4i8 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER 
JUNE 28 
FARMERS’ CLUB-DISCUSSION. 
Rolling and Mulching: Deep and 
Shallow Cultivation. 
A. W. P., Astltjm Station, Mass.— The 
discussion on page 86 of the R. N.-Y. about 
rolling the prize oat crop, proves that it is 
difficult to harmonize practical results 
with an erroneous philosophy. The stand¬ 
ard agricultural philosphy in relation to cul¬ 
tivation, which Iinfer from the discussion, 
the R. N.-Y. accepts as correct, claims 
that good cultivation checks evaporation, 
and benefits the crop by retaining for Its 
nse moisture in the soil, which would 
otherwise be lost by evaporation. There 
is a modern, and, I think, more correct phi¬ 
losophy, which originated in one of the 
hottest and driest valleys of California, the 
inhabitants of which made a specialty of 
growing early fruits and vegetables with¬ 
out irrigation for the San Francisco mar¬ 
ket;, and they claim that good cultiva¬ 
tion assists evaporation and benefits the 
crop by increasing the flow of moisture 
from the earth, relying upon capillarity 
to provide for the increase. 
When theR. N.-Y. says. “If *T. W. S.’ 
will roll a strip of the field, leaving the 
rest not rolled, it will be seen that the strip 
rolled will be moist on the surface when 
the unrolled soil is dry, thus showing that 
the moisture comes to the surface more 
rapidly, and, of course, escapes more 
rapidly the new philosophy says that is 
correct and because the moisture comes to 
the surface more rapidly our crops are 
benefited by being better watered and 
better fed. How better fed ? The stream 
of moisture which is drawn from the earth 
by the powers of evaporation and capillarity 
holds plant food in solution. This food is 
left in the earth at the place where the air 
meets the visible moisture and changes it 
into invisible vapor of water. The place 
where this change takes place is called the 
point of evaporation. All the control the 
cultivator who works without irrigation, 
has over the amount of water he shall fur¬ 
nish to his crops, he gets from his ability 
to locate, and to change the location of this 
point of evaporation. The nearer the sur¬ 
face the point of evaporation is kept, the 
more rapid the evaporation will be, and the 
more thrifty the growth of the crop. 
The new philosophy affirms that what¬ 
ever assists evaporation is beneficial and 
whatever checks it is injurious, either for 
wet weather or dry. Rolling may be bene¬ 
ficial orit may be injurious, as it was when 
the R. N.-Y. rolled its wheatground in the 
fall, thereby causing it to glaze and crust. 
Nothing checks evaporation more com¬ 
pletely—except jack frost—than a hard 
crust on the surface, closing the capillary 
tubes, and preventing them from doing 
their legitimate work, and if this crust re¬ 
mains, the point of evaporation works 
down into the earth, as the water works 
down into a pump when its valves are out 
of order. Crusted land is not dry because 
too much water has evaporated from it, but 
because the pumps of capillarity have not 
had an opportunity to keep the surface soil 
moist. I have yet to meet a practical result 
that will not harmonize with the new phi¬ 
losophy. 
Again, I notice that Mrs. Jones who won 
the prize in the Women’s Potato Contest, 
mulched her crop. How and why did the 
mulching benefit the crop* Let us look, 
first, at the difference between mulching 
and shading. If we take two pans of water 
and set them in the sun and wind, place 
some sticks on one, pnt some straw on the 
sticks so as to protect the water from the 
sun and wind, that pan Is shaded and the 
water will not evaporate so rapidly from it 
as it will from the unshaded pan. If we 
take away the sticks and place the straw in 
contact with the water, we change the straw 
from the work of shading that pan of 
water, to the work of mulching it, and by 
this change in the position of the straw, we 
change the conditions of the water so that 
the sun and wind can, and will, evaporate 
water much faster from the mulched pan 
than from the unmulched and unshaded 
one by the side of it. A stratum of dry 
earth is shade material, and checks evapor¬ 
ation. Professor Atwater, by experiments 
has shown that the checking is in propor¬ 
tion to the thickness of the stratum of 
shade material. His experiments were 
very interesting, carefully conducted and 
correct results were given to the public, and 
yet, because of the erroneous ideas that the 
checking of evaporation is desirable, many 
agricultural papers founded erroneous in¬ 
structions upon those experiments. In the 
early days of California agriculture, I knew 
acres of crops to be cultivated to death by 
following such instructions. Some of the 
Western experiment stations have of late 
given instruction, founded upon results ob¬ 
tained in field culture, which substitute for 
the old rule: “ Stir the soil deep and often:” 
“ Stir shallow and only enough to kill 
weeds and break up crusts ”—a system of 
cultivation which brings the point of evap¬ 
oration near to the surface and thereby as¬ 
sists evaporation: they have changed their 
practice, before changing their philosophy. 
Stagnant water is injurious to vegetation. 
Capillary tubes are to the circulation of 
water in the earth, what the pores in our 
skin are to the circulation of moisture in 
our bodies: close either and injurious re¬ 
sults follow. Whether Mrs. Jones’s wood 
“ dirt ” was leaf mold from the woods, or 
refuse chips, bark and sawdust from the 
wood pile, it was probably a more porous 
material, less liable to crust after a rain, 
and of greater evaporating capacity than 
the natural soil, and by putting on three 
inches of this material she raised the point 
of evaporation at least three inches, thereby 
giving the roots three inches more of very 
fertile moist soil to feed in, and any in¬ 
crease of evaporation caused by the mulch 
would bring more plant food in solution, 
as well as more water within reach of the 
roots. I think it safe to credit the mulch 
with 25 per cent, of the crop. 
Gophers Again. 
Prof. W. A. Henry, Madison, Wis.— 
The call of W. B. H., Cone, Montana, for 
help in fighting the gopher should bring 
out a full discussion from the R. N.-Y.’s 
Western correspondents. For two sum 
mers I carefully watched the destructive 
work of the pocket gophers in California, 
and early became convinced that they are 
by far the most insidious of the animal 
pests that annoy our agriculture and hor¬ 
ticulture. Their mines are so deep down 
that there are no signs of their trails, as in 
case of the mole, except where the heaps of 
earth are thrown out from 15 to 25 feet 
apart. It Is simply wonderful to note how 
rapidly they move through the soil, and 
how unerringly a desired tree or melon is 
reached. They will run a tunnel for scores 
of feet and come up directly under a water¬ 
melon. About half a peck of earth is de¬ 
posited in each heap. I have repeatedly 
removed this carefully in order to discover 
the opening through which it was pushed, 
but usually failed, the ground being packed 
as hard in the opening as elsewhere. I 
have seen where they passed the first row 
of orange trees and girdled a tree in the 
second row where the orchardist did not 
expect an attack, and only became aware 
of it when the 13-year-old tree was past re¬ 
covery, for a tree will keep its leaves green 
until ruined, when girdled below the sur¬ 
face of the soil. 
As to remedies: First of all there is no 
cheap and easy way of getting rid of these 
pests in orchards, unless the land can be 
entirely flooded. In a number of instances 
we drowned them out by flooding each sec¬ 
tion where there were any signs of them. 
In one case when we were flooding, we saw 
one rise above the water from his hole, but, 
on seeing us ready to dispatch him, he 
drew back and deliberately committed 
suicide rather than allow himself to be 
killed by us. Trapping succeeds well when 
one has learned the “knack.” At first we 
were entirely unsuccessful. We paid boys 
a stipulated price per head, and they did 
such excellent work as only boys can. By 
watching carefully we soon saw how the 
thing was done, and succeeded very well 
indeed. The trapper should have at least 
two kinds of gopher traps, so that if he 
fails with one kind, as is sometimes the 
case, he has a chance with the other. A 
large number of traps should be used at 
once, if there are many depredators. 
Gopher smokers are used by some. The 
smoker is a tube in which old rags or some 
such substance is placed along with sul¬ 
phur. The tube is inserted inside the run, 
and by means of the bellows attached the 
fumes and smoke are forced into the runs. 
Carbon bi-sulphide is strongly recom¬ 
mended, and will, perhaps, prove the best 
single remedy. A small quantity of the 
liquid is poured through a funnel into the 
run, which is quickly closed up. The 
liquid rapidly vaporizes, and, being poison¬ 
ous, kills the animals. As carbon bi-sul¬ 
phide is very inflammable, it should be 
kept away from the fire aud bright sun¬ 
light. All orchard methods of destruction 
are necessarily slow, and require much 
patience. For Alfalfa land the Califor¬ 
nian system of occasional floodings seems 
to be the only practical method. 
Cross-Fertilization of Grapes. 
T. V. Munson, Denison, Tex.—I wish 
the R. N.-Y. to put on record a fact I ob¬ 
served on June 5, 1890, as it is one rarely 
observed, though doubtless of common oc¬ 
currence. To the questions of'G. R. W. as 
to whether bees are capable of fertilizing 
grape flowers, and whether they are agents 
in crossing and hybridizing them, I gave, 
on page 335, an answer in the affirmative, 
provided the bees ever visited the flowers, 
which I doubted was the case. What I 
saw on the above date answers the ques¬ 
tions of many in the matter of cross-fertil¬ 
ization of the grape by insects. 
At about 10 o’clock A. M. that pleasant 
day I was intently studying the opening 
of the grape flowers, and observing all the 
insects attracted to them. I first observed 
a number of “ Lightning Bugs ” diligently 
crawling over the clusters of bloom on Mus¬ 
cadine vines (Yitis rotundifolia), eating the 
pollen. These insects do not. of course, 
flv in the day-time unless disturbed, and 
hence could not be much engaged in cross- 
fertilization, even if they carried the pollen 
on their exterior parts as do bees. But 
they ate entirely all the pollen they col¬ 
lected as they gathered it. While watch¬ 
ing these pollen eaters I heard among and 
in the shade of the dense foliage a faint 
humming, which I, at last, found came 
from a very small bee—a “sweat bee.” It 
was very busy and exceedingly agile in 
collecting grape-pollen into pellets on its 
legs, which were provided with pollen- 
cups, as in the case of the honey-bee. 
There were two or three species of these 
“sweat-bees” at work, and. besides these, 
one species of the “ leaf-cutting bees ” 
(Megachilius), which also collect pollen 
from melons, squashes, etc., and are still 
more shy and rapid than the “sweat-bees.” 
They collected pollen exceedingly fast 
upon the under side of their abdomens, 
going entirely over a cluster of grape- 
flowers in about a second. All these 
pollen collecting insects were very shy, 
flying away at once at the least jar, or 
when I went near on the windward side of 
them. So, in order to observe them better, 
I crept beneath the vines and lay upon my 
back till I became fully satisfied that no 
better agents for crossing and hybridizing 
species of grapes blooming at the same 
time exist wild in nature. Only a few 
paces distant from the vines observed were 
thousands of honey-bees, collecting honey- 
dew from Catalpa leaves and various 
flowers; but, as in all my previous obser¬ 
vation of grape-flowers, no honey-bee ever 
came near the grape flowers. We can then 
safely affirm that grapes blooming at the 
same time in the open air can be, and are, 
intermingled both by insects and the 
wind. I once sent to Jacob Moore, of New 
York, dry pollen of some varieties of 
grapes, which he used successfully in pro¬ 
ducing crosses about three or four weeks 
after I had collected it, and he preserved 
some of it in a dry air and medium temper¬ 
ature till the next year, and still suc¬ 
ceeded in making crosses with it. All 
these facts are very valuable to the intelli¬ 
gent hybridizer. 
“ Exclusive Orcharding.” 
Dr. T. H. Hoskins, Orleans County, 
Vt.—M r. Taylor, of Kansas, (R. N.-Y. May 
17, page 320) seems to take exception to my 
expression of a doubt whether, as a rule, 
exclusive orcharding on a large scale is 
likely to be as profitable as mixed farming 
in' which orcharding takes a prominent 
place. I have no objection or criticism to 
make upon exclusive orcharding in compe¬ 
tent hands; but, unfortunately, the num¬ 
ber of men who succeed in exclusive or¬ 
charding is comparatively small. Even 
the Hale brothers, with their large Con¬ 
necticut peach orchard, do not confine 
themselves to that, and are well aware of 
its risks. We have but little experience 
on record in New England which favors 
exclusive orcharding. My own leading 
branch is orcharding; but I find it very 
convenient, especially in the off years, to 
have something else to sell. My older or¬ 
chard contains about 700 trees, and another 
one will soon be made up to 1,000. For 
quite a number of years a young apple or¬ 
chard produces little fruit, while the 
growth of the trees is much promoted by 
the manuring and cultivation attendant 
upon cultivation of the land. I have 
grown small fruits, dwarf peas and beans 
in my orchards, and made the land pay so 
well that the trees came to bearing almost 
as a by-product, without expense. PIven 
now, when my older orchard is mostly in 
full bearing, I manure and cultivate the 
land for the benefit of the trees. The 
straw from the beans grown in a young or¬ 
chard has proved admirable for mulching 
the trees, and furnishes a first-class ferti¬ 
lizer as it decays. Southwestern Maine is 
the great New England apple section, and 
furnishes the finest fruit grown tor expor¬ 
tation to Europe; yet this fruit all-copies 
from orchards where mixed farming is the 
rule; and some of the best dairymen of 
Maine—notably, editor Gilbert, of the 
Maine Farmer—are very successful orchard- 
ists. Even President Rufus M. Prince, of 
the Maine State Agricultural Society, who 
has very large orchaids, and advocates a 
general and great extension of the business 
in his State, is by no means an exclusive 
apple grower. Whatever theories may be 
entertained, practical men will be governed 
by practical facts. Here and there there is 
a man with capital and skill to succeed as 
an exclusive orchardist; but it must be 
long before any considerable part of our 
fruit supply will come from such orchards 
Let us adhere to facts. 
More about Moles. 
F. H., Climax, Mich.— I planted some 
wrinkled peas in drills about 50 feet long, 
and at the time of planting stuck down 
shingles across the drills to keep the moles 
from following the row. In former years 
I had found this plan quite effectual; this 
year it failed for the moles had learned 
the trick. The shingles are about 16 
inches apart. The moles have followed 
the rows right along the whole length, 
simply going around the shingles as they 
came to them. A few peas which the mole 
track did not reach were left close to the 
shingles. All the rest are gone, not a 
trace of them being left in the ground. 
Some of my peas have not been disturbed 
by them. They were not wrinkled. Not a 
pea has been touched by mice or grubs 
where the moles have not been. The 
ground had been heavily manured in 
former years and was not manured at all 
this year, and it was all equally mellowed, 
so that there was nothing to attract in¬ 
sects to the rows any more than elsewhere. 
Tf the moles did not eat the peas which 
disappeared along their path, what became 
of them ? and why did the moles follow the 
rows so persistently when so many obstruc¬ 
tions were in their way ? If mice or grubs 
ate them, as A. C. B., of Rockville, Ind., 
says, whv did they not eat them in other 
places than along the mole tracks ? Is it 
necessary for a mole to open the path for 
the mice and grubs ? I have not found 
any grubs in the ground. Why not ? I 
have looked carefully. It is said “ the 
mole is not built” to eat these things. 
Perhaps not; I believe he does it “ just the 
same,” and that he has no more difficulty 
in eating peas after they have laid in the 
ground a few days than he has in eating 
May-bugs, and that he has the disposition 
to do so. 
It is, however, a matter of indifference to 
me whether the mole eats vegetables or 
leads a party of mice and grubs to do it; 
he is equally my enemy. It is at most but 
a small part of the injury done by the 
moles that is done in this way. All the 
good done by moles, supposing they eat 
every insect in the ground, is small com¬ 
pared with the injury they do with their 
burrows. I can fight the insects without 
the mole’s help, and I will very gladly dis¬ 
pense with his services if he will keep out 
of my grounds. 
Applying Stable Manure. 
E. I., Bucks County, Pa.—I n the appli¬ 
cation of stable manure, I have a practice I 
consider particularly good. In preparing 
the ground, I plow as soon as the previous 
crop—mostly oats—is removed. The sur¬ 
face is leveled and the manure is put on, 
and all after-working is done with a disk 
harrow. The wheat is put in with a drill 
with teeth well staggered to prevent drag¬ 
ging the manure. In eight trials of this 
method the yield of wheat has fallen be¬ 
low 30 bushels per acre only once; while 
once it reached 37 bushels and the grass 
stand has always been perfect. A strip 
through a field that got a double but not a 
heavy coat of manure was a close Blue 
Grass sod the second summer after wheat. 
This year a field ot Alsike Clover was ad¬ 
mired by all who saw it. A field that has 
been mowed four seasons has yielded 
nearly twice as much hay as an adjoining 
one equal in every respect except in regard 
to the preparation of the ground aud the 
position of the manure. 
Timothy with Wheat. 
J. S. T., Lysandkr, N. Y.— The R. N.-Y. 
stated, some time ago, that it was going to 
plant its potato plot to potatoes again, har¬ 
vest them early and sow to wheat, seeding 
with Timothy at the same time, and with 
clover in the spring. Let me give my ex¬ 
perience during several years. Sow the 
wheat as soon after the 1st of September as 
possible: and in about four weeks seed 
with Timothy. When the grass is put on 
early in September it gets so large a growth 
that it chores the wheat, 
