S54 
AMERICAN AGRICULTURIST. 
them all down, for he farms for profit, and 
cannot let them stand. The injury they do 
to a crop in taking up the moisture for some 
distance around, and leaving the growing 
plant to famish, or, at best, attain a stinted 
growth, is least in importance with him. It 
is mainly in their effect in fattening cattle 
that his trees have become so obnoxious in 
his eyes, and are falling at the hands of the 
vandal ax-man. 
Mr. D. buys about 1,000 head of steers 
every spring to fatten on his farm, assigning 
to each field just the numher it will keep 
during the season, never changing from one 
field to another. He has two fields of 30 
acres each, as nearly alike in the amount 
and quality of pasture they furnish, as two 
lots well can be, where he alleges he has by 
repeated and varied experiments tested the 
damaging effect of shade. His mode has 
been to select a sufficient number of cattle 
of as nearly equal quality as possible for 
each lot, and in the fall when he came to 
draw for the market, he has invariably found 
that while the open lot furnished a good¬ 
ly number in suitable condition for the first 
draft, it was not till the second or third 
drawing that any could be found in the re¬ 
quisite condition as to flesh in the shaded. 
He has also, by actual weighing found a dif¬ 
ference of 15 lbs. per head increase a month 
in favor of open fields, and avers that, other 
things being equal, a lot of steers will gain 
as much in an open field in four months of 
summer as they will in five months in a field 
where they have access to shade. The cat¬ 
tle in the first instance feed at all hours of 
the day upon dry and fattening grass instead 
of standing under the trees, as in the sec¬ 
ond instance, until driven out by hunger, and 
filling themselves only in the morning and 
evening with wet, flashy food. And, there¬ 
fore, it is that he cannot afford to keep his 
trees, and is hewing them down. 
Mr. D. mentioned that having directed his 
foreman to prostrate all the shade trees in a 
certain lot, he returned, saying, “ I have cut 
all but two —they are too handsome, and cost 
too much to destroy—if you want them felled 
you must do it yourself, I wont .'” “ But,” 
added Mr. D., “they must come down.” 
I could not but think the foreman was in 
the right of it, and manifested a praisworthy 
spirit, and would ask Mr. D., is profit the 
only thing for which we labor 1 Is the grati¬ 
fication of taste of no account! Shall a 
landscape, made beautiful by groves, and 
clumps, and isolated trees, be changed to 
open and arid waste for money ? And to in¬ 
crease our gain shall we forget to “ be mer¬ 
ciful to our beasts,” and compel the poor ani¬ 
mals to roast beneath a midsummer sun! 
Methinks if the dumb creatures themselves 
could speak, they would ring in the Senator’s 
ears, in such imploring tones, 
“• Woodman spare that tree, 
Touch not a single bough,” 
as to deter him from further prosecuting his 
ignoble work. W. B. P. 
Prattsburg, Nov. 17, 1854. 
Mr. Dickinson is a man of long experience, 
and has devoted many years to cattle feed¬ 
ing—principally grazing—and as profit has 
been the sole object of his labors, his expe¬ 
rience may be reliable, so far as that has 
formed his opinions ; and being an earnest 
man, he profoundly believes what he says. 
As these facts which he states—there being 
little of theory about them—are in contra¬ 
diction to the general belief, we have some¬ 
thing further to say on the subject, which is 
truly an important one, in the way of profit¬ 
able results. 
That trees injuriously affect growing crops 
beneath them, every one who will examine 
can readily see, by the stinted herbage on 
the ground wherever the roots or shade of 
the trees extend. The roots not only soak 
up the moisture of the soil, but they exhaust 
the nutriment wherever their strong and 
hungry spongioles are spread, thus feeding 
the tree at the expense of the crop, whether 
it be of grain or grass ; hence no good grain 
farmer permits many trees in his cultivated 
fields. On pasture-grounds it has been more 
the practice to have trees in greater numbers 
standing, either singly or in groups, for the 
supposed comfort of the cattle, or other ani¬ 
mals grazing upon them, without reflecting 
that to the same extent is grass affected, in 
its quantity and quality, as are grain crops. 
We are partial to trees ourselves, as beauti¬ 
fying the farm, and in our process of clear¬ 
ing and cultivation, have left copses of them 
in favorable localities, and cherished the 
growth of others which have sprung up in 
different places, for the same object. But 
in our experience, in an economical view, we 
believe Mr. Dickinson is right, although we 
are inclined not to cut down our own trees, 
even for the profit suggested. Neither cat¬ 
tle nor sheep will graze under trees when 
good pasture grows on the exposed lands in 
the same inclosures, because the grass in the 
open sun is firmer and sweeter. It may 
appear that the cattle and sheep are more 
comfortable during the heat of the day, in a 
fierce sun, under the trees where they usu¬ 
ally congregate ; yet the flies follow them as 
closely there, and annoy them as severely 
as in the open grounds, for the very reason 
that the shade is as grateful to the insects 
as it is to the cattle. This, any close ob¬ 
server will remark, and in the vicinity of 
trees the grass is always last to be eaten, 
the rankest in growth and the worst in qual¬ 
ity. 
Another fact was stated to us by Mr. Dick¬ 
inson, not above noted, which is, that open 
streams of running water, or ponds, are in¬ 
jurious to the growth and fattening of cattle, 
inducing them to stand in them during the 
heat of the day, thus giving their hair a 
rough, staring look, and enticing them from 
feeding in the middle of the day, where, in 
the absence of moisture, the grass is most 
nutritious and beneficial to them. Such ap¬ 
pear also to be facts, which may as well ap¬ 
ply to dairy cows and other grazing animals. 
These views have recently been corrobo¬ 
rated in our mind by information we have 
received from several Kentucky and other 
western graziers, who have long been accus¬ 
tomed to leave numerous trees in their pas¬ 
ture-grounds, to such an extent that “ the 
woodland pastures of Kentucky ” have be¬ 
come a term pregnant with associations of 
landscape beauty, as of herds of noble cattle. 
These graziers tell us that as the value of 
their lands have increased in late years, they 
are extensively cutting down their trees and 
laying their pastures open to the sun, thus 
getting double the feed they formerly yield¬ 
ed, and ripening their cattle for market in a 
much shorter time than before. 
Another fact, as stated by Mr. Dickinson, 
equally contrary to usually received opinion, 
we believe to be quite correct, which is, 
that frequent change of pasture, from stale 
to fresh, is not beneficial to thriving animals. 
Not that changing cattle from pastures that 
are eaten down to nothing into rank feed, is 
injurious to them ; but that, not over-stocked, 
the permanent pastures are best, is certainly 
reasonable, and in accordance with the natu¬ 
ral habits of the animals themselves. All 
observing farmers will notice that when a 
sudden change is made from a closely pas¬ 
tured field to a fresh one, a looseness of the 
bowels is at once apparent in the animals. 
The cattle overgorge themselves with the 
fresh, flashy grass, and a declension of ap¬ 
petite and flesh is the consequence for sev¬ 
eral days, in feeding cattle, and in the rich¬ 
ness of their milk, and a deterioration in the 
quality of their cheese or butter, is followed 
in the cows. Mr. Dickinson tells us that his 
habit is to cut his hay, which is several hun¬ 
dred tons every year, in the very pastures 
where his cattle graze, so important does he 
consider it to have them in full feed continu¬ 
ally 1 This is certainly new doctrine to the 
generality of farmers ; but in rich lands, 
where the pastures are of equally good soil 
as the other parts of the farm, we see no 
lack of economy in its practice. We have 
frequently done so ourselves, in limited in¬ 
closures, where the depastured animals were 
unable to consume the overgrowth of the 
grass. 
This subject will bear reflection and ex¬ 
amination by such of our graziers, stock¬ 
breeders and dairymen as enjoy the advan¬ 
tages for its trial, and their future practice 
may perhaps be altered to their advantage. 
For the American Agriculturist. 
POULTRY. 
I was much pleased with the article head¬ 
ed “Importance of Poultry to the United 
States,” which appeared in your journal a 
few weeks ago. There is certainly nothing 
on a farm which, with so little trouble, will 
pay as well as some of the improved breeds 
of poultry. Yet how little has the attention 
of farmers been called towards the subject. 
They have, for the most part, been satisfied 
with anything that would lay eggs. Fortu¬ 
nately the getting up of poultry societies, 
and the hue and cry that has been raised by 
the admirers of Shanghais, has opened the 
eyes of some of the more intelligent ones, 
and I think that in future the raising of poul 
try will claim much more attention than ever 
heretofore. 
I have always had a great fondness for 
the feathered tribes, and during the past few 
years have tried several of the different 
breeds of poultry. The Black Spanish, 
Dorking, Game, Black Poland, and Shang¬ 
hai, have all had their turn and each their 
merits. 
For the farmer who does not wish to give 
much time or attention to his fowls, there is, 
according to my opinion, no breed equal to 
the Game. They are hardier, less liable to 
disease, keep fat with less feed, and raise 
more chicks with less care, than any other 
kind. They are not as great layers as some, 
but fully equal to the average. 
To the farmer who is willing to devote 
