Newspapers / The Progressive Farmer (Raleigh, … / March 24, 1903, edition 1 / Page 1
Part of The Progressive Farmer (Raleigh, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
r t 5) (ni rn To) w y THE INDUSTRIAL AND EDUCATIONAL INTERESTS OP OUR PEOPLE PARAMOUNT TO ALL OTHER CONSIDERATIONS OF STATE POLICY. Volume XVIII. RALEIGH, N. C, TUESDAY, MARCH 24, 1903. Number 7. AGRICULTURE HARRY FARMER'S TALKS. CXII. Editor of The Progressive Farmer: We were glad to have Professor Masry discuss the interest problem. His plan would he an improvement on pre-ent conditions, but if all the farmers in the cotton belt were to ro iirto raising beef, would not the price iro down so low that it would not Lave any profit? It is true, as he says, that cattle could he raised at a small cost if our farmers would diversify and sow oats, cow peas and feed the cattle on the farm, then re turn the manure to the land, and thus eMt down the cotton acreage about era-half hut raise just as much cot-t-.n. We auri c with him about having Mmethinir to sell at all seasons of the year. As we stated once before, (rum our own farm there is scarcely a 'lay hut thatwe get dimes, and 'We days dollars, for eggs, meat, po tatoes, hecf, hay", cotton, grapes, mel eollards, turnips, peanuts, lard, r:;"lases and other things. But every tanner is not so situated as we are T" have a market for every thing, shh"i:h there are thousands who f'"'dl l ull,! up a market and thus luve a ie;idy stream of money com- ' idl the time, if it is small. Prut,..,,,. ;i;Hev iag one a good ai: I f;irmors 0f Xorth Car- i ,1: , . ' 1,1:1 1 tin- oiith owe him a debt frratii-idc for tonehing them the '"I'rtant ,. ,,f rotating and changing "'a t!:c mttoii fanning, but his '''il'iWi- le i - are iewer than they should ""'withstanding they are much 'ir,.,-fui ti1;111 tjie average hirnnT. V'har w,. v.ant is to stop this buy- '"' thee at high prices. It will vlr,1- hri;,- disaster on all who en- L"1-1' in it r i f 'armors who pay cash 'r i;"t th. y hy save an enormous h'I'! in :1 f,"w v,,Jlrs nn(1 the only i: ,luU v'"'" f is to borrow s Wl' ,;ni borrow it and pay " 10 1" -r - nt thorp will 1 o VT o- f .;Ult ::iiv,-1- When men are suf- t,.j tj ; 1 11 -os no good to cine h'" ll'at there is a good medi tit1 a ,,--rtain city that will relieve Tlt 'Jirl i1"7 Want is something Wf thcra If the f'Um-ir " rrow money instead Pnce; ;f ,'nitUae at the usual time n lnakc a difference so u$ in o 10 W"u1,1 become prosper a a ft-w years. Every writer, including the Editor of The Progressive Farmer, agrees that cash buying would be best. Now many of the readers of The Progressive Earmer seem to be puz zled to know our reason for using a nom de plume in signing the articles we write. Well, when we were a boy it was a great thing in our eyes to use a Big I when appearing in pub lic, but later in life our ambition to show self began to wane, and now we want to do as much good as we can without appearing in public at all. If these Talks can help the farming interest and cause more of our young men to do more thinking and help build up the run-down farms of the State, we shall be sat isfied. We are glad that we sprang this discussion; it has done good, and while we may not have anything more to say, we want every one who disa grees or agrees with us to express his opinion. Let us have more of the letters like that of Mr. Blak6 Johnson. The Bible tells us not to hide our lights but let them shine. HARRY FARMER. Columbus Co., N. C. Can Fanners Mix Their Own Fertili zers Economically? Many of the experiment stations have for several years past been studying this question in connection with their work in the official inspec tion of fertilizers. The unanimous conclusion reached by the stations which have given the closest atten tion to the subject is that it is en tirely practicable and economical un der certain conditions for farmers to buy the different fertilizing materials in the crude stock and to mix them on the farm, and they have made every effort to encourage and assist them in the practice. It has been clearly shown that when farmers combine together and pur chase their supplies in large quanti ties for cash and make their own mixtures, they secure their fertilizers at a greatly reduced cost. An exam ination by the New Jersey Station in 1895 of home mixtures made by farmers in different parts of the State, representing in the aggregate a purchase of over 1,000 tons, showed that these mixtures cost on an aver age $28.02 per ton, while the fertil izing ingredients which they contain ed, at the station valuations, were worth $31.68. In the average factory-mixed fertilizer the same ingre dients would have cost $43.12. "At the rate here indicated there was a saving of $14,500, certainly a good return for cash payments instead of credit, for selecting materials high grade and suited to the needs of the soil or plant instead of by hit or miss, and for using the regular labor of the farm in mixing instead of paying others who do the work no better." In 189G the home mixtures examined by the station cost on the average $20.18 per ton, while their average valuation was $28.34, "indicating a saving on the part of the consumer not only of the difference, $2.10, but also of the additional expenses in volved which would have been paid if the average commercial mixture had been purchased." As stated above, however, this sav ing can only be secured by coopera tion on the part of farmers, so that the fertilizing materials can be pur chased in bulk for cash. The market prices of the fertilizing materials bought in small quantities are fre quently so high as "to render home mixing impracticable. The individ ual farmer rarely uses fertilizers in sufficient quantity to enable him to secure the advantage of wholesale quotations on unmixed fertilizing materials, but farmers' clubs, granges, etc., may buy the crude stock in carload lots and thus secure the full advantage of reduced price for purchase in bulk. It has repeatedly been urged that it is not practicable for farmers to mix their own fertilizers, because mixing can not be satisfactorily done with the ordinary facilities of the farm; but reports of a large number of practical and successful farmers in Connecticut, New Jersey, Rhode Island, and other States have shown beyond question that fertilizer mix tures uniform in quality, fine, dry, and equal in all respects to the best factory-made fertilizers, can be and are annually made on the farm with out the aid of milling machinery. A tight barn floor, platform scales, screen, shovel, and hoe are the only utensils needed. The materials being weighed, screened, and lumps pul verized, the most bulky stock is spread in an oblong pile from 6 to 12 inches deep; upon its leveled top the next material is placed, and so on until all have been added like layers on a layer cake. Commencing at one end, the pile is shoveled over, reaching clear to the-bottom every time. The pile is then leveled up and the operation repeated three times. The mixture may then be screened again if desired. j In this system a farmer has a defi nite knowledge of the kinds of plant food that he purchases. Each ingre dient can be examined separately and its nature and quality deter mined. "Leather, shoddy, wool waste, v or other inferior materials can not be palmed off as readily as when dis guised by other materials in mixed goods." A further advantage is the ability of the farmer to vary the proportions of the different fertilizing ingre- ? dients to suit the varying require ments of soil and crop. It has been urged in objection to this that the farmer as a rule does not possess the information necessary to enable him to mix his fertilizing ingredients in the proper proportions to meet most economically the varying require ments of his soils and crops. If the farmer does not know the requirements of his own soil, who is to tell him? No two soils have ex actly the same needs and no two crops the same requirements. It is, idle to hope that some "special" fer tilizers can be compounded which will be perfectly adapted to a given crop on all soils and. under all condi tions. This is a species of agricul tural quackery which fortunately is rapidly passing away. It is becom ing more and more evident every day that in the use of fertilizers, as in other agricultural operations, every farm is an experiment and that every farmer must be an alert experiment er. Each farm has its problems dis tinct from those of every other farm, and they can only be solved by pa tient study and experiment on the part of the farmer himself. No out sider can tell him just what to do and just what fertilizer to use in each particular case. The farmer can no longer afford to use fertilizers blindly and solely on the statement of some one else. He must study the principles underlying the use of fertilizers and determine by experiment the kinds and amounts best suited to his own peculiar needs. The experiment stations organized in every State and Territory have al ways stood ready to direct and assist the farmer in this important work, and in doing this have performed one of their most useful functions. To summarize briefly, it is believed that the investigations of the stations and the experience of practical farm ers show that the main conditions which must be observed by intelli-' gent and progressive farmers in or der to make the system of home mix ing of fertilizers entirely feasible and thoroughly economical are "(1) that the supplies should be purchased in considerable quantities, (2) that they should be purchased early and prepared before the beginning of the busy season on the farm, and (3) that contracts sjiould be on a cash basis." Experiment Station Record,United States Department of Agriculture.
The Progressive Farmer (Raleigh, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
March 24, 1903, edition 1
1
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75