Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1873-03-08
FARMERS, COLUMN.


e.
There are two opinions about pas
lures. One is that it is more proiifa-
BILE to feed only newly seeded land,
using ~ not more than two years be-
fore blowing it up for reSseeding
and the other to let it remain for
many years, allowing the surface to
become fully occupied by the native
grasses, these being supposed to be
best adapted to develop its power of
production.
If we consider this question accord
ing to the general practice of farm
ing communities in this country, we
cannot hesitate 10 decide that the
greatest profit will follow the first
named method, for there is no dis
putting the proposition that timothy,
red-top, orchard grass, and red clover,
newly sown on a well-prepared and
well-manured soil, will produce much
more forage land of a highly nutri-
tious kind than will close turf of
bluegrass, white clover, etc., which
has for many years had full possess
ions of the ground, and has had no
artificial stimulation. The differ
ence in amount viii be much more
than enough to repay the cost of the
breaking up, manuring, and seeding.
1t is not now a question whether
the cows will do better on one kind
of pasture than on the other, only
which will produce the largest mon
ey profit. If a single cow were al
lowed TO roam over ten acres of short
old pasture, picking up her whole
living in white clover and the tender
sprouts of blue grass, there is no de-
nying that she would give more milk,
more butter, and more cheese, than
she would if feeding, however abund-
antly, on the coarser grasses of an
artificial pasture. But our purpose
in farming is not to get the largest
possible yield from our land. The
cows are only implements for con-
verting the products of the field into
the saleable products of the dairy.
An average first-ciass cow coming
in May will make 900 lbs. of butter
in the season on good natural pasture,
but she will require at least three
acres of land for her exclusive use.
At zoe. per H., the seasons produce
Will be $50, or $50 per acre. On
good artificial pasture she may give
only $50 lbs, worth $54, but she will
be fully supported by the produce of
single acre. Surprising that one
third of the produce is consumed by
the interest on the extra number of
cows, and by the cost of keeping up
the pastures, which is surely very
liberal allowance, we shall have $50
instead of $50 as the return per acre.
In addition to this, we shall make
ourselves much more independent of
variations OF the seasons, for a we'll
worked rich meadow is far less injur-
ed by excessive drouth than any nat
ural pasture on the same soil could
be. This of itself, will often equal
the drawback we have allowed for
extra cost.
To put the proposition in another
form, We may expect, from the fore
going ejaculation, as large cash
profit from ten acres of artificial as
from eighteen acres of natural pas
ture, and there would be far less risk
of loss from unusual drouth. 1t is
not proposed, of course, that rough
or waste lands should be used for ar
tificial pastures (they would not re-
pay the cost only that such fields |
as are susceptible of profitable sub
lection should not be left wild.
How nearly natural pastures may
be made equal so artificial ones by |
the use of the harrow and liberal top /.
dressings in a proposition not consid- |
cred above. The cost would gener- /
ally be less than that of re-seeding,
and the result equally good. In any
case, no pasture, old or new, should |
ever be over-stocked.