STATE AGRICULTVRAL SOCIETY. 131 



Mr. Lancy, in commenting on the experiment, in the Minneapolis 

 Tribune, says : 



Tlie appearance of the grain advances and declines in [jrecisely the same wa.yastlie quantity. 

 'The grain of tlic first cutting was miserably shrunken, resembling, it was frequently remarked 

 at the lairs, that of the crop of 1878 in the southwestern jiortion of the State. That of the sec- 

 •ond cutting showed a vast improvement. That of the third some improvement over t!ic second, 

 but not so much as in the preceding case. Tiie grain of tlie fourth cutting was by a few pro- 

 nounced the best, but the majority readily agreed on the fifth. -The grain of the sixth cutting had 

 lost its bright itolor — was bleached. The condition termed ripe was this: most of the stems, 

 -or straws, had turned, not dead white, but a rich, lively yellow. Scjme were still somewhat 

 green. The lieriv, when jiressed l)etween the soft parts of the thumb and finger, would yield, 

 but nothing liquid or doughy couid lie pressed out. 



Thus it will be seen that there was a loss of two bushels and a half 

 to tlio acre by cutting the grain in the advanced dough, and of one 

 bushel and a half to the acre by allowing it to pass the ripe stage and 

 become dead ripe. This is the loss in grain yielding only fourteen 

 bushels to the acre, and in the comparatively damp climate of Min- 

 nesota. On grain yielding twenty-one bushels to the acre in the same 

 climate, the loss, it will be seen, would have been two and a quarter 

 bushels to the acre, by allowing it to stand till dead ripe. It is also 

 evident that in our dry climate the loss would naturally be much 

 greater, as the evaporating force of the air and sun are much greater 

 than where this experiment was made. But allowing the loss to be 

 the same from the same cause, let us see what California farmers lost 

 on their wheat crop of 1878. The number of acres sown that year 

 was 2,470,000, and the total yieldwas 41,999,000 bushels, pr about 21 

 bushels to the acre. Now, assuming that our crop stood in the field 

 till it was dead ripe that year, as is the custom with us in order that 

 it may be cut with a header, and heaped up in the lieads or thrashed 

 and sacked immediately — the loss to the farmers on that one crop in 

 weight was_5,557,500 bushels. At a dollar a bushel, $5,557,500. This 

 is the loss in weight alone, but we have seen that the loss in quality 

 is also very great. Some of our best millers estimate the latter at 

 from five to ten per cent, at least. Now we present these facts and 

 considerations to the farmers of this State thus early in the year, that 

 they may study the subject well before the crop they are just now 

 planting is nearly ready for harvesting. But there is another consid- 

 eration in connection with this subject. We refer to the greater draft 

 upon the soil, as a result of allowing the grain to stand till dead ripe. 

 It is well known to all farmers that all growing crops draw more 

 heavily both on the moisture and fertilizing properties of the soil 

 during the last stages of ripening. Since it has been proven that it is 

 ' an actual damage to the wheat to allow it to go through this stage 

 while standing connected with the soil, and it is known that the soil 

 itself is greatly defertilized by the process, we would suggest whether 

 California farmers are not making a serious mistake in their time and 

 mode of harvesting? Does it pay to use the header as a harvesting 

 machine? Are we not unnecessarily drawing the fertility from our 

 soil, while at the same time we are deducting from the weight and 

 ■quality, the money and full value of our wheat? 



