880 
TShe  R  U  R  AL  N  E  W-YO  R  K  E  R 
•Tunc  17,  1910. 
resell  tat  Ives  of  the  farmers  of  their  towns  nn<l  that 
it  depends  on  them  to  secure  field  tests,  demonstra¬ 
tions  and  meetings  for  their  neighbors,  then  the  bu¬ 
reau  will  make  greater  progress.  The  farm  bureau 
manager  cannot  be  expected  .to  do  it  all.  He  must 
have  a  good  organization  in  each  town  back  of  him. 
I  know  of  no  bettor  means  of  helping  the  farmer 
to  help  himself  and  lo  develop  rural  leadership  than 
the  farm  bureau.  1  think  it  has  come  to  stay  in 
Monroe  County.  geo.  w.  im'nn. 
Cow-Horn  Turnips  for  Green  Manure 
Last  Fall  we  printed  part  of  a  correspondence  be¬ 
tween  Or.  .1.  It.  Lindsey  of  Massachusetts <  and  the 
Hope  Farm  man  regarding  Cow-born  turnips.  We 
have  claimed  tlmt  Ibis  turnip  is  useful  because  it-  digs 
deep  in  the  soil,  adds  much  organic  matter  and  prob¬ 
ably  has  the  power  of  utilizing  forms  of  potash  which 
some  other  plants  could  not.  use.  We  knew  the  first 
two  points  are  trim,  but  tin-  latter  was  a  chemical  pro¬ 
position.  So  we  sent  a  good-sized  New  Jersey  Cow- 
horn  to  Dr.  Lindsey.  Now  we  have  his  figures,  and 
they  seem  to  show  that  the  potash  claim  is  sound: 
YOU  will  recall  that  last  Autumn  wo  had  con¬ 
siderable  correspondence  relative  to  Cow-horn 
turnip  as  one  of  the  components  for  a  catch  crop. 
We  sowed,  last  Summer,  a  combination  of  turnips, 
rye  and  vetch,  upon  a  number  of  plots  after  peas 
and  oats  had  been  removed.  They  were  sown  the 
last  of  July.  The  rye  and  the  turnips  grew  vig¬ 
orously  and  rather  choked  out  tin*  vetch.  I  think 
I  sowed  too  much  turnip  seed.  On  Sept  ember  25 
the  combination  of  turnips  and  rye  averaged  2V> 
feet  high.  Of  course  the  rye  was  taller  than  the 
turnips.  A<  different  places  in  the  plots,  I  cut.  out. 
10  feet  square  of  the  material  and  weighed.  This 
green  material  contained,  approximately,  13%  of 
dry  matter,  which,  on  being  calculated  on  an  acre 
basis,  gave  from  1SS2  to  26(51  of  dry  matter  per 
acre.  At  the  end  Is  a  table  showing  the  yield  per 
acre,  of  ash,  phosphoric  acid,  calcium  oxide,  potas¬ 
sium  oxide  and  nitrogen.  By  noting  the  table,  you 
will  see  that,  'on  an  acre  basis,  the  combined  catch- 
crop  took,  for  example,  from  .‘!17  !<>  423  pounds  of 
ash.  from  110  to  l<i-l  pounds  of  potash,  and  from 
54  to  SO  pounds  of  nitrogen.  I  am  also  giving  a 
table  showing  the  analyses  in  parts  of  dry  matter 
of  the  mixed  catch-crop,  and  also  one  analysis  of 
the  roots  which  I  took  from  our  field,  and  the  an¬ 
alysis  of  the  roots  sent  by  you.  These  analyses  are 
all  expressed  on  a  dry -matter  basis  for  comparison. 
Plot 
South 
North 
Wont 
Table — Pit  Acre. 
Pry  Phosphoric 
inattVr 
Ash 
Avid 
Lime 
Potash 
Nitrogen 
2001 
423 
37 
108 
194 
80 
1882 
317 
28 
3.7 
110 
74 
2143 
379 
30 
41 
132 
08 
lill.sls  Of  A  Illll.VHiH. 
100  Parts  of  Pry  .Mat tor. 
3 
8  ° 
ci  o 
'5 
2  © 
o 
ci 
US 
a> 
•o 
Turnips,  rye  ami  vetch,  west  plot. 
Turnips,  rye  and  vetch,  south  plot 
Turnips,  rye  and  vetch,  north  plot 
Turnips,  roots  and  tops  . 
Ash  . . . . 
Phosphoric  acid  . 
Potassium  oxide  . 
Sodium  oxide  . 
Calcium  oxide  . 
Mugncshiui  oxide  . 
Sulphuric  acid  (S(>3) 
Iron  and  alumina  oxides 
Soluble  Silica  (Si  02)  .. 
Insoluble  matter  . 
Nitrogen  . 
Massachusetts  Fxp.  Station. 
< 
a 
d 
~H  G 
' 
.2 
:  11 
4  8 
ss 
tft 
3  " 
-»j 
Cm 
£5 
Cm 
17.71 
1.42 
1 .93 
0.1S  3.10 
17.90 
1.40 
4.00 
0.18  3.01 
10.84 
1.48 
1.87 
5.88  2.87 
10.08 
1.19 
4.21 
7.79  2.71 
Massaebusetts 
New  Jersey 
1  too Is 
Hoots 
... 
8.50 
10.31 
1.30 
1.00 
3.89 
3.70 
.73 
1.02 
.70 
1.37 
.80 
.32 
.48 
.81 
trace 
.00 
.40 
.17 
.3.7 
7.49 
9.03 
... 
1.01 
1.28 
,  # 
1.72 
2.19 
I!.  LINDSEY. 
Talks  About  Saving  Potash 
Would  you  give  the  agricultural  value  of  corncobs, 
and  the  most  economical  way  of  obtaining  the  plant 
food  constituents  contained  therein?  I  get  the  cobs 
from  our  local  mill;  they  are  considerably  broken  in 
the  process  of  shelling,  and  some  etna  scattered  through 
them.  1  keep  poultry,  a  horse  and  cow,  and  wish  to 
ask  the  advisability  of  grinding  and  using  its  an  ab¬ 
sorbent  with  the  chicken  droppings,  and  as  stable  bed¬ 
ding,  whether  to  scatter  them  out.  over  the  ground  us 
they  come  from  the  mill,  put.  them  in  coinpost,  or  burn 
them.  What  is  the  per  cent,  of  plant  food,  etc.?  M.  i>. 
( )hio. 
A  FAIL  analysis  of  the  average  corncobs  show 
about  the  following:  In  one  ton  there  "'ill  he 
eight  pounds  of  nitrogen,  nine  pounds  of  potash,  and 
two  pounds  of  phosphoric  acid,  also  a  quantity  of 
lime.  'Phis  plan!  food  may  la*  saved  in  various 
ways.  The  entire  cob  is  rather  slow  to  decay.  On 
many  Western  farms  where  large  quantities  of  corn 
are  fed  on  the  car,  entire  cobs  are  mixed  with  the 
manure  and  hauled  mil  with  it,  although  thousands 
of  tons  are  fed  in  feeding  lols  and  thus  nol  util¬ 
ized.  For  best  and  quickest  results  (he  cobs  should 
be  broken  up  or  burned.  The  crushed  cob  makes  a 
good  absorbent  and  a  fair  bedding.  We  have  a 
cob  mill  which  can  he  used  for  smashing  or  crushing 
the  Cobs  into  small  pieces.  We  find  (hose  excellent 
for  covering  the  floor  of  poultry  houses,  and  also 
lor  absorbent  of  the  liquids  back  of  the  slalls  for 
horses  and  cattle.  The  crushed  cobs  are  porous,  ab¬ 
sorb  the  liquids  well  and  when  mixed  through  the 
manure  decay  quilt*  rapidly.  Handled  in  this  way 
the  nitrogen  is  saved  and  large  quantities  of  the 
liquid  which  would  otherwise  be  wasted  absorbed 
and  held  by  the  cobs.  In  order  to  pay  the  cost  of 
a  crusher  il  would  be  necessary  to  use  large  quanti¬ 
ties  of  the  col),  on  poultry  farms  in  particular.  In 
many  eases  it  would  pay  to  buy  ear  corn,  shell  off 
tin*  grain  and  then  crush  the  cob  or  crush  the  whole 
Into  cob  meal.  We  should  prefer  feeding  the  grain 
alone  to  poultry,  and  then  use  the  crushed  cobs  for 
Utter  on  the  house  floors.  Burning  the  cobs  drives 
off  the  nitrogen  but  leaves  the  remaining  plant  food 
in  a  far  more  available  form.  The  average  analysis 
of  the  ashes  of  corncobs  shows  500  pounds  of  pot¬ 
ash,  00  pounds  of  phosphoric  acid  and  1  10  pounds 
of  lime.  It  will  bo  seen  that  the  cobs  are  very 
strong  in  potash,  and  cob  ashes  make  a  very  good 
potash  fertilizer.  The  cobs  make  good  fuel,  being 
light  and  burning  readily,  and  probably  on  most 
farms  where  fuel  is  necessary,  burning  the  cobs  to 
a  clear  ash  will  be  Ibc  best  way  to  utilize  them.  It 
is  a  good  plan  to  make  a  certain  amount  of  char¬ 
coal  out  of  part  of  the  cobs,  as  this  charcoal  is  ex¬ 
cellent  for  bogs  as  well  as  for  other  farm  stock. 
Speaking  of  sources  of  potash  fertilizer  we  print 
the  following  letter,  which  wag  brought  out  by  our 
recent  article  on  “Wasted  Potash”: 
Wo  arc  manufacturing  one  ton  per  week  <>f  potash 
from  wood  ashes,  and  analysis  of  same  is  (5(5  to  74% 
pure  potash.  Wo  manufacture  daily,  and  are  adding  to 
our  plant  at  present.  We  use  1,200  bushels  ashes  per 
Week.  Wo  gather  our  ashes  from  mills. 
Michigan.  ADA  ms  &  co. 
As  we  have  often  stated,  if  the*  corncobs  produced 
in  a  few  of  our  corn-growing  Stales  could  be  col¬ 
lected  and  burned  we  should  have  an  annual  sup¬ 
ply  of  potash  very  much  larger  than  the  entire 
amount  imported  during  a  normal  year  from  Eu¬ 
rope.  ()ur  present  experience  ought  to  teach  this 
country  habits  of  economy,  and  steps  should  be 
-taken  to  save  as  much  as  possible  of  this  corncob 
waste.  The  letter  from  Adams  &  Co.  shows  What 
is  being  done  with  the  waste  of  some  of  the  local 
mills.  We  believe  it  will  pay  someone  to  start  in 
a  businesslike  way  to  collect  Western  corncobs  and 
turn  them  into  potash. 
We  have  all  seen  how  the  increased  demand  for 
rags,  paper,  and  metals  has  developed  tin*  junk  busi¬ 
ness.  We  think  the  work  of  saving  potash  from  cobs 
and  other  waste  substances  will  follow  in  much  the 
same  way. 
I  can  gel  kelp  ashes  (or  seaweed)  which  analyzes 
11.5%  potash.  (58%  lime,  7%  chlorine.  Is  this  loo 
much  salt  for  farming?  w.  P.  c. 
Delray.  Fla. 
In  ibis  case  the  fertilizer  men  usually  object  to 
the  high  per  cent,  of  chlorine.  These  ashes  might 
do  well  enough  for  crops  like  asparagus  or  grass, 
but  most  growers  prefer  less  salt  for  potatoes  or 
similar  crops.  But  here  is  another  waste  product 
from  which  potash  may  be  obtained. 
Heavy  Salting  of  Asparagus 
RECENTLY  The  It.  N.-Y.  printed  a  note  by  El¬ 
mer  ,l.  Weaver  on  the  practice  of  a  I’cnnsyl- 
vaniu  farmer  who  used  salt  at  the  rale  of  eight  tons 
per  acre  on  his  asparagus  patch.  There  have  been  a 
number  of  questions  about  tills — flu*  following  being 
a  fair  sample  of  the  doubters: 
I  noticed  on  page  588  a  report  of  using  sail  on 
asparagus  by  E.  J.  W.  lie  says  bo  uses  eight  tons  of 
salt  to  the  acre  in  the  Spring.  Will  you  tell  me  If  this 
is  a  fact,  or  a  mistake  in  the  quantity.?  I  am  aware 
that  asparagus  will  stand  considerable  salt,  hut  it  looks 
to  me  »s  Ihoiigli  eight,  tons  to  the  acre  would  be  an 
overdose  to  apply,  and  the  cost  of  tin*  eight  tons  would 
cost  more  than  the  price  the  ‘‘grass”  would  sell  for. 
1  have  used  salt  on  my  asparagus  several  times  at  the 
rate  of  1,000  pounds  !<>  the  acre  after  I  was  through 
cutting  to  kill  the  weeds  by  applying  on  the  rows.  I 
was  troubled  very  much  with  erahgrass  and  il  was  very 
expensive  to  clean  il  out  by  hand  labor.  It  eos!  me 
over  $550  per  acre  to  clean  it.  but  the  1.IKI0  pounds  of 
salt  per  acre  killed  every  weed  and  made  a  complete 
job  at  very  little  expense  and  I  think  was  a  benefit 
In  the  “grass.”  1  have  thought,  that  there  must,  be  a 
mistake;  that  the  amount  should  have  been  800  pounds 
instead  of  eight  tons  to  the  acre.  H.  0.  wr. 
Staten  Island,  N.  Y. 
In  order  to  get  the  facts  we  asked  Mr.  Weaver  to 
go  over  the  came  carefully,  lie  has  done  il  and  hero 
is  his  report.  What  he  says  about  trying  these  new 
ideas  conservatively  is  very  sound. 
Eight  Tons  to  the  Acre 
When  I  looked  that  matter  up  I  could  scarcely 
believe  that  anyone  would  use*  eight:  tons  per  acre, 
though  tiiis  man  has  actually  done  that  for  10  years, 
and  is  just  ready  to  apply  a  ton  next  week.  I  did 
not.  answer  your  letter  at  once  because  1  wanted  to 
measure  this  patch  myself.  The  actual  area  is  not 
over,  but  possibly  under  one-eighth  acre,  and  the 
application  as  above  stated  is  one  ton  of  salt  each 
year.  There  was  no  question  of  excuse  in  the  or¬ 
iginal  question,  and  if  no  other  benefit  than  the 
killing  of  the  weeds  would  result,  it  would  he  an 
expensive  substitute  for  tlie  cultivator.  I  cannot 
say  whether  or  not  it  is  of  any  other  benefit,  though 
T  do  know,  as  before  staled,  that  there  Is  no  aspar¬ 
agus  offered  on  the  Lancaster  market  that  runs  as 
uniformly  heavy  as  that  cut  from  this  patch.  These 
are  the  facts,  and  all  I  can  suggest  is,  that  anyone 
wishing  to  try  this  quantity  of  salt  should  experi¬ 
ment  with  part  of  his  field,  note  results,  and  de¬ 
termine  whether  or  not  it.  will  pay  to  do  it  on  a 
larger  scale.  This  is  the  only  way  to  try  any  now 
method  that  one  may  hear  suggested.  Upon  more 
than  one  occasion  I  have  foolishly  gone  into  some 
new*  method  on  a  large  scale  simply  because  it 
looked  plausible,  only  lo  lose  out.  Now  I  use  cau¬ 
tion  and  experiment  on  a  small  scale,  thereby  at 
least  Iri/ina  to  prove  a  thing  good  before  holding  on 
to  it.  The  motto,  “Prove  all  things;  hold  fast 
that  which  is  good,”  Is  a  good  one,  and  pays  in 
farming  as  in  all  other  lines  of  human  endeavor. 
ELMER  J.  WEAVER. 
Live-stock  and  Maintenance  of  the  Soil 
A  Safe  Ideal  of  Soil  Management 
Part  TIL 
PLANT  FOOD  SUPPLY  IN  SOTLS.— Finally, 
there  is  the  food  supply  partly  represented  by  the 
use  of  commercial  fertilizers.  The  fundamental  idea 
in  the  use  of  fertilizers  is  to  add  available  plant 
food,  either  that,  which  is  immediately  available  or 
will  be  available  by  the  time  the  plant  Is  ready  to 
use  it.  Beyond  this,  however,  it  must  he  remem¬ 
bered  that  the  soil  is  a  great  storehouse  of  plant 
food  and  that  even  the  very  unproductive  soil  may 
have  several  hundred  times  as  much  food  for  plants 
as  is  used  by  a  single  crop. 
CHOP  AND  SOIL  ELEMENTS.— The  following 
three  tallies  taken  from  Circular  23  of  the  Cornell 
Station  by  tin*  writer  present  the  essentials  of  this 
matter  for  the  elements  with  which  the  soil  is  most 
concerned.  , 
Table  I.  Composition  of  Crops. 
Crops.  ' 
Corn  grain  . 
Corn  stover  . 
Wheat  grain  .... 
Wheat  straw  .... 
Oats  grain  . 
Oats  straw  . 
Clover  hay  . 
A I  fill  I'a  hay  . 
Potatoes  . 
Apples,  fruit  .... 
Apples,  leaves  .  .  . 
t 
<u 
*-  t! 
<D 
o 
U 
to 
1-4 
to 
5-4 
t,  i 
<k  a 
u 
a 
L<  tf 
a 
£ 
c. 
u 
in 
JS 
QJ 
©4 
to 
a 
eK 
« 
u 
a 
Pi 
1-3 
a 
IK 
to 
o 
J 
M— ' 
a 
3 
'in 
to 
« 
J5 
M— ' 
h 
3 
ja 
in 
3 
Im 
O 
M3 
© 
to 
ja 
w ' 
a 
p 
a 
a 
In 
9 
a 
■3 
H 
MM 
| 
c. 
O 
*s 
r— • 
CS 
u 
a 
H 
y. 
Cm 
3 
W 
Cm 
O 
— 
-ft 
50  bu 
80.0 
9.5 
5.0 
8.5 
1.0 
8.0 
1.8  ton 
24.0 
20.0 
2.0 
8.0 
10.0 
5.0 
3.7  lot 
3.7,5 
0.7 
4.0 
0.0 
1.0 
2.0 
1  ton 
10.0 
10.5 
3.0 
2.0 
4.0 
1.5 
4.7  bu 
25,0 
7.0 
3.0 
ft, 6 
1.5 
2.0 
1%  ton 
12.0 
27.0 
3.0 
3.0 
6.0 
8  0 
2  tons 
80.0 
00.0 
12.0 
10.0 
47.0 
17.0 
3  Ions 
140.0 
50.0 
18.0 
14.0 
07.0 
24.0 
20(1  bu 
44.0 
00.0 
7.7 
9.0 
3.5 
4.0 
300  Im 
24.0 
28.5 
1.0 
2.5 
1.0 
2.0 
2  Ions 
30.0 
27.0 
2.0 
3.5 
50.0 
13.0 
Table  il.  Average  Composition  of  Soils  Per  Aero-Foot. 
tn 
© 
y 
i-i 
o 
Cm 
X> 
l-l 
3 
.a 
£. 
in 
3 
o 
— 
© 
£ 
a 
.2 
’o 
. — > 
© 
u 
►4 
a 
3 
Cl 
a 
to 
3 
A  normal  soil....  0,000  80.000  1.200  1,000  24,000  15,000 
'faille  III.  Maximum  Number  of  Crops  That  Could  Be  Produced 
by  the  Quantity  of  Eaeli  of  the  Primary  Plant-Food 
Elements  in  an  Acre-Foot  of  Normal  Soil. 
Nltro-  Potas-  l’hos-  Sul  Cal-  Mugno- 
C’rop  Yield  per  aero  gen  stum  phorua  phur  eluni  Bium 
Corn  .70  Ini.  grain  and  stover  so  8(10  183  172  2182  1873 
Wheat  2.7  hu.  grain  A-  stover  133  170.7  200  171  4800  4300 
Oal-  1.7  Im.  grain  A  stover.  102  SS2  108  200  8200  3000 
Red  chu'W  hay  2  toils .  7.7  .700  100  100  ,733  882 
Alfalfa  liny-  3  tens  .  47  ooo  11.7  70  373  02.7 
Potatoes  200  lai.,  2  tolls  tops  130  700  177  ltM)  0800  3770 
Apples — 300  Im. ,  2  Inns  leaves  111  .7.70  200  400  470  1000 
DEDUCTIONS.— It  is  m.l  at  all  certain  that  the 
full  amounts  of  the  plant  food  elements  in  the  crops 
mentioned  in  Table  I  are  essential.  The  propor¬ 
tion  varies  greatly  With  the  soil  but  III  a  rough  way 
maintains  these  general  relations.  Similarly  in 
Table  II  there  is  actually  a  wide  Variation  that 
might  be  expressed  by  seventy-five  per  cent,  above 
or  below  these  figures,  hut  such  extremes  are  very 
unusual.  Assuming  just  the  right  amount  of  plant 
food,  as  stated  in  Table  1,  is  supplied  each  year  by 
the  normal  soil,  until  till  In  the  surface  foot  is  ex¬ 
hausted,  it  would  last  for  tin*  mini  her  of  years  given 
for  each  element  and  each  crop  specified  in  Table 
III.  If  a  three-fool;  section  were  considered,  the 
length  of  time  in  each  east*  would  be  multiplied  by 
three.  But  tin*  farmer  is  nol  able  to  take  tlown  a 
shiny  key  from  its  pin  and  loosen  tin*  lock  tin* 
soil  holds  on  Ibis  plant  foot!  in  such  an  exact,  or  sim¬ 
ple  manner.  Nature  has  wisely  made  il  u  combin¬ 
ation  lock  and  one  must  learn  for  each  soil  bow  to 
apply  the  key. 
NITBOCEN 
THE  LIMITING  ELEMENT. — It; 
will  be  noted  that  of  Uie  elements  enumerated,  if 
