The Pacific commercial advertiser. [volume] (Honolulu, Hawaiian Islands) 1885-1921, 1904-11-17
CONTINUED from Page II


one. believing in giving all the water
TO the old cane He did not want 10
press the growth of the young cane
A third manager agreed with the sec
ond. and a fourth with the first
Mr.. swanzy called on Mr.. Goodale,
chairman of the committee on irrigat-
ing. for report, as it might possibly
throw light on the question raised
Mr.. Goodale had no report. 1t was
question between a disquisition OF a
theoretical kind and telling something
about what had been done in develop
ing water. AS to the latter, MI
OyShaughnessey had written an ex-
baustive report which had been pub
lished in the daily papers. Water was
being developed above Waialua. but
the work would not be completed this
year. Mr.. Goodale recognized himself
as Mr.. Cookies fourth manager. In a
question of dividing water he thought
it more important to protect the young
cane.
Mr.. Gliding told of a plan he had
adopted at Koha1a, where the soil was
porous, of laying out the land With
burrows at fall of three feet in the
hundred. Later in. discussion he said
the plan would not suit where the soil
was compact.
Mr.. Fairchild spoke of the laterals
as depending on the fall of the land.
Answering a questions he said there
was not great deal of wash in the
system.
w. o. Smith said the first place
where he knew of burrows on the level
was at Lahaina One difficulty of lay
ing out the ground on the fall was
the wash. It seemed to him that where
the soil was loose there would be
great deal of wash at the entrance.
Mr.. Fairchild said both methods had
been tried at Kealia. Before the leaf
hopper came he would say Mr.. Good
ale was right to promote the young
cane. The loss from the hopper was
cane, while the yield from short ra-
toons was almost UNAFFECTED. Observing
that fact they had cut down the per-
centage of nitrogen at planting, and
when the hopper's period of incubation
was over they PUT in nitrogen. Bet
ter results were had from cane thus
treated than under the old system.
Mr. Eckart told of experiments at
the station. Account was taken in one
week OF the humidity of the previous
week in watering the cane. Different
localities required different treatment,
and that was where the sub-stations
would prove their value. An evil of
excessive water was not merely the
waste. but it washed out salts of the
soil that We're valuable solvents of
plant food.
The discussion was continued by
those already named. together with
Messrs. Renton, Lidgate, Glib, Ogg,
Giffard. Kennedy. Horner and Adams
1t proved that the leaf hopper had act
ed differently in different localities
The greatest diversity of experience
seemed to be in the matter of strip
ping cane. In some cases the caution
against stripping put forth by En-
tornologfst Perkins was borne out. In
others it appeared the best protection
was the hardening of the cane rind
after stripping.
Mr.. Eekart, who was the last speaker,
said that while the leaf hopper de-
served all that was said against it,
there We're root diseases more preva-
lent here than was generally realized
He explained the nature of some of
these diseases and remarked on the
great benefit that might be expected
from the new pathological department
of the station.
It came out in the discussion that the
-