Rensselaer Union, Volume 5, Number 17, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 16 January 1873 — Old Pastures, or New? [ARTICLE]

Old Pastures, or New?

There are two opinions about pastures. One is that it is more profitable to feed only newly seeded land, using it not more than two years before plowing it up for a reseeding; and the otherto let it remain for many years, allowing the surface to become fully occupied by the native grasses, these being supposed to be best adapted to develop its power of production. If we consider this question according to the general practice of farming communities in this country, we cannot hesitate to decide that the greatest profit will follow the first-named method, for there is no disputing the proposition that timothy, red-top, orchard grass, and red clover, newly sown on a well-prepared and well-manured soil, will produce much more forage (and of a highly nutritious kind> than will a close turf of blue grass, white clover, etc., which has for many years had full possession of the ground, and has had no artificial stimulation. The difference in amount Will be much more than enough to repay the cost of breaking up, manuring, and seeding. It is not now a question whether the cows -will do better on one kind of pasture than on the other, only which will produce the largest money profit. If a single cow were allowed to roam over ten acres of short old pasture, picking up her whole living in white clover and the tender sprouts of blue grass, there is no denying that she would give more milk, more butter, and more cheese than she would if feeding, however abundantly, on the coarser grasses of an artificial pasture. But our purpose in farming is not to get the largest possible yield from our cows, but to get the largest possible yield from our land. The cows are only implements for converting the products of the . field into the saleable products of the dairy. An average first-class cow coming in in May will make 200 pounds of butter in the season on good natural pasture, but she will require at least three' acres of land for her exclusive use. At 30 cents per pound the season’s produce will be s6o—or S2O per acre. On a good artificial pasture she may give only 180 pounds, worth $54, but She will be fully supported By the produce of a single acre. Supposing that one-third of the produce is consumed by the interest On the extra number of cows and by the cost of keeping—up the pastures—which-is surely a very liberal allowance—we shall have $36 instead of S2O as the return per acre. In addition to this, we shall make ourselves much more Independent of variations of the seasons, for a well-worked rich meadow is far less injured,by excessive drought thin any natural pasture on the same soil could be. This, of itself, will often equal the drawback we have allowed for extra "os£, To put the proposition in another form we may expect, from the foregoing calcu latipn, as large a cash profit, from ten acres of artificial as from eighteen acres of natural pasture, and there would be far Tess risk of loss from unusual drought. It is not proposed, of course, that rough or waste lands should be used for artificial pastures (they would not repay the cost), only that such fields as-are susceptible of profitable subjection should not be left wild. How nearly natural pastures may be made equal to artificial ones' by ; the use of the harrow and liberal top dressings is a proportion hot considered above. .The cost would generally be less than that of reseeding, and the result equally good. Id any case, no pasture — old or new—should ever be overstocked. ~~Am. Agnruttunnt.