602 



FARMERS' REGISTER— FERMENTATION OF MANURES. 



of" the contrary practice, so much applauded by 

 Young and liis followers. 



Those farmers in our country who have adopted 

 the opinions and jjractice of either of the opposite 

 parties in Britain, have not attended to tlie great 

 differences of temperature in the climate, of the 

 amount of moisture usual in summer, in the two 

 countries, and the very important difference thence 

 produced on the progress of the fermentation of 

 manures, whether remaining in bulk, or buried in 

 the soil. In England, and still more in Scotland, 

 the climate is far more cool and moist than ours; 

 and also far more uniform. They have neither 

 our burning summer's sun, nor our long continued 

 droughts. The compound contents of their farm- 

 yards (fi'om the nature of the litter and food of the 

 cattle, and the greater richness of the dung of 

 their fatter beasts,) are more putrescent than ours, 

 which are principally corn stalks and straw, tram- 

 pled by lean cattle, kept on dry and poor food. Yet 

 the cool climate in Britain so retards fermentation, 

 that it requires much care and labor on clay farms, 

 to rot the winter's manure in heaps by August — 

 and in dry seasons, the whole year is not sufficient 

 for that purpose.* Here, our less putrescent ma- 

 nui-e, if heai)ed in March, (or even in mid- winter) 

 soon ferments violently, and thoroughly, unless 

 moisture is not generally diffused, or air is ex- 

 cluded from some parts by compression. It must 

 thence be inferred, that if like modes of heaping, 

 &c., are pursued in both countries, the violence of 

 fermentation, and the consequent waste and des- 

 truction of fertilizing principles, must be nmch 

 greater here, than in Britain. We labor under 

 equal, though different, disadvantages in following 

 the practice of the English "long muck" farmers. 

 After their unrotted straw and other contents of 

 the farm-yard are v^ell buried by the plough, they 

 remain undisturbed, and constantly moist. Fer- 

 mentation may proceed ver}^ slowly — but at least 

 it is not checked by drought, and exposure of the 

 manure to the air. With us, tlie nature of" our 

 husbandry compels the application of manure that 

 is fermented either very slightly, or not at all, to 

 the corn crop, where it is necessarily ofien exposed 

 by the plough, while its fermentation is in progress. 

 If spread over much surface, the labor would be 

 greatly increased, and the best effects of the ma- 

 nure scarcely perceptible. If the manure is laid 

 thick, as is generally done from necessity (to save 

 labor) no less than choice, a drought stops fermen- 

 tation, and the mass of dry litter is for the time 

 hurtful to the growing crop. That is not all the 

 evil. The manure when sjiread in its coarse state, 

 is no longer a mixture of various and different in- 

 gredients, as they become mostly separated by the 

 spreading. Here, there is put on the soil a lump 

 of pure dung, which remains a dry hard impene- 

 trable body, if on the surface — or if beneath, it rots 

 too fast for the roots to absorb its products. In 

 another place is covered a mass of wet straw, 

 which may ferment, or not, according to the sea- 

 son — and more often, hard and woody corn stalks, 

 which, when alone, can scarcely be fermented 

 without waste of principles, and injury to the crop. 

 The coarse nature of our litter, makes it impossi- 

 ble to secure it by the plough. Supposing fermen- 

 tation to go on, every corn stalk serves as a flue or 

 chimney to carry off the gases which are evolved, 



* See Agriculture, in Edinburgh Encyclopaedia, 



near to, or into, the air. The deepest ploughing, 

 consistent with economy and good husbandry, 

 could not prevent this loss. Unless growing plants 

 by their roots sliould arrest them, gaseous products 

 would rise and escape through every part of a 

 sandy soil: and clay would be a still worse cover- 

 ing — as the plough in summer would leave it every 

 where in clods with open intervals or vents between 

 them. 



If we continue the examination of all our usual 

 modes of preparing and applying manures, and 

 test them by the known eflects of fermentation, 

 and the received opinions as to the nature of the 

 food of plants, we shall find that great loss is en- 

 countered by even the least wasteful. Yet though 

 such loss can in no case be entirely avoided, atten- 

 tion to sound theoretical principles will ena- 

 ble us to save much that is now wasted, and \o 

 draw far greater profits from our manures of every 

 kind. A brief" description of the most usual modes 

 of managing manure will be presented, none of 

 which will need a veiy close trinl by these tests to 

 be proved extremely defective. 



Our different practices of applying manure, 

 though in each case directed by an opinion of the 

 superior value of manure in some particular form, 

 yet are not less governed by necessity, and the kind 

 of husbandr)^ in use. Thus, the fiirmer Avho is 

 most anxious to have his farm-yard manure com- 

 pletely rotted, must be satisfied with its state (it 

 heaped previously) as early as June: but we have 

 no crop then to receive it — there is neither time nor 

 labor on most farms, to s]iread it for wheat, after 

 removing the corn preceding it (according to our 

 usual rotation)— and consequently, the manure is 

 not used before the next year, when it is given to 

 the crop of corn. Considerations of convenience, 

 such as these, perhaps prevent every farmer from 

 adopting what he may consider the best applica- 

 tion of his manure. 



A practice very general formerly, and still not 

 altogether abandoned, is to leave the farm-yard 

 untouched from the spring, when the cattle are 

 moved awaj^, vmtil summer, just before needing 

 the yard to tread wheat on. By that time, and 

 with the usual small proportion of vegetable mat- 

 ter, it was abundantly rotted for convenient use, if 

 any crop required it. It was moved off on hand- 

 barrows, and heaped, to remain until the next 

 spring: or during all winter, is carted out for the 

 next year's crop of corn. Besides all the waste 

 sustained by such long exposure of a wide surface 

 to sun, air, and rain, the removal and heaping in 

 summer must bring on a second fermentation, after 

 the first (on the yard) had ceased — and the conse- 

 quent waste of principles is compensated by no 

 gain, as the fermentation was before enough ad- 

 vanced. 



Others let the manure remain in the yard until 

 it is taken into the carts to be carried to the field 

 for use. Theory seems to pronounce this less 

 wastefid than the plan of heaping and causing a 

 second fermentation in summer: but the amount of 

 waste in this case must depend very much on the 

 thickness of the coat of manure on the yard. If 

 tAvo feet thick, it might be not much affected by 

 the exposure, and its being close trodden would 

 necessarily cause its fermentation to be slow and 

 never violent. But if only six inches thick, the 

 exposure to air and sun and water, and the conse- 

 quent loss, would be greater, not only compara- 



