SOIL EXHAUSTION. 75 



aud on account of its being cooler than other plants, condenses more dew 

 laden with fertilizing matter. 



Why is it that plaster, which by chemical analysis, contains almost no 

 fertilizing matter, is able to produce forty times its own weight, or one ton 

 of hay from fifty pounds? ^Yhy, although not able to draw moisture does it 

 destroy the effect of drouth and sometimes keep clover green and growing 

 a week later than clover not so treated. The primary effect seems to be to 

 combine with the gases escaping from the soil changing them from an inert 

 to an available form. 



This being taken up by the plant produces a greatly increased growth of 

 top, which in turn produces the indirect but most important effect. By 

 this increased growth of top it keeps the sun from heating the ground, 

 •i-etains more of the rains that fall and condenses more dew. 



By its use we not only save our own soils from loss, but we can draw down 

 and condense the gases that have escaped from the fields of our neighbors 

 who do not use plaster. This theory, it seems to me, explains the reason 

 why we cannot see any benefit on rich soils. The plant will attain sufficient- 

 growth without any aid, and therefore the primary effect would be greatly 

 lessened and the secondary effect wholly lost. 



At the present time there are other agents employed to keep the soil from 

 losing fertility. One of these is salt, which has the merit of being cheap 

 and certainly helps keep the soil moist and cool, thereby reducing its ten- 

 dency to loss by carbonizing. Is it better to plow under a crop of grass 

 worth ten dollars per acre for hay or cure it and feed it to stock? By the 

 latter plan we can return four-fifths of it to the land as manure, which, with 

 the roots later in the season is worth more than the roots and tops turned 

 under early in the season. T tried the former plan once, but shall not 

 again. 



Shall we buy phosphates or complete manures, costing 1^ to If cents per 

 pound, and which are only plant food to raise wheat which is only worth 1^ 

 cents per pound? 



There are some chemical fertilizers that give promise of good results, but 

 have not been put to the test of practical application on out- farms. Next 

 to clover in importance comes barnyard manure, which I think is greatly 

 under valued, the farmers, as a class, not making half what they might, and 

 letting half go to waste in their yards, while of what they do draw to the 

 fields, not over half is ever appropriated by growing plants, thus reducing 

 the supply to one-eighth of what it should be. Still another way to increase 

 the value of our fields is by thorough cultivation. A summer fallow, if kept 

 thoroughly worked, will keep moist and draw dews, thereby gaining in rich- 

 ness. A good rule, if you can follow it, is to never let a crust form on a 

 tilled field during the summer months. 



There is no doubt in my mind but that a system of tiles on our j)oorest 

 hill sides would be of great benefit, but probably not enough to pay for the 

 tile. They would draw the water down through the soil, keep the surface 

 from washing, and also act to increase the moisture in time of drouth. 

 Cole's "New Agriculture" proves that this theory is correct, but does not 

 prove that it is profitable. I have become so impressed with the importance 

 and correctness of the theory that excessive heat is the cause of the universal 

 poverty of dry sandy soils, that I recommend anything that will keep the 

 surface cool, such as all kinds of mulch. Straw, which is of small value as 

 a manure, may exert an influence equal to phosphate if applied to the 



