NOTES ON THE LOSSES CAUSED BY "WEEDS.

Globe, Volume XXIV, Issue 2710, 14 December 1882, Page 4

NOTES ON THE LOSSES CAUSED BY "WEEDS.

[From the " Weekly Press."]

" Wherever the carcase is there will the eagles be gathered together," and so it is in agriculture. Wherever the land is neglected there will the weeds accumulate. Again, it is said that " one year's seeding makes seven years' weeding." This is the inevitable penalty which attends the neglect to destroy all seedling weeds as they make their appearance. Where land is farmed in a suitable rotation there will always be a proportionate area under root crops in drills, which, if properly attended to during the early period of their growth, in the way of the constant use of the scuffler and drill grubber, will leave little cause to fear from weeds in the after corn and grass crops. It must however, be remembered that the most careful tilling of the green crops will not avail much to the after crops, if care is not exorcised in preparing the cereal and grass seeds, and in freeing them from the seeds of weeds. In a oountry like New Zealand, whore we are starting with clean fresh land, and with a knowledge of the losses sustained from weeds by farmers in older countries, it is not too much to expect that our colonial farmers would take all precautions to prevent the introduction of such noxious weeds as the corn charlock, wild field cabbage, ox-eye daisy, thistles, darnel, wild oats, sorrel, fat hen, and a host of others. Yet are they not found rampant in many of our farms throughout Canterbury, as any one who travels through the country must be aware of. We know of some farms of good land which will soon be rendered quite useless if they are not immediately attended to and cleared of the wild cabbage and mustard now in full bloom, which, if allowed to seed, will so pollute the soil as to become useless for future cropping, except at such a cost for weeding as would not pay. Few people are fully aware of the immense losses caused by weeds. When we consider the risk of hot winds, droughts, low prices, and all the other difficulties over which the farmer has little or no control, and which all tend to diminish the profits of the year's operations, should we not exercise every available means within our reach to obtain the largest possible return from the soil. The first step in this |direction will be to , keep the land free from all weeds, and thereby to retain in the soil the food which they consume to feed, plants destined for the food of man and the lower animals. Sir John Sinclair, writing on " The destruction of Weeds," remarks that, " it is one of the most important branches of the agricultural art, for if that is neglected, or even but slovenly performed, the crops , may be reduced to the amount of onefourth or one-third of a fair average crop." Every farmer knows the evil of a weedy crop, if such be laid by wind or rain ; and even if cut without lodging, the weedy corn will not be ready for carting nearly so soon as that which is clean, thus prolonging the risk of the harvestfield. Sir John goes on to instance an experiment which was tried for the purpose of

arriving at an exact conclusion as to the relative return of dirty crops and clean—- " A seven acre field of light soil was sown with corn. One average acre was measured off, tho other six were carefully weeded. The unweeded acre produced 18 bushels, the six weeded acres produced 135 bushels, or 22i bushels per acre, which is 4J bushels, or one quarter move produce, in favor of tho clean crop. A six acre field was sown with barley, in fine tilth, and well manured from the previous crop. The weeding, owing to a great abundance of charlock (the same weed which is gaining ground so rapidly in some parts of New Zealand), cost 12s per acre, The produce of an unweeded acre was only 13 bushels; of tho weeded 28 bushels, difference in favor of weeding 15 bushels per acre." Such reliable facts as these should cause tho most careless farmer to consider by what means he might best keep his land free from such pests. It may be argued that at the present price of labor it will not pay to weed. Be this as it may one thing is quite certain, viz., that it will not pay to grow weeds. The improvements which have been made of late years in all kinds of agricultural implements, render the task of weed exterminatii g comparatively easy, as compared with that which prevailed years ago —namely, hand pulling and hand hoeing. The system of summer fallowing, however efficacious, is fast growing into disuse, and we think properly so, particularly on our lighter lands, which are subject to be swept during the prevalence of strong north-west winds. But we object to naked fallows, it being an expensive system. The value of the labor expended in the frequent jjloughings and harrowings necessary to secure all the advantages of a good fallow, if spent on superphosphate and bones and applied to green crops grown in drills, kept thoroughly clean by the frequent use qf the scuffler and drill-grub, would effect the desired end, whilst keeping up at the same time a larger supply of winter feeding for stock, without which it would be found impossible to farm with profit, especially now that we may look for an increasing demand for meat, as the frozen meat trade is an established fact. Referring to the estimate in which our forefathers held weeds, we may mention an old statute of Alexander 11. of Scotland, passed about the year 1220, for the destruction of thistles, which were considered to be peculiarly pernicious to cornfields. "It denounces that man as a traitor who poisons the king's lands with weeds." Bondsmen who had this plant in their corn were fined a sheep for each stalk. How would our Canterbury farmers like to have to pay even a small fine for every thistle found growing in their cornfields, although we look upon charlock as a much more troublesome weed. Now is the time to wage war against the enemy, for every plant of fat hen pulled now will prevent the growth of hundreds next year. It has been truly remarked that " all farmers, according to the nature of their practices, are either preventers or encouragers of weeds."