FARMYARD MANURE

Western Star, 16 August 1912, Page 1

FARMYARD MANURE

The following, from an interesting article by " Hickory," in tho Australasian, is well worthy of consideration in vjiew of the divided opinions held by -practical farmers on tho question touclied on: "An experiment which might be tested at our experiment farm, when it is in work, is tho relative value of fresh and well-rotted manure. . . It has been regarded by almost every farmer that well-rotted manure is far more valuable than fresh from tho stable or cow-yard; but if the trouble is taken to analyse the constituents of each, and work out their monetary value, it will be found that there is not a great deal of difference, ton for ton; and then there is the consideration of tho fact that it takes about two tons of fresh manure to make one ton of rotted manure, on account of the loss by evapo:ration and washing. From Maryland' Experiment Station it is reported that the comparative result from using; rotted and fresh manure in growing maize and wheat was a slight difference in flavour of the latter, which shows that it is at least as good when rotted manure, and when the saving of, loss is taken into account, and the eventual saving in labour, it must bo regarded as more valuable. On good farms a lot of care is taken in ' making ' the manure, brick or clay-lined pits are being provided, sometimes roofed in. and the liquids systematically conserved. If the fresh manure is carted out each day, and spread on the land, tbe liquids being made part of the loud, by pumping on to the solids, not only will an eyesore be removed from many farmyards, but it will save work, and, apparently, benefit tho land to a great extent. For field cropping the proper disposition of the coarse, fresh manure is on the grass land, or on fallow land just in front of a cereal crop in rotation. Tln> soil will benefit by tbe warmth, and by tbe chemical results set up during fermentation."