The Vermont watchman. [volume] (Montpelier, Vt.) 1883-1911, 1894-03-21
Potato Planting.

1t is generally conceded that the use
of good potato planter, from an eco
nomic point of view, is indispensable,
its value as labor saver often making
the difference between success and fail
ure. But the story is told of farmer
who used patent potato planter for
some time, and after making compare
tive tests decided to abandon its further
use and plant his eight or ten acres of
potatoes by hand. He claimed to OBJ
tain much greater yield by so doing
His method is to strike out burrows both
ways, using the Planet, Jr., with mark
ing attachment, and 3 inch plate for
making tbe marks, bearing well on the
handles to obtain greater depth of fur
row with a large proportion of loose
earth directly beneath the row-the
rows are 80 inches apart each way. He
prefers large tubers cut to two or three
eyes to the piece, with fertilizer dis
tributed broadcast before planting. He
claims to have been able to secure bet
ter results than when the planter was
used. His objection to the latter was
that the pieces had to be cut too small
to suit him, and for some unexplained
reason the results, so far as yield is
concerned, have not been as satsfacto-
ry as those received by the other meth
cd. Following is a reply to the fore
going, which was submitted to Rural
New Yorker for consideration: There
is the same economy in the use of
planter that there is in the use of pillow
viz, an ability to work faster and
save manual labor. There is no doubt
that a stout man with spade or fork
can do better work in preparing the soil
for a crop than any plowman. He will
do better work as far as he goes, but
while he is digging rods the plowman
will cover acres. In all agricultural
implements the highest standard of
thorough work is set by the hand tool
when used with skill and judgment. A
machine moved by horsepower cannot
see or think. but it does so much more
work than the hand tool that in large
areas it is more economical. In the
case of the potato planter the economy
comes in the fact that man can plant
eight acres or more in one day with the
machine, while to do it by hand would
mean large force of hands or several
days of hard work. The question is,
Will the saving in manual labor at
planting equal the increased value of
the crop due to hand planting? There
are times when two or three days saved
in planting large field of potatoes
would be worth hundreds of dollars, as
later rain would SO delay hand plant
ing that it could not be finished in time.
That tits possible to do more thorough
work by hand than by machine no one
can deny. Take an acre of corn, for
example If it could be worked with
hoe entirely-never letting a cultiva-
tor into tive have no doubt better
yield could be obtained than by the use
of any horse tool. But would not the
smaller crop show the more profit-aft
er estimating the cost of hand labor:
The same with potatoes. Most of the
great yields on record have been pro
duced by plan very much like that
described viz, wide, deep burrows,
large seed pieces and broadcasted fer
tilizer. We do not know that these
large yields have been the most profit
able ones; in fact, we think the most
money is made i'll potato growing by
those who cultivate many acres and use
machinery for planting, digging and
working. The Aspinwall planter has
no brains; neither has it eyes nor mus
Giles. 1t has the best mechanical imita-
ton of the finger and thumb joint that
L. Il =
possibly work as accurately as good
human hand, but it does the work of
four or five ordinary hands without
resting. AS to whether the more expen-
sive hand work of furrowing and drop
ping is more economical can only be
determined by experiment One farmer
told us this season that after trying two
or three different diggers he came back
to hand digging as the least expensive.