Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1867-01-16
Does 1Ie Soil Need Rest {?

Our fathers in Agriculture quite gen.
orally held the opinion that Summer fll.
lowing greatly benefited the soil by the
rest which it gave. If the land lay utter
ly idle through all the season of growth,
should it not recuperate its power of pro
duction? They believed it would. And
this opinion prevails to some extent at
the present time among farmers.
But absolute rest obviously adds moth
ing to tie soil; no food for plants de-
scends from the air above or rises from
the subsoi! below. No favorable chemi-
cal action is known to be induced by cx-
posing q naked soil a long time to the
elements; on the contrary, it may be ap-
pretended that the washing of the rain,
the parching Of the sun, the evaporation
Of the atmosphere, remove some of the
volatile substances which are found in a
fertile soil. Rest does not impart fertli-
ly to the sands of the desert, nor are ara
ble soils in q state Of nature where they
are increasing in fertility, ever permitted
to be destitute of vegetable covering
The soil then does not need rest-it re-
quires cultivation. BY cultivation we
mean here those physical changes which
may be made. It wants deep and thorough
working so thet the roots of plants can
reach every particle of soil; it needs
draining to draw off the stagnant water
which is poison to the roots of our cereals
and cultivated grasses. Deep, though
frequent pulverisation of the soil, though
it adds nothing to The amount of plant
food, will, by making it all available to
the crops, cause the land to be very pro-
ductive, for it is by the sole agency of
what grows upon it that the farmer can
hope to increase the amount of plant
food in his land.
But is not land constantly producing
crops, whether Of grain or grass, exhaust
ing itself? Yes, if those crops are re-
moved from the soil and no remuneration
made therefor; but if the whole produce
of the ground is returned to it the amount
of plant food is increased. The soil be-
comes richer for the reason that the sub
stance of the plant was only partly de-
rived from the soil, but largely from the
atmosphere, and when the soil receives
again what it gave, through the decompo-
sition of the plant, it has in addition all
that was drawn from other sources. This
is the reason why the ploughing under of
clover or other green crops for manure
enriches the soil. The crops have drawn
only part of their fertilizing components
from the soil-they have gathered from
the air likewise-and it is precisely this
which increases the previous richness of
the soil. And if all the manure which
crops will make by passing through the
animal system be returned to the soil,
its fertility will doubtless be maintained;
enough will be returned to replace the
ash.constituents of the plant which aloua
were derived from the earth
We conclude, then, that the soil does
not need rest to render it fertile. 1t needs
cultivation and cropping Not reckless,
wasteful, unmethodical farming, but that
so planned and executed as to grow large
and varied crops, and dispose of them in
such manner as to return the extracted
elements of fertility to the soil.-Rural
New Yorker.