165 



itself into this, that on rnadiurn ani hotter classes of soils green manur- 

 ing is not as profitable as feeding the crop. When the crop is fed the 

 stubble and roots are left to the soil,, and they together with the manure 

 enrich the s >il in fertilising materials, and in humus to very nearly the 

 same extent as ploughing the whole crop under. With the exception of 

 perhaps one fourth of the fertilising materials, the soil shares all the 

 advantages to be obtained from green manuring when the crop is fed 

 and the manure preserved. More labour is involved in feeding but ia 

 return more milk and more beef are made, or the purchase of expen- 

 sive grain is largely avoided. 



In a rational system of farming not a single pound of protein which 

 can be used as food for stock should be ploughed into the soil. Of course 

 there are conditions under which green manuring is to be recommended 

 in preference to feeding the crop, and unfortunately sum conditions 

 prevail at present over a considerable part of this country. Unless the 

 manure is carefully collec ed and preserved the advantages from ^feed- 

 ing disappear to a large extent. In some sections of the country, even 

 where manures are at present necessary, little or no care is taken of 

 the barnyard manure. A large proportion of the fertilising and humus- 

 forming ingredients is lost, either through leaching, sarfac3-washing, 

 or fermentation and decay. The farmer who permits this waste, whether 

 ■through ignorance or carelessness, is sure to feel the loss either in 

 diminished crops or in increased bills for fertilisers. The barnyard 

 manure should be as scrupulously cared for as any other farm product. 

 It has been repeatedly shown in experiments in the East in growing 

 stock for beef, mutton and pork, that a very large proportion of the 

 profit was in the manure. If the value of the manure was left out of the 

 account there was little or no profit from the operation. If the manure 

 was valued at current rates for fertilising materials a fair profit was 

 apparent. 



ADVANTAGES OF SOILING. 



The advantages of soiling, or feeding animals largely or wholly on 

 green forage crops in the barn instead of pasturing them, are that less 

 land is required to maintain a given number of animals, the food sup- 

 ply can be better regulated, the animals do not waste their energy in' 

 searching for food, and the manure can all be saved and applied to the 

 soil. The arguments for partial soiling are that the amount of feed 

 furnished by pastures is very irregular, being usually abunda at and of 

 good quality early in the season, but falling off later from droughts or 

 early frosts In the case of milch cows unless some supplementary 

 food is given at such times the milk flow diminishes and the cows fall 

 off in flesh. ] 



Concerning the relative amounts of food furnished by pasturing and 

 by soiling, the Pennsylvania Experiment Station found in experiments 

 in two years that "in round numbers we can produce from three to five 

 times as much digestible food per acre by means of the soiling craps 

 (rye and corn or clover and corn) as is produced by pasturage su ;h as is 

 represented by our small plat." The plat in question was believed to 

 fairly represent the average pasture. From feeding trials with the 

 above soiling crops and pasture grass the average yield of milk par acre 

 "was calculated as follows :] 



