St. Tammany farmer. [volume] (Covington, La.) 1874-current, 1911-08-05
WHICH IS THE
BEST WAY F.?
A Sensible Discussion of a
Much Mooted Question.
Is it Most Profitable to Turn
Under or Feed Legumes?
Farmers Must Decide This
as a Business Proposition.
Loss of Plant Food Value in
the Crops Fed to Stock.
IFrom Progressive Farmer. ]


Every year the question is asked
whether it is more profitable to plow
under a pea crop, or to cut it, make
hay and feed it? This perennial
question is already being asked this
year and must be solved on practical
ly all farms. Of course, the same
question must be settled as regards
all other crops grown for soil I'M
provement and for forage.
There are those who are convinced
that no crop fit for forage should
BE- plowed under and thereby have
its feeding value wasted. On the
other hand, there are some who be-
lieve that the plowing under of
crop of peas or clover is the most
profitable use to which it can be
put.
a Purely Business Proposition.
The problem is purely business
proposition and must be solved on
every farm, indeed, for every field
according to the conditions which
exist on that particular farm or field.
We are not, in our consideration of
the subject, going to give any weight
to the excuses SO often employed
feed the hay is too great, or that the
live stock are not at hand to con-
sumo it. Nor are we going to give
much consideration to the plea that
more than a small part of the stable
manure seldom finds it way back to
the fields We can only consider the
question fairly on the broad basis of
efficient management, whichever
plans is adopted.
1t is true aud may as well be adj
mitted to start with, that to pioW
under the crop is the least trouble
and will effect the greatest improve
ment to the land. If the method OF
saving and feeding the crop, there.
fore has any advantage, it must be
in the greater profit resulting.
When the crop is plowed under the
plant foods contained in it are all
returned to the soil. Not only all
that which came from the soil, but
also in the case of legumes, all the
nitrogen which has been taken from
the air. But this is by no means all
benefit received by the land from
plcwing the crop under. Our soils
are. most of them, deficient in hu-
mus. Deficient in decaying organic
matter. The decay of the crop re-
suits in the formation of certain
acids which dissolve the potash and
phosphoric acid, or put these in
condition so they can be taken up by
the growing crops.
Benefits of Flowing Under.
The benefits, then, of plowing
crop under instead of taking it away
nc how oro chiefly.
/. The addition of plant foods, nj
trogen. phosphoric acid and potash
to the soil.
Q. The addition of humus-formini
materials which improves the me
chanical or physical condition of tn
SOIL, improves the moisture condl
tion and makes it more easy TO WofS
etc.
8. Plant foods already in the sol
but in such condition that they al
not dissolved by the soil wate
hence, are not available to the crop
are dissolved and put in condition
be used by growing plants.
These conditions are basic or e
sential to fertile SOIL The que
tion is simply, do the results Justil
the cost? Or is this the cheape
way of obtaining these benefits.
Some Mistakes of the Chemists.
If the crop is taken off the land
hay and fed, and the manure retur
Cd to the land, what are the result
IN the first place, the feeding OF u
crop destroys about. two-thirds
humus-forming value. The cheml
at once assumes that two-thirds
i.s value in improving the physle
nronerties of the soil and in dissol
ING and rendering available the pla
foods already in the soil is also 10
We do not believe this IS true,
the bacterial life in stable manu-
and the excellent medium which s
blc manure form for the growth
bacteria should not be lost sight
In so far as we know, this questl
has not been definitely answer
hut It is certainly safe to concit
that a given amount of stable
nure is worth more to the soil tt
the plant. foods and humus-form
materials it contains would 1ndlct
and herein is where those VINO au
cate the plowing under OF green
nures usually fail to give pro
value to the effects of stable mani
If the crop is fed there IS loss
from 10 to Is per cent OF the pi
foods. retained by the animals
i is almost impossible to preven
considerable additional waste
nlant foods from the manure.
instance, about one-half the pl
foods. value of the excrement OF
stock is in the urine and -oss
mart of this is very difficult to
vent. Perhaps, as general r
nnder reasonably good managem
not more than from SO to IS per
Of the original plant foods value
crop can be returned in the ST
manure when that crop is used