The Valley Virginian. [volume] (Staunton, Va.) 1865-1895, 1886-04-15
NO 3

fore you must load the stump on the
side opposite to the one you wish to pro-
tect. The powder, being more advarta-
geously placed there, to expend it's first
and greatest force, breaks the part Of the
stump Immediately over the charge into
smaller and lighter pieces. On the oppo.
site side, the pieces, being larger, are
loOsened with greater difficulty, and be-
fore they start, repel the other ones. Such
at least, was my observation, and acting
in obedience to it, I got through my
stump-blasting without accident to per-
sons or things.
The splitting of the stumps by the pow
der is one of the greatest advantages con-
/ nected with its use. An item of great
expense is thus avoided, for the problem
of disposing of the stumps, so perplexing
IN the case OF digging or machine pulling,
is solved. After the blast, you have COM
paratively small pieces, easily handled and
loaded in wagon and Of a SIZE available,
with slight additional labor, for lirewood.
In my case, | had no difficulty in engaging
a man to haul them away, for the gift OF
them. To have had to dispose Of two
hundred whole stumps would have been
very expensive as well as annoying.
| The principal outlay is for the powder,
which costs ten cents per pound and
freight. The labor per stump is compar-
| atlyely small, as one man and boy can
| get out twenty in day. Here the size of
| the stump makes but little difference. It
takes about as much time to blow out a
small one as large one. My largest
stumps measured two feet and half in
diameter. | found twelve pounds of
powder enough to get these out. Two or
| three pounds were used under stumps
! having diameter of eight or ten inches
| Between these two sizes the charge was
proportionally varied, six pounds, how
ever, being quite enough for stumps OF
twenty inches. A tough looking customer
generally gets an extra allowance. A
little experience soon enables the operator
to gauge his charges correctly. In places
where there is no danger to adjacent prop
erty, a nicely in calculating the amount of
powder to be used is not required, for the
greater the charge the more complete is
the destruction. This much, however,
must be considered the greater the charge
the wider and deeper, also, is the excaya
tIOn made. This has to be filled with new
earth, as that which was blown out is so
thoroughly scattered that it is impossible
TO scrape 1T together again for use. This
IS the only drawback to the use of powder.
Tbs character of the soil has everything
to do with the quantity of the powder used
"a loose soil requiring more than com
pact one, dry one decidedly more than Il
moist or wet one, perhaps one-third more.
mad my work going on In both seasons.
and therefore can recommend that q wet
one should always be selected for the
work, il economy is consideration. My
soil is sandy loan, with clay underlying
it, filled with much loose rock, and
extremely difficult to bore through onthat
account. presume that the conditions
on my place were of the most unfayorable
sort.
Removing StumpS, no matter how done.
is an expensive undertaking. Conse
quently, in adopting any particular method
we must be governed not by its absolute.
but by its relative. cost. 1t is difficult to
make comparative calculation for ma
chine work, as a machine cannot be pro-
cured on trial for the purpose, at least l
could not do so. Therefore / had to base
my calculation on circumstantial evidence
SO to speak, and on the perhaps biased
statements of the manufacturers. But
every one can make the best Of hand dig
ging for himself. | had occasion to have
a few oak, maple and elm stumps dug, to
lay out vegetable garden. The trees
were taken down before being cut. which
of course gives the best results, as the
weight of the tree draws out great many
roots before they are severed. A two
foot stump, | found, took one man four
days to get out. The excavation was
quite as large as in the case of powder,
but the earth was ready at hand to be
shoveled back again. All this represents
live to six dollars. Stumps as small as a
foot, consumed one mans labor nearly
two days. Even at the same cost, the
time required for hand work would turn
the scale in favor of the use of powder.
look, then, upon my experience with
powder as eminently satisfactory and |
would advise any one, who is competent to
handle ordinary fire arms with safety. to {
adopt this method in removing stumps.
1t is the cheapest and quickest way, and,
with ordinary care. so free from danger.
that it need not be considered ]. w. X.
Kearny Township, ~ j., Feb. 1886.
Messrs. Stack, Splitter & Co., are the
agents for this powder in this section.