, and longer, is mathematically demonstrable, and the loss is r.iuch greater than is generally supposed. It is, of course, practically impossible to return to the soil all the plant food that a year's crops take o«*. without drawing from sources outside the farm. It would probably be nearer the truth to say that it is an absolute impossibility, to do so. If all the vegetable growth fit for such use, was carefully saved and returned to the fields, together with all the b and stable manure of the farm, the soil would still suffer a considerable loss through the elements of plant food which go to make up the flesh, bone and blood of the animals sold off, and those which go to make the grain that has been marketed. loss in Manure on Average Farm. This statement is made on the supposition that the utmost care has been exercised in conserving the farm manures. But how much more adverse ls the result, when little, or no care is used in this direction; and the practice, unfortunately, is extremely common, to burn tons of straw, and to allow vast quantities of manure to rot and leach until the larger part of its value Is lost. An experiment conducted at the University of Illinois, showed that of the plant food contained In the rations fed. 19.68 per cent of the nitrogen, 26.66 per cent of the phosphorus and 23.98 of the potassium were not recovered in the total manures. Add this loss to the waste, and loss in the manures By J. H. Rockwell themselves, already referred to, and we get a faint notion of ihe loss of fertility and removal of plant loud from the soil, that is constantly going on. Why Manure Docs Not Supply Need. Now go a little farther, and sum up the number of farm animals that have been in the country In the forty year.-. under consideration—the cattle, ho mules, hogs and sheep. They have no? all been on the farms, but we will place them there ami make the on the side of soil conservation, as strong as possible. Take the avi for the five census periods, I860 to 1900, Inclusive, and call ten sheep or ten hogs equivalent to one horse, cow or mule, in the production of manure —which is the usual estimate—and allow ten tons of manure a year as tha product of each animal so recund— the usual basis of calculation—and we have a total of scarcely sufficient to furnish one ton of manure to each acre, on the average, under tillage each year. Now, as no ton of manure represents. or can represent, all the plant food in the feed from which it was pro duced, and u no acre can get back, on this calculation, as mueh as la taken from it ln the crop, unless it takes ■ portion of what, in equal distribution, should go to other acres, the result is a demonstrated lessening of soil fertility, even if we allow that every acre does get back something. which, as a matter of fact, it does not. The Phoapboraa ProWani. Wisconsin experiments warrant the conclusion that, In the last half-century one-third of the phosphorus in the soil had been lost In the tilled fields. Broadly speaking, this would mean on its face, that the entire phosphorus content of the soil would he entirely exhausted In a hundred and fifty years. But it means much worse than that—it means that soils so worn, are already beginning to fall in the production of paying crops. I^ong before the original supply of plant food has been used up, the land must be abandoned, or It must be liberally enriched. The land owner must live; and he must have a surplus, or he must quit. It may be urged that such a simple thing as the rotation of corn, oats and clover—the latter plowed under the fourth year—will set matters right Bui "ill It? clover plowed under once in four \ears— equivalent to one loa of dry hay to the acre — would give to the SOU no more nitrogen thun a forty crop of corn would take from it, and the clover has no power to add phosphorus or other mineral elements. How to keep up the supply of phosphorus and potassium, is tlie question to be solved; the supply of nitrogen we know how to maintain. It is a subject well worth careful looking in*o, for, turn the matter over as we may, the fact remains, we have been losing soil fertility, and have been "mining the soil rather than farming it." More Live Stock is ..ne Solution to the Fertility Problem. Tll.l. DRAINAGE OX THK FAKM. The Department uf Agriculture has in press Farmers' l'.ulletin 524 on "Tile Drainage on the Farm," by A. ii. Smith, Agriculturist, Office of Farm .Management, Bureau of Plant Industry. This bulletin was prepared to meet the demand that is arising all over the country for Information on this subject. It is not designed to apply to large drainage projects Involving engineering problems, but to cover the subject fully from the farmer's point of view. The United States needs more drainage, says Mr. Smith. Good examples of drainage can be found in practically every State, but there are millions of acres that still require it. The Middle Western States have done the most draining, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Iowa leading in this respect. Although there is urgent necesaitj for drainage In Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, Missouri, Arkansas, and New York, comparatively little has been done. Along the coast from Xew .Jersey to Texas, inclusive, every State has gigantic drainage problems almost untouched, while throughout the country there are lands that must be drained before maximum returns can be obtained. In reality, drainage in the Untied States is only fairly begun, and its Immense possibilities are but little known. Mr. Smith summarizes the benefits of drainage as follows: It usually Increases the yields and profits of crops. It makes lands that are uncertain in production produce crops every year. It brings into cultivation lands otherwise worthless. Xot only can swamp lands be made tillable, but on farms where there are places too wet to cultivate, drainage will improve the land and cause it to produce good crops. Drainage improves the physical condition of the soil by making it more granulated, porous, and friable. Thus, stiff soils are more easily handled, the plants have a greater feeding area, and the available moisture In the soil Is increased. Soils also absorb more of a rainfall, thereby decreasing erosion and damage by floods. Drainage also warms the soil, because the evaporation of moist nre l.y the sun requires heat which, If the excessive moisture is re- Continued on page 16.
Object Description
Title | Indiana farmer, 1913, v. 68, no. 22 (May 31) |
Purdue Identification Number | INFA6822 |
Date of Original | 1913 |
Subjects (LCSH) |
Agriculture Farm management Horticulture Agricultural machinery |
Subjects (NALT) |
agriculture farm management horticulture agricultural machinery and equipment |
Genre | Periodical |
Call Number of Original | 630.5 In2 |
Location of Original | Hicks Repository |
Coverage | United States - Indiana |
Type | text |
Format | JP2 |
Language | eng |
Collection Title | Indiana Farmer |
Rights Statement | Content in the Indiana Farmer Collection is in the public domain (published before 1923) or lacks a known copyright holder. Digital images in the collection may be used for educational, non-commercial, or not-for-profit purposes. |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Date Digitized | 2011-04-18 |
Digitization Information | Original scanned at 300 ppi on a Bookeye 3 scanner using internal software. Display images generated in CONTENTdm as JP2000s; file format for archival copy is uncompressed TIF format. |
Description
Title | Page 1 |
Subjects (LCSH) |
Agriculture Farm management Horticulture Agricultural machinery |
Subjects (NALT) |
agriculture farm management horticulture agricultural machinery and equipment |
Genre | Periodical |
Call Number of Original | 630.5 In2 |
Location of Original | Hicks Repository |
Coverage | Indiana |
Type | text |
Format | JP2 |
Language | eng |
Collection Title | Indiana Farmer |
Rights Statement | Content in the Indiana Farmer Collection is in the public domain (published before 1923) or lacks a known copyright holder. Digital images in the collection may be used for educational, non-commercial, or non-for-profit purposes. |
Repository | Purdue University Libraries |
Digitization Information | Orignal scanned at 300 ppi on a Bookeye 3 scanner using internal software. Display images generated in CONTENTdm as JP2000s; file format for archival copy is uncompressed TIF format. |
Transcript | cu9^/~ VOL. LXVI1I INDIANAPOLIS, MAY 31, 1913 NO. 22 The Problem of Keeping up Soil Fertility In a report recently sent out by the National Conservation Congress, this remarkable statement appears: "During the forty years from 1860 to 1900, the United States lost more fertility on Its old acreage than It gained by the addition of virgin acres. America has been mining its soil rather than farming lt." If true, this is a most important matter. The verb "to mine," has various meanings, but the one that seems to best fit the case in hand is this: "To ruin or destroy by slow methods." Most scientific agriculturalists and noil chemists know it to be true that farming methods in the United States, have been wearing out the land, working Bteadlly toward the exhaustion of its fertility. There needs to be persistent a-Hation of the matter—and hence this article. Any System of Cropping is DangefOUA. l.ft it be admitted at the beginning, that raising a crop and removing it from the field where it grew, carries away a portion of the supply of plant food. Such a process, if continued, must certainly impoverish the soil. How long it will take to exhaust its fertility, depends on circumstances. Some soils have more plant food than others, and some crops consume more than others; but this only means that, under certain circumstances, it will take long, and under others shorter time, to complete the ruin. In either case, however, ruin is Inevitable. That we have been losing fertility for forty years, and longer, is mathematically demonstrable, and the loss is r.iuch greater than is generally supposed. It is, of course, practically impossible to return to the soil all the plant food that a year's crops take o«*. without drawing from sources outside the farm. It would probably be nearer the truth to say that it is an absolute impossibility, to do so. If all the vegetable growth fit for such use, was carefully saved and returned to the fields, together with all the b and stable manure of the farm, the soil would still suffer a considerable loss through the elements of plant food which go to make up the flesh, bone and blood of the animals sold off, and those which go to make the grain that has been marketed. loss in Manure on Average Farm. This statement is made on the supposition that the utmost care has been exercised in conserving the farm manures. But how much more adverse ls the result, when little, or no care is used in this direction; and the practice, unfortunately, is extremely common, to burn tons of straw, and to allow vast quantities of manure to rot and leach until the larger part of its value Is lost. An experiment conducted at the University of Illinois, showed that of the plant food contained In the rations fed. 19.68 per cent of the nitrogen, 26.66 per cent of the phosphorus and 23.98 of the potassium were not recovered in the total manures. Add this loss to the waste, and loss in the manures By J. H. Rockwell themselves, already referred to, and we get a faint notion of ihe loss of fertility and removal of plant loud from the soil, that is constantly going on. Why Manure Docs Not Supply Need. Now go a little farther, and sum up the number of farm animals that have been in the country In the forty year.-. under consideration—the cattle, ho mules, hogs and sheep. They have no? all been on the farms, but we will place them there ami make the on the side of soil conservation, as strong as possible. Take the avi for the five census periods, I860 to 1900, Inclusive, and call ten sheep or ten hogs equivalent to one horse, cow or mule, in the production of manure —which is the usual estimate—and allow ten tons of manure a year as tha product of each animal so recund— the usual basis of calculation—and we have a total of scarcely sufficient to furnish one ton of manure to each acre, on the average, under tillage each year. Now, as no ton of manure represents. or can represent, all the plant food in the feed from which it was pro duced, and u no acre can get back, on this calculation, as mueh as la taken from it ln the crop, unless it takes ■ portion of what, in equal distribution, should go to other acres, the result is a demonstrated lessening of soil fertility, even if we allow that every acre does get back something. which, as a matter of fact, it does not. The Phoapboraa ProWani. Wisconsin experiments warrant the conclusion that, In the last half-century one-third of the phosphorus in the soil had been lost In the tilled fields. Broadly speaking, this would mean on its face, that the entire phosphorus content of the soil would he entirely exhausted In a hundred and fifty years. But it means much worse than that—it means that soils so worn, are already beginning to fall in the production of paying crops. I^ong before the original supply of plant food has been used up, the land must be abandoned, or It must be liberally enriched. The land owner must live; and he must have a surplus, or he must quit. It may be urged that such a simple thing as the rotation of corn, oats and clover—the latter plowed under the fourth year—will set matters right Bui "ill It? clover plowed under once in four \ears— equivalent to one loa of dry hay to the acre — would give to the SOU no more nitrogen thun a forty crop of corn would take from it, and the clover has no power to add phosphorus or other mineral elements. How to keep up the supply of phosphorus and potassium, is tlie question to be solved; the supply of nitrogen we know how to maintain. It is a subject well worth careful looking in*o, for, turn the matter over as we may, the fact remains, we have been losing soil fertility, and have been "mining the soil rather than farming it." More Live Stock is ..ne Solution to the Fertility Problem. Tll.l. DRAINAGE OX THK FAKM. The Department uf Agriculture has in press Farmers' l'.ulletin 524 on "Tile Drainage on the Farm," by A. ii. Smith, Agriculturist, Office of Farm .Management, Bureau of Plant Industry. This bulletin was prepared to meet the demand that is arising all over the country for Information on this subject. It is not designed to apply to large drainage projects Involving engineering problems, but to cover the subject fully from the farmer's point of view. The United States needs more drainage, says Mr. Smith. Good examples of drainage can be found in practically every State, but there are millions of acres that still require it. The Middle Western States have done the most draining, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois and Iowa leading in this respect. Although there is urgent necesaitj for drainage In Minnesota, Michigan, Wisconsin, Missouri, Arkansas, and New York, comparatively little has been done. Along the coast from Xew .Jersey to Texas, inclusive, every State has gigantic drainage problems almost untouched, while throughout the country there are lands that must be drained before maximum returns can be obtained. In reality, drainage in the Untied States is only fairly begun, and its Immense possibilities are but little known. Mr. Smith summarizes the benefits of drainage as follows: It usually Increases the yields and profits of crops. It makes lands that are uncertain in production produce crops every year. It brings into cultivation lands otherwise worthless. Xot only can swamp lands be made tillable, but on farms where there are places too wet to cultivate, drainage will improve the land and cause it to produce good crops. Drainage improves the physical condition of the soil by making it more granulated, porous, and friable. Thus, stiff soils are more easily handled, the plants have a greater feeding area, and the available moisture In the soil Is increased. Soils also absorb more of a rainfall, thereby decreasing erosion and damage by floods. Drainage also warms the soil, because the evaporation of moist nre l.y the sun requires heat which, If the excessive moisture is re- Continued on page 16. |
Tags
Comments
Post a Comment for Page 1