Pullman herald. [volume] (Pullman, W.T. [Wash.]) 1888-1989, 1911-10-06

something in the growing conditions,
in the air, or in the ground, that pro-
duces smut just the same.
Smut is not particularly new in
this country, for in 1878, the year in
which | raised my first crop in this
country, it was about half smut. That
particular crop was sown when it was.
wet-in fact, it was raining when
finished. 1t was spring wheat sown
on sod ground, and l have never seen
any other wheat in this country as
smutty as that. Then ] suppose l
used about pound and a half of
bluestone to o gallons of water. This
year / treated with 25 pounds of Wit
riol to 100 bushels of wheat, and we
let the grain soak for 10 minutes.
Some portions of the field were
smutted but little, and | noticed that
the worst smut is in the richer and
heavier land where the straw was
rankest-in the draws, for instance.
seeded at all times, commencing in
September and finishing in Novem-
Der. In my last sowing, which was
in stubble, there was not much smut.
In a dry season the smut balls are
dry, and at threshing time they break
up and are blown out. When it is
damp and the balls are tough they do
not break open In such case if
these balls were present in seed
wheat, and We're broken open after
the seed had been treated-as they
might in passing through the seeder
the treated seed could be resmut-
ted probably; at least | think there is
something in that theory. This has
not been true of my experience of the
last two seasons, however, for there
were very few smut balls to start
with, and where we found them we
took them practically all out"
Colonel Duling of Garfield adj
vanced the idea that early sown grain
is most free from smut, and H. Fl.
Mclean of Walla Walla contended
that vitriol rightly used will kill
smut. He said that one common mis-
take in treating seed is that the Wit
rolled water does not reach all the
grain, because air bubbles form in
the sacks, keeping some of the kerr
nels dry He doubted the theory that
smut comes from the ground and
cited an experiment where smut was
mixed with soil and wheat sown on
the plot and on another plot of clean
soil. There was no difference in the
amount of smut in grain grown on
the two plots. In reference to smut
explosions in threshing machines. he
said that in 30 years experience he
had never had an explosion His sys-
tenn of guarding against them is to
keep man on each side of the ma
chine to see that all of the bearings
are kept we'll oiled. He believes that
unless there is a hot box to ignite the
smut there will be no explosion.
An experimentation committee,
composed R. c. McCroskey of Gar
field, j. s. Klemgard and Prof. r. w.
Thatcher of Pullman, was appointed
to plan an extensive series of expert
ments, to be carried on Jointly by
the Experiment Station at the w. S.
c. and farmers in different parts of
the Inland Empire. Seed wheat will
be treated by different methods at
the station and sent to the farmers,
who will keep records of the time and
weather and soil conditions of SOW
ing and the percentage of smut in the
crop.
Resolutions were adopted urging
the farmers to keep careful records
OF their experiments and the results
attained on blanks to be furnished
by the committee, and thanking all
who had contributed toward making
the convention success.
The college authorities promised to
detail man to make an exhaustive
study of the problem and make pub
lie It's conclusions. Prof. Humphrey
has been assigned for this work.