Dry-Farming : A System of Agriculture for Countries under a Low RainfallWidtsoe, John Andreas
Science
Dry-Farming : A System of Agriculture for Countries under a Low Rainfall
Widtsoe, John Andreas
Dry farming
In the discussion of the clean summer fallow as a vital principle of
dry-farming a slight difference of opinion was discovered. Farmers
from some of the localities insisted that the clean summer fallow
every other year was indispensable; others that one in three years
was sufficient; and others one in four years, and a few doubtful the
wisdom of it altogether. However, all the speakers agreed that clean
and thorough cultivation should be practiced faithfully during the
spring, and fall of the fallow year. The appreciation of the fact
that weeds consume precious moisture and fertility seemed to be
general among the dry-farmers from all sections of the country. The
following states, provinces, and countries declared themselves as
being definitely and emphatically in favor of clean summer
fallowing:
California, Utah, Nevada, Washington, Montana, Idaho, Colorado, New
Mexico, North Dakota, Nebraska, Alberta, Saskatchewan, Russia,
Turkey, the Transvaal, Brazil, and Australia. Each of these many
districts was represented by one to ten or more representatives. The
only state to declare somewhat vigorously against it was from the
Great Plains area, and a warning voice was heard from the United
States Department of Agriculture. The recorded practical experience
of the farmers over the whole of the dry-farm territory of the
United States leads to the conviction that fallowing must he
accepted as a practice which resulted in successful dry-farming.
Further, the experimental leaders in the dry-farm movement, whether
working under private, state, or governmental direction, are, with
very few exceptions, strongly in favor of deep fall plowing and
clean summer fallowing as parts of the dry-farm system.
The chief reluctance to accept clean summer fallowing as a principle
of dry-farming appears chicfly among students of the Great Plains
area. Even there it is admitted by all that a wheat crop following a
fallow year is larger and better than one following wheat. There
seem, however, to be two serious reasons for objecting to it. First,
a fear that a clean summer fallow, practiced every second, third, or
fourth year, will cause a large diminution of the organic matter in
the soil, resulting finally in complete crop failure; and second, a
belief that a hoed crop, like corn or potatoes, exerts the same
beneficial effect.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account