No. 6. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 175 



of farming- in this country, as in all countries, is one of wastefulness 

 in the utili/cation of natural resources. As already pointed out, 

 nature added to the soil an abundance of vegetable matter, which, 

 in its partial dtiay, contributes not only to the absorptive, water 

 and food-holding capacity of the soil, but also to the building up 

 of the crop. As the farmer began his work on soil cultivation, he 

 created a tendency towards the reverse order of things, favoring 

 not a legitimate use of the organic matter in the soil, but its burning 

 up, as it were, and in conseciuence fertility was reduced and the 

 yields became poorer. 



Because of the abundance of land, the practice prevailed not of 

 conservation and improvement by directing nature's laws, but of 

 taking up more land, or of clearing it of timber, in order that more 

 produce might be grown. The timber was not utilized as it might 

 have been, since the primary i)urpose was to obtain the land upon 

 which it grew. This system, which the individual farmer followed, 

 which was practiced by farmers in the aggregate, has resulted in 

 the destruction of our forests, or the w.fsteful management of our 

 lands, has resulti-d in malcrially changing the cliinaU' of our coun- 

 try, but certainly the changed conditions of soil, in so far as they 

 concern its water-holding capacity, are such as to considerably 

 modify the effect of our spring and winter rain.s. The floods, which 

 have recently been so devastating in their character in many parts 

 of our country, and the periodical drouths, so destructive in their 

 nature, are due, in great measure, at least, to the removal of our 

 forests, and to the depletion of the organic matter in our soils, with 

 the consecjuent rapid running away of the water, rather than its ab- 

 sorption and conservatism, and its gradual movement toward the sea. 

 This destructive system of farming is not confined to any special 

 district, though it is especially noticeable in those sections of our 

 country where single crops are the farm's main source of income, 

 as, for example, cotton and tobacco in the South, corn in thv. Middle 

 West, and wheat in the Northwest. These systems of farming are 

 very wasteful of soil fertility, because they do not provide for the 

 building up of the soil, either in the organic matter or in its physical 

 character. Even the ranges of the far Western states have been 

 injured by destructive methods. The grasses have been destroyed, 

 the water-holding- capacity of the mountain sides decreased, and 

 the available water for the irrigation of the drier plains below ma- 

 terially diminished. All of these methods, which hav^e lessened the 

 productivity of many of our soils, show but one side of the losses 

 that are actually occurring; the side which is perhaps the least 

 important, though it cannot be separated from the other, for the 

 two combined must constitute what we understand by natural fer- 

 tility. In other words, it has been shown that the final measure 

 of fertility of a soil is its content of nitrogen, phosphoric acid and 

 potash, and the elements contained in comparatively small amounts 

 in soils and removed by crops in relatively large amounts. That is, 

 we may have a soil quite perfect in its physical character, that 

 would hold water and give it up gradually to the plant, that would 

 hold warmth, and in other ways be perfectly capable of contribut- 

 ing to the growth of the plant, and yet be incapable of supporting 

 plant life, if deprived of the constituent elements, nitrogen, phos- 



