-182 



Production of Artificial Farmyard Mant re. 



[Sept., 



it was decided that claims might be made up to and including 

 the 18th July, and a notice to this effect was issued on the 

 28th June, in which growers were warned that no further exten- 

 sion of time would be granted. In addition to the notices issued 

 to the Press, notices were also published in the April, May, and 

 June issues of the Journal of the Ministry. 



It was necessary that a final date for the receipt of claims 

 should be fixed, in order that they may be examined by the 

 county committees as far as possible before the land is ploughed 

 up, and, in view of the long period allowed in which to make a 

 claim, I feel that farmers who failed to send in their claims by 

 the prescribed date have no legitimate grievance. I do not pro- 

 pose, therefore, to accept claims made after 18th July, 

 except where the occupier entered into occupation of the land 

 after the 30th June." 



* * * * * " *■ 



In the last number of the Journal (p. 398), there appeared an 



article on this subject which deserves the attention of practical agri- 



„, , ^. » culturists. The results obtained constitute 



The Production of „ ^, i. . i.i j • i 



^ . , „ one of the most notable advances m know- 

 Artificial Farm- , , , . . , , • i. i 



, ledffe 01 the principles oi aQTicuLtural prac- 

 yard Manure. \x ^ ^ S ^ ' u 



^ tjce that have been made m recent years. 



Interesting as the subject of " artificial " farmyard manure 

 must be — especially for the market gardener — the advance in 

 knowledge regarding the principles which underlie farm practice 

 in relation to ordinary yard manure is equally noteworthy. It 

 is now made clear that Nature, if left to herself, turns out a pro- 

 duct which is practically of constant fertilising value. The 

 making of dung is essentially a process for rotting straw. The 

 latest advance of science confirms the wisdom of age-long prac- 

 tice — the addition of animal urine is the best way of rottirg 

 straw and producing the most essential of all fertilising agents. 

 So much for theory, what of practice? 



The discoveries that have been made establish, first of all, 

 that under ordinary conditions of making and application it 

 makes little difference whether dung is made from " cake fed 

 animals or not. A certain quantity of straw will give a certain 

 amount of dung of a uniform fertilising value, and, secondly, if, 

 as a result of feeding cake, the animals produce a richer urine, 

 the best way of retaining the added richness during the period 

 that ordinarily elapses between making {i.e., thorough rotting) 

 and application, is to use more straw in the litter. Unless this 

 is done the additional fertilising value fnitrogen'i may be lost 

 in the air. 



