The weekly clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1863-1882, 1874-06-18
The Waste Of Fences.

costly system Of fencing, which, including
the damage done to crops by the encour-
a. ement of weeds and their encroachmert
upon our fields, will, doubtless, reach |
every year to fully six per cent upon the
cost Of the fences, and thus will represent /
a capital sum equal TO that cost. linen !
the value Of the fences, upon the whole, |
and their annual t, may be estimated |
At equivalent to double the value OF our
live stock. The Commissioner of the
Agricultural Department, in his last
monthly report, estimates the cost OF
fencing farm Of 100 acres IN Pennsyl-
vania, with chestnut posts and rails, at
$3.50 81, a sum actually far in excess OF
the average value of the stock kept upon
farms in that State No wonder that
farming does not pay We therefore claim
for our own estimate very close approx
imation to the actual facts.
When we come to realize that this rum
Gus expense In a large part Is unnecessary;
that it is, in fact, maintained IN defiance
of common sense and better knowledge,
and that its abolition in great part Is en-
tirely and easily practicable, 1t becomes a
matter for establishment that such costly
system should be continued. What bust
ress can be mace. to pay when the prlncI-
pies Of economy are 50 detied
III our article last week we spoke OF this
waste as being one Of the first that should
be remeded under a system OF improved
farming. We wish to point out how this
has been done, is now done, aud may be
done. There are two ways in which
tbs wastefuI system may be either totally
or partially abolished. One is, by fol-
! lowing the soiling system OF feeding and
combining the stock altogether to yards,
| thus entirely doing away with the need
| for inside fences, ard the other by fencing
| off a field which is used for pasture, and
removing all other outside fences. At
| the outset we are met with the objection
that soiling stock requires so much labor
| that /: is not possible for the poorer far
mers to follow that plan. But we have
passed through extensive districts IN
| France and Germany, where the farmers
are much poo Ia II any here, and cul-
tivate " y sin: farms, or rather
patches, seldom equal to twenty acres
each, and, curiously enough, they agree
that they cannot afford to do anything
else with their stock but shut them up,
and grow, cut, and carry feed for them,
| to be consumed in the stable or yard. In
their case it is ''their poverty and nottheir
will consents" and they adopt the system
because they cannot afford any other. For
many miles through the richest and most
| closely populated country in that part Of
Europe, the boundaries between the farms
are low, narrow banks, mere burrows, COW
cred with grass or clover, and no other
| fence i visible; not even upon the roads
/ ~, IL 1
there made in abundance. At the same
| time it is the boast of the farmers who
cultivate with most success and profit the
high-rented farms in Great Britain that
their land all lies within a ring fence,
with nothing to obstruct its cultivation.
1t may therefore, be taken as demonstra-
ted that so far from it being ilD possible
for the poorer farmer to keep his stock
upon what is known as the soiing system,
it may be accepted as a good reason for
his poverty that he keeps his stock in any
other way 1t must be understood that
we refer to those cases in which the farm
ing IS mixed, and where land is scarce
and high, and not to those in which sheep
farming is carried on, Or where the dairy
is a special pursuit, and pasturing alto
gether followed, nor where land is so low
in price that small crop upon a large
area is for the present more desira-
able than a large crop upon small
area.
Wherever it IS desired to farm with the |
greatest economy we would recommend |
that all interior fences should be removed |
a simple wagon road or path being MAIN !
tanned between them, and sOwn to clover |
and grass, which is moved as any other |
crop; and as far as possible that portion |
of the farm most conveniently situated for |
the purpose should be appropriated to a |
succession of crops, which should be de- |
voted to the maintenance of the stock |
in sheds and yards. The good results of |
this system have been found to be: first, |
an actual saving of time and labor in |
growing the feed and feeding it; second, a |
better yield Of milk from cows and of beef |
or pork from feeding stock, and better |
health in all the animals subject to it; third. |
gain IN the quantity and the |
quality OF the manure saved; fourth, a |
greatly increased product from the same |
area of ground; and, lastly, but not least, !
a far greater subordination Of all the |
business of the farm to methodical and !
easy and profitable manage
ment. When we assure our readers that |
our own experience has resulted in the |
plentiful feeding of one COW upon the pro-
duct of one acre for the whole year, and |
that others who have fed their stock upon /
this system have done better. than that, it /
is to be hoped that some enterprising far
mers, at least, who are looking to the
profitable management Of their farms,
will, as soon as may be, inaugurate this
system, and give an example of its benefits
to their neighbors; and in so doing help to
show that the present great waste of fences
need exist no longer