SLOVENLY FARMING.

Colonist, Volume IV, Issue 364, 19 April 1861, Page 4

SLOVENLY FARMING.

FRIENDLY HINTS TO OUR AGRICULTURISTS. In a late issue we asked our agricultural friends whether they believed that their farms were really cultivated, and whether they felt that they met even half-way the bounties so plenteously showered upon them. We cannot answer this by a simple yea or nay; we will allow our readers to draw their own conclusions. Let us commence with an enquiry into the cultivation of our principal cereal—wheat. We do not intend to imitate the proprietor of Tiptres Hall; we do not intend to thrust upon our readers any of the abtruse dogmas of agricultural chemist* We believe that, for many years, we may be independent of

manure as restorers of our wasted fields. We believe that mere industry and neatness in our field operations will do that for us which in less favored soils and climates is only to be brought about by the happy combination of that industry with scientific skill and plentiful capital.

Let us ask how it is that the wheat crops of the past season are all so lamentably deficient in quantity; why do they average so much less than in the previous less propitious season ? How is it that on some of the richest soils in the Tumut there have been crops of only five or ten bushels to an acre ? How is it that so few crops run above fifteen or twenty bushels per acre ? The seed time was unusually fine—the soil in first-rate case to receive the seed—the spring fortunate—rains during growth more than abundant—the weather during harvest at least fairly seasonable. Then how comes it, we again ask, that the yields have been so much less than in previous less favorable seasons ? We reply, the crops were choked with weeds. These weeds some of our friends will call green-stuff or clover, or some other wild periphrasis, to hide their slovenly farming. We take it that the presence of these weeds in any, even the smallest, quantity is an evidence of bad farming; but when present in such quantity as materially to reduce the average of the crop, as has this year happened, it is an evidence of very bad farming indeed.

We know that during the past season many ot our farmers put in much more wheat than they should have done. When that wheat land was broken off the lea or grass, it was only once ploughed, and that badly. But however carefully that single ploughing may have been given, do our friends for a moment believe that such treatment could keep down the weeds, "green-stuff" or "clover?" In such a season as has just passed it would only act as a gentle stimulant to their growth. Do our farmers believe that the only object of ploughing is the preparation of a seed bed ? Are they not aware that the exposure of the furrows to the sun or frost is as necessary ? Then how long was their lea furrows exposed to the action of the sun or frost; was it sufficiently long to destroy the roots of the clover or other weeds; in nine cases out of ten the exposure was quite insufficient. But we will go further, and ask them if their stubbles ever had half a chance to grow a crop ?

Our wheat crops are generally cleared off by the middle of January at the latest; our ploughing, as a general rule, only commences in May. Do our friends imagine that nature lies idle during these four months if themselves do ? Let them walk through their stubble now, and see if there be not very fair pasturage there. Do they imagine that, if these weeds are allowed to grow until May, a single ploughing will in any great degree disturb them ? If our farmers were of our opinion, the last fortnight would not have seen an idle plough in the district. Let them make up [heir mind on some defined principle as to how much wheat land they will require for any coming season, and let them immediately after harvest, turn up so much of their stubble to be mellowed by the hot autumn sun, and thereby turn in the weeds to fatten their soil instead of exhausting it. The powerful rays of the sun will kill many ol the weeds whose tender roo:s will be turned to their influence. The early frosts of April and May will complete the work. Soil so treated will be in fine order to receive the second or third furrow, which, of course will be given across the first where possible. We willingly admit that some autumns are dry, so that it may occasionally be a work of some trouble to give this early furrow, but for many years we have observed that it is quite possible, and at 'Jumut is more easily accomplished than at most other places. But we repeat again, most emphatically, that this autumn fallow is the only plan by which the rich soils of the Tumut can be kept sufficiently clean to bear successive crops of wheat. Our climate permits both to have crop and bare fallow in one season. We are firmly convinced that but few of our agriculturists take advantage of this. It is, however, the method which is universally pursued in South Australia, and is one of the many reasons why its colonists, with inferior climate and soil, are yet enabled to undersell us at our own doors. We must apologise to smart farmers for our dwelling on such a rudimentary process as this; but we state, without fear of contradiction, that the want of that fallow ploughing has reduced our crop of 1860-61 by 20,000 bushels. We turn again to our teachable friends, and tell them that the better, the richer the soil, the more Jhis fallow is required, and the more easily it is given. We know of course, that there are some light sandy soils on which such a proceeding might be very questionable, but few of these obtain on the Tumut.

Now we have no doubt of the crowd of farmers who are not ploughing, but who should be, that'many will be provided with the usual stock excuses. Some are busy thrashing; some are delivering their wheat; some digging potatoes; some few may confess that they are enjoying a spell after all the hard work. Now, we would say to these, that by the plough you live, and, if you cannot manage to order your own affairs so as to keep that going, you had better throw up your farms, or lay them down in permanent pasture. That this would in many instances, be more profitable than tillage does not admit of a doubt. We are now, however, addressing ourselves to those who do intend to cultivate a wheat crop, and we would say to them, that now, both early and late, their ploughs should be at work, and should have been during all the month of February.

We are assured by our farmers that money is scarce amongst them. It may be so, but one would hardly suppose so, as they certainly make no great efforts to earn it. They complain of the cost of reaping and harvesting. Reaping* we believe.

during the past season has been from 20s to 30s per acre, besides additional outlay for wines and spirits for the reapers, a ruinous price truly and far in excess of anything paid elsewhere. We propose to show hereafter how these changes may be materially reduced. Now we merely put it to our friends whether it would be better to pay for reaping one acre with thirty or forty bushels on it, or for reaping two with likely not more than twenty-fire in both ? Is it not easier, as well as cheaper, to secure thirty bushels off one acre than the same quantity off two? We again repeat that this is to be done by the autumn fallow, an operation which, we believe, has hitherto been quite neglected at Tumut, where the richness of soil and rankness of vegetation has rendered it imperatively necessary. Now it is possitle that we may be in error in all this. This autumn fallow may be usual in the district, or it may be practised by some, who thereby obtain a steady high average crop; or it may have been tried and found not successful, Here we are again treading on the heels of an agricultural association. Such a society might have informed us of the habits of the Tumut farmers; enquiries instituted under their auspices would telli us whether this fallow be common, and if so whether it be successful. Perhaps,'; in the meantime, some of our friends will afford us any information in their power on the subject. There is an old adage which tells us that " the proof of the pudding is the eating of it"; so with the flour, we fancy. How does it happen* then, that the Tumut flour always brings the lower price when fairly placed in competition with flour of other districts ? Millers are always abused, and some say that the fault is theirs. That can hardly be, however, for most of our millers have been themselves dealers in the flour market, and would turn out a first rate article if they could. It is known, besides, that when our wheat has been sold to millers in other parts of the colony, it has been used merely to mix with their superior grain. We would wish much to know whether this inferiority is -to be attributed to the soil or climate of the Tumut, to the treatment of crop during the process of harvesting, or to mere inferiority of seed. Our own impression is that it is owing to a combination of all three. We do not belieya that the soil or climate of the Tumut is adapted to grow a very fine sample of wheats we fancy that the bran will be in excess generally, and the grain, besides not actually yielding well at the mill, will not generally produce a very high sample of flour. But we also believe that many a fine sample of wheat is destroyed by carelessness in harvesting, unnecessary exposure to the weather, and dirty threshing: ard we further believe that by importing occasionally first-class prize samples of: wheat from other colonies or districts, and by sowing them on the sharper and drier soils which may be found amongst uf,:that the whole district could be supplied with changes and varieties of valuable seed wheat, which, combined with neatness in the harvest operations, would in a great measure remedy the grossness of our soil and climate.— Wynyard Times.