PROGRESS OF AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENTS, 1924. 



A Report of the Director of the New Hampshire Agricultural 

 Experiment Station for the Year 1924, Including a Financial 

 Statement for the Fiscal Year Ending June 30, 1924. 



Development of a long-time program which should eventually build anew the 

 agriculture of New Hampshire, repairing the inroads of the past half centuiy, 

 has been for several years the desire uppermost in the minds of those who have 

 thought of the fundamental needs of the state. That such a program is already 

 in process is evident. Extension agnecies, farm bureaus, experiment station, 

 state department of agriculture, and various other associations are working 

 together in the building of it; and during the last biennium the formation of a 

 central state committee for the rehabilitation of New Hampshire has not only 

 brought the problems into better focus but has better co-ordinated the working 

 forces. 



From whatever angle one looks into the question of improving the agriculture 

 of the state, however, one soon finds certain unsolved fundamental problems. 

 On these the need for careful scientific investigation is paramount. Unless 

 such investigational work is done, there is opportunity for grave mistake in the 

 building of our program. Principal among these problems are: 



Determination of soil tjTJes throughout the state, and adaptation of crops to 

 such soil tj'pes. 



Ascertainment of local market needs and adjustment of community pro- 

 duction to fit such needs. 



Participation in the forest research program of the northeastern states. 



New Hampshire has been presented by Nature with gi'eatly varying soil 

 tj^jes. It is not possible — as in many regions of the country — to map out 

 definite areas in which uniformity prevails. From field to field — and often 

 within the field — the character of the soil changes. Sand, loam, clay and rock 

 with all the intermediate variations of these tjqjes run in irregular splotches 

 with, of course, varying effects on different crops. 



To recommend specific varieties or often even specific crops on these soil 

 types — and particularly to lay down a progi-am to solve the urgent problem of 

 soil fertility — without more thorough investigation than has yet been possible 

 is somewhat like prescribing medicine before the doctor is confident of the 

 diagnosis. The best that we have been able to do has been to draw certain 

 generalizations. The farmer must then make his own experiments to complete 

 the solution of the problem. Granted that some degree of local experimenta- 

 tion and adaptation of generalized knowledge will probably always be necessary 

 on the part of individual farm owners, the present system is still woefully 

 inefficient. It is possible to learn many valuable points about our soil tj-pes 

 which we do not yet know. Even though our soils vary so greatly, the different 

 types recur. It should not be necessary for thousands of individual farmers to 

 learn through a Ufetime of personal ex-periences points which regional experi- 

 mentation could determine. There is an unexplored midground between our 

 present knowledge and the irreducible minimum of farm application. 



