1882.] 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
not very well understood. This year we are 
likely to get additional light. The spring was 
wet in Hookertown, and better prospects for 
grass were never held out. The crop was 
good, but after it was gathered the grub of 
the May-bug began to show the results of its 
depredations, both in the pastures and in the 
meadows. My attention was called to them 
by the flocks of crows in the big pasture, and 
the adjoining fields. I did not suppose there 
were so many crows in the neighborhood. 
They frequent the shore in winter, coming 
long distances to feed upon the clam banks, 
when food is scarce elsewhere. But their 
favorite diet in summer seems to be the 
worms that come from the May-bug. They 
have great skill in detecting the presence of 
this grub, and if the crows were protected in 
their period of incubation, they would be¬ 
come so numerous as to exterminate these 
pests, or to reduce their numbers so much 
that they would do no serious damage. In 
some of my fields the grass roots are de¬ 
stroyed in large patches, so that you can 
scrape off the stubble with a rake. There 
can be no good crop of hay until these places 
are re-seeded. For several generations war . 
has been waged upon the crow, because he 
pulled corn out in the retired fields on the 
edges of woodland. Town and State have 
put bounties upon him, and he has been 
hunted at all stages of the year, to get the 
bounty money. The boys have sought out 
his nesting place, climbed tall trees, and 
cleaned his nest of the callow young. Men 
have put a dead carcass back of the barn to 
entice him within gun-shot, and he has been 
treated as -a deadly enemy. He has been 
branded with a bad name, and “ scarecrow ” 
has been applied to all those non-descript 
contrivances that disfigure cornfields to keep 
off the birds. Still he vindicates his right to 
be, and che response which Nature makes to 
this unreasoning warfare is, ‘ ‘ Protect the 
crow or do worse.” A few hills of corn in 
spring time is small damage compared to the 
grass crop of a whole farm destroyed by 
grubs. On the whole, the wiseacres at the 
State capital make poor work at mending the 
legislation of the Almighty. Take care of 
the crows, and the crows will take care of 
your grabs. 
A large portion of our farmers blunder in 
stinting the manure they apply to crops. 
Nothing can be plainer than the impolicy of 
this habit. Manure makes all the difference, 
in the older States at least, between twenty 
and fifty bushels of corn to the acre ; ten and 
thirty bushels of wheat; seventy-five and two 
hundred bushels of potatoes; unprofitable 
and thrifty culture. The planting, cultiva¬ 
tion, and harvesting of the large crop costs 
but a trifle more than the expenses of the 
small crop. The one means success, the 
other means starvation and emigration. As 
a rule, in the East, that is the best kind of 
farming which secures the largest amount of 
manure, made under cover from stock kept 
upon the farm. The man, who works his 
acres on this principle, will soon have the 
means to add to his home-made manures, 
concentrated fertilizers to enlarge his busi¬ 
ness. The greatly increased cotton crop of 
the South is owing not more to free labor 
than to the greatly increased use of concen¬ 
trated fertilizers. Planters are no longer con¬ 
tent with half a bale of cotton to the acre. 
With manure delivered by rail at the nearest 
depot at reasonable prices, it is no longer 
57 
necessary to abandon the old fields to Broom- 
sedge and gullies. Cotton can be raised 
cheaper than ever. The South is learning by 
its mistakes. 
Farming in the East is in a transition state. 
It no longer pays to raise the crops that were 
profitable fifty years ago, as many are learn¬ 
ing to their cost. They keep on in the ruts, 
and are starved out. The iron rail and steam 
put down the concentrated products of the 
prairies at our doors at less cost than we can 
raise them. In the more bulky and perish¬ 
able article^ there is a fair chance for com¬ 
petition and profit. It hardly pays to raise 
grain for the general market, and the profit 
is small to raise it for home consumption. 
Farmers near seaports and railroad depots 
in large towns, buy much of the grain they 
feed out. Butchers in the large villages, re¬ 
tail Chicago beef, sent to them in refrigerator 
cars. The beef we can make with profit 
must be in connection with dairying, raising 
working cattle, or some business that pays 
for the animal before it is ready to fatten. 
Many of our farmers are getting out of the 
ruts, and steering clear of the competition of 
the prairies. In studying this problem there 
is no help like that of a good agricultural 
journal. About the biggest blunder a farmer 
can make is to think he can thrive and make 
the most of his opportunities without read¬ 
ing and digesting the contents of such a 
paper. This brings to the farmer the re¬ 
corded experience of the best cultivators of 
the country, the philosophy of their failures 
and successes. Jake Frink is a good illustra¬ 
tion of the man who spends his evenings at 
the corner grocery, and has no time to read. 
Deacon Smith is one of the other sort, who 
has read the American Agriculturist for near¬ 
ly thirty years, and makes farming pay. The 
year is up, and now is a good time to subscribe. 
Hookertown. Ct I Yours to command, 
November 15, 1881. f Timothy Bunker, Esq. 
The Fence Question Again. 
BY H. C. WATKINS, MILLS CO., IOWA. 
The experience of an average farmer in 
Western Iowa, leads me to agree with Prof. 
Knapp in most of his ideas about barbed- 
wire fences, as expressed in the November 
number of the American Agriculturist. I 
must confess, however, to a little surprise 
that among so many good things, the Profes¬ 
sor should recommend so many different 
styles of fence—one for cattle, another for 
horses, a third for hogs, and still a fourth for 
sheep. Whether the average farmer, in the 
practice of a wise rotation of crops and pas¬ 
turage, shall change the kinds of animals to 
suit the fences, or the fences to suit the ani¬ 
mals, is a problem inferentially submitted by 
Professor Knapp. As a rule, observation and 
experience has demonstrated that one kind 
of fence for all kinds of animals, is best for 
the soil and animals too. “A change of 
pasture makes fat calves,” is a homely adage, 
early taught, and not easily forgotten or 
gainsaid. It is best to change the kind of 
grazing animals in a stated field as often as 
convenient without taking into account a 
change of fence as well. To have a field stand 
enclosed with a lasting barbed-wire fence, to 
be grazed only by animals specially suited to 
the fence until the same decays, would be a 
startling contradiction of the time-hqnored 
quotation, and wholly impracticable. 
It was not intended, however, to find fault 
with any particular style of fence (for any¬ 
body can do that much), but rather to show 
a large family of readers a kind of mongrel 
barbed-wire and board fence which I have 
been using for some time. A sketch of a 
panel of it is here presented : 
BOARD AND WIRE PENCE. 
With me this style of fence is more the 
outgrowth of necessity than jaf skill. En¬ 
closing some fields was an old three board 
fence, with posts 8 ft. apart, that must be 
renewed. It was very desirable, also, that 
the new fence should safely enclose hogs and 
sheep, as well as the larger animals. So, the 
old fence being torn down, good new posts 
were placed every 16 ft., a barbed wire made 
to order with barbs only 2'/ 2 inches apart, 
was then stretched and stapled at the bottom 
of the posts, say three or four inches from 
the ground: the posts from the old fence 
furnished two short ones, placed at equal 
distances between the end posts, high enough 
only to receive two boards, also taken from 
the old material and placed thereon, as shown 
in the engraving, with a four-inch space be¬ 
tween the lower board and the wire, and six 
inches between the two boards. Above these 
were placed the two barbed wires, leaving foot 
spaces, the upper wire being 50 inches from 
the ground. A fence thus built has securely 
enclosed during the past year horses, cattle 
(including a bull) and hogs. The more this 
fence is investigated, the more its practical 
usefulness and economy will be apparent. 
Old materials can be utilized, if convenient. 
It is durable, not top-heavy, horses will not 
hurt their knees on it, sheep will not scratch 
themselves on the barbs, hogs will not root 
under it, and all will pay it due respect. 
Another Tether. 
Mr. F. H. Fairweather, Kings Co., N. B., 
has, as he writes : “a tether (of his own in¬ 
vention) which an¬ 
swers its purpose 
admirably.” A post 
of any convenient 
length, and sharp¬ 
ened at one end, is 
driven firmly into 
the ground. A 
“turning bar,” or 
“swivel,” is secured 
to the top of the 
post by a stout pin. 
This bar may be of 
any desired length, 
up to eight feet; it 
has a hole at one 
end, through which 
the tether rope 
passes. This rope 
should be sufficient¬ 
ly long to allow 
the animal a good 
sweep. With a weight just heavy enough 
to keep all slack rope from the ground, it is 
impossible for the animal to get entangled. 
The engraving above given makes a more 
minute description unnecessary. 
