any permanent improvements, such as the expense for limestone,
phosphate, new fences and buildings, and breeding stock.

Referring again to the invoice of the soil, I may say that the
percentage of the mineral plant foods increases with depth, the same
as in your soil, but not to such an extent, and with one exception.
The phosphorus content of our surface soil is greater than that of
the subsurface, but below the subsurface the phosphorus again
increases. This is probably due to the fact that the prairie grasses
that grew here for centuries extracted some phosphorus from the
subsurface in which their roots fed to some extent, and left it in
the organic residues which accumulated in the surface soil.

Aside from the difference in organic matter, the physical character
of our soil is distinctly inferior to the loam soils about
Blairville and Leonardtown. We have a very satisfactory silt loam
surface, but the structure of our subsoil is quite objectionable. It
is a tight clay through which water passes very slowly, so slowly
that the practicability of using tile-drainage is still questioned
by the State University, although the experiments which the
University soil investigators have already started in several
counties here in "Egypt" will ultimately furnish us positive
knowledge along this line.

As for me, I purpose making no experiments, whatever. I do not see
how I or any other farmer can afford to put our limited funds into
experiments, especially when we often lack the facilities for taking
the exact and complete data that are needed. It takes time and labor
and some equipment to make accurate measurements, to weigh every
pound of fertilizer applied and every crop carefully harvested from