St. Tammany farmer. [volume] (Covington, La.) 1874-current, 1900-04-21
FARMER AND PLANTER
THE SOUTHERN COTTON AREA.

THE SOUTHERN COTTON AREA.
| The watchward of the FarmsR
should Ne "Planf Fewer and
Retaer Acres.
Some of the arguments employed hy
those who are endeaSoring to sclve
the problem of the area Of the next
| crop possess the merits of novelty, ii
not WISDOM. One gentleman claims
that it would not be wise for the farm
ers to so reduce the aggregate pro<luc-
tion OF cotton as to cause such an ad-
vance in the price Ms would encourage
foreign competition Russia, India,
Egypt. Turkey, etc). In other words.
he thinks is would be wise to keep
down the market price to point o.
which these foreign nations could not
produce it profitably. But what saver
the utter fallaciousness of his aI1TRs
ment is the atice tpat II givl to
du, + thd cost of pr1duct pm. He do
not, however, explain hd y thu pri
can be kept down % the nprohsbitoly
point by increasing the aggregate
crop production, and at the same time
reduce the cost of production. Farm
ers pretty well understand4hat if the.t
increase the area in cotton the cost
per pound will generally increase. be-
cause poorer or less productive lands
will be planted.
Another gentleman suggests that
the world is SO short on cotton that
even a twelve-million bale crop would
fetch good, paying price. He may be
correct in his opinion, but it is pretty
certain that past experience does not
justify it. 1t is a leap in the dark to
encourage the farmers to go ahead
and produce twelve-million-bale crop
in expectation Of getting present
prices for it. !.
Many others insist that the farmers
either use no commercial fertilizers
at all, or q very much less amount, in
order to thus cut down the aggregate
production and keep up or advance
the price. Would it not be just as rea-
sonsble to advise the farmers not to
use good tools, not to buy . new plOw
or caltivator, not to plant prolific va
rieti.s, and not to use so much skill
in cEltiavtion-if the object be to SIM
ply reduce production? To comply
with either of any of these "don'ts"
would tend to reduce production just
as certainly as to quit using" fer
best tools and machinery, the best
seeds, the best skill and care would
save some outlay, and thus reduce
expenses just as certainly as to quit
using" commercial fertilizers. The ar
gumeat reminds me of the Irish house
painter who was observed to be in u
very great hurry in painting a house.
When asked the reason for his remark
able speed, he replied: "Faitah, and
l want to get done before my paint
gives out"
The simplest and most direct appeal
is the best. 1t goes straight to the
comprehension of any farmer. It is
the appeal to his own personal inter
ests, urging his to pursue q course
that will be best for him whatever
other farmers in the south may do.
1t is to cut down the cost of produc-
tion. 1t is a thing that he can do him
self, without cooperation or consul
tation with other farmers. The coop
GRAFTON of other farmers-which he
knows he can not rely on-is not nec-
essary 20 do this. Every experienced
farmer knows that the cheapest cot
ton he makes is that which he gets
from tie best land. Every farmer who
uses fertilizers knows from experience
that the cheapest cotton he makes is
that produced by the aid Of fertilizers.
If rich soil does not enable a farmer
to make his cotton cheap, then there
is no reed for rich soil, and poor
acre or several poor acres are as good
as q rich acre. If fertilizers do no,
enable the farmer to produce cheaper
cotton. then there is no need of fer
dlizers in cotton farming.
What, then, should be the farmers
watchword? 1t should be this: Plan.
fewer and better acres and fertiiize
them better. Cut the area in cotton,
and increase the application of the
right kind of fertilizer per acre, until
the two conspire to produce cotton
at cost of less than S cents pound
1t may be necessary for q given farm
er to reduce his cotton area to one.
fourth the usual amount, and to
double the dose of fertilizers to each
acre in order to meet the require
ments. Then let him do it. He plant
ed last year 100 acres, applied ten
tons, or 5000 worth of fertilizers, to
produce yield of 80 bales. Suppose
he cuts his acreage this year to IS
acres, and applies to these IS acres
500 worth (twice as much per acre.
Of judiciously home-mixed fertilizer.
The result would probaly be Is to 20
bales of cotton. The difference in
results between last year
and this year might be indicated by |
the figures and S, or possibly by 8 |
and 5, 8 representing the cost per
pound of the farmers last crop, and
5 the cost per pound of his next one.
But this difference would not be all. |
II he cuts his cotton acreage frolu
100 to Is acres, he will have q larger
area of corn, cowpeas, oats and pas
ture. He will very probably have more
and better cows, have some beef cat
tie, plenty of pork and bacon, etc.
Cor. Atlanta Constitution.
MADE ATTRACTIVE. |
1 Little Intelligent Planning and |
Reasoaable Activity Will
Brlgkten the FaRm.