Homesteaders Used Barb Wire

Fencing and Barbed Wire

By Travis Maresh

Southeast Community College 

Imagine a world without any defined boundaries, a world where cattle and livestock roamed free. Everyone has seen barbed wire before, whether it is on a ranch or in a movie. I have been involved with fencing and barbed wire growing up so I have decided to learn more about the beginning of barbed wire. Today I will inform you about fencing and barbed wire. I am going to teach you about the history of barbed wire, the role barbed wire played in the 1900’s, and how barbed wire has evolved.

The history of barbed wire dates back to 1868 with Michael Kelly and patents had been awarded through 1874. However, according to C. Moore "Barbed Wire: It Isn't Just For Fences" (2003) there are more than 570 patented wires. The U.S. patent office recognized Michael Kelly’s patent in November of 1868. Kelly took two wires and twisted them together, resulting in a place for the barbs. Joseph Glidden received his patent in November of 1874 for his type of barbed wire. Glidden improved on Kelly’s design by locking the barb in place rather than hanging loosely. Glidden also invented the machinery to mass produce this type of wire.

Barbed wire played a large role in the Midwest. It was cheap to produce, easy to put up and needed little maintenance. Wooden fences were too costly, because of the lack of lumber in the open plains. Barbed wire was the solution to many of the farmers’ problems as barbed wire fences were much more cost effective.

According to McCallum (1965) "The Wire that Fenced the West," the farmers and the cowmen had two different opinions about fences. The cowmen were for the unwritten Law of the Open Range, which was the free access to grass and water. The farmers had to put up fences so the cattle would not ruin and trample their crops. This difference in opinion about the barbed wire fencing resulted in range wars between the two groups. Since watering holes were blocked, the cattlemen cut the fences, and in some cases lives were lost. According to "Fencing the Great Plains: the History of Barbed Wire," (2011) homesteaders used barbed wire to mark their boundaries.

Today, barbed wire is still prevalent in our lives, we can see it holding prisoners, keeping unwanted intruders away, or protecting valuables.  According to M. Bellis "History of Barbed Wire or the Thorny Fence," Barbed wire has been used in multiple wars since its invention. Miles of barbed wire were strung in World War I. British military manuals which date back to 1888 encouraged the use of barbed wire. Today, barbed wire is used in prisons, construction sites, and storage sites. To protect supplies barbed wire has been put up around buildings.

Barbed wire has been used in many ways; it has developed from a cattle fence into a protection device. Barbed wire helped farmers and homesteaders in numerous ways, protecting crops and establishing boundaries. From containing cattle to being used as a war mechanism barbed wire has changed over the course of its history.

I hope you enjoyed learning more about fencing and barbed wire. I have shared with you the history of barbed wire, the role it played in the 1900’s, and the evolution of barbed wire. We still use barbed wire 150 years after its invention, whether it is to confine cattle, or as a military device, barbed wire has come a long way. Fences and barbed wire gave the Midwest boundaries and established property lines. Yes, the cattle still roam free, just inside a fence.

References:

Good fences make good farms. (2011). The Wilson Quarterly, 35(3), 63. Retrieved from OmniFile Full Text Select database.

Bellis, M. (n.d.). History of barbed wire or the thorny fence. Inventors. About.com. Retrieved November 02, 2011, from http://inventors.about.com/od/bstartinventions/a/BarbedWire.h 

Fencing the Great Plains: The history of barbed wire. (2011). National Park Service. Retrieved from http://www.nps.gov/home/planyourvisit/upload/Barbed%20Wire%20Brochure,%20final.pdf 

McCallum, H. D., & McCallum, F. T. (1965). The wire that fenced the West. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

Moore, C. (2003). Barbed wire: It isn't just for fences. Antiques and Collecting Magazine, 108(8), 62-7. Retrieved from OmniFile Full Text Select database.

From “the Great American Desert” to the “American Breadbasket”

In 1806 Lieutenant Zebulon Pike, exploring at the direction of President Thomas Jefferson labeled the Great Plains of the United States as the “Great American Desert.” In 1820 Major Stephen Long on another expedition seconded this opinion when he reported “it is almost wholly unfit for cultivation, and of course uninhabitable by a people depending upon agriculture for their subsistence.” Such was the belief most Americans held about the Great Plains well into the 19th century.

For people of a European background, the terms "desert" or “barrens” were often used to describe treeless lands whether they were arid or not. It was long thought that treeless lands were not good for agriculture; thus the term "desert" also had the connotation of "unfit for farming."

The exact location of this “Great American Desert” was not clear, Carey and Lee's Atlas of 1827 located the Great American Desert as an indefinite territory in what is now Colorado, Kansas, Nebraska, Oklahoma, and Texas. Others thought the desert included an area 500 miles wide lying directly east of the Rocky Mountains and extending from the northern boundary of the United States to the Rio Grande River. Generally, in the first half of the 19th century most people thought the land between the Missouri River and the Rocky Mountains was a desert.

Zebulon Pike’s influence was large, after his 1806 expedition he wrote "From these immense prairies may arise one great advantage to the United States, that is: The restriction of our population to some certain limits, and thereby a continuation of the Union. Our citizens being so prone to rambling and extending themselves on the frontier will through necessity be constrained to limit their extent to the west to the borders of the Missouri and Mississippi, while they leave the prairies incapable of cultivation to the wandering and uncivilized aborigines of the country."

This idea that the area west of the states of Arkansas, Missouri, and Iowa was unfit for citizens of the U.S. was so prevalent that it led to the establishment of an “Indian Territory” where Indians from east of the Mississippi River would be moved as a result of the Indian Removal Act of 1830. Dozens of tribes were moved and promised lands they could keep “forever” in what are now the state of Nebraska and Kansas. The Indian tribes already residing in those areas were not happy to have new neighbors. “Forever” proved to be only 20 to 40 years as most of these Eastern tribes and many of the “Plains Tribes” were moved again to a reduced in size “Indian Territory” [the present state of Oklahoma]. This happened because the Americans finally realized the Great Plains could be productive land for agriculture.

And what a great agricultural area it has become. The eastern area of the “Great American Desert” normally has more than enough rainfall to produce abundant corn and other grain and agricultural products. And the western area of the “Great American Desert” blossomed in the 1940s, when mechanized pumping was introduced and people began to tap the great water reservoir of the Ogallala Aquifer [sometimes called the High Plains Aquifer] that lies under the area. The formerly dry land flourished under abundant irrigation water from below ground. More and more wells were drilled and pumping capacity dramatically increased. Center-pivot irrigation was introduced, which resulted in huge, lush green circles of agricultural crops on the dry brownish landscape. Large-scale, mechanized pumping of groundwater transformed the agricultural productivity, the society and culture, and the economy throughout the area of the Aquifer.

Today, the Great Plains once known as the Great American Desert along with the Corn Belt that begins east of the Great Plains and extends out onto them from America’s primary grain belt region and are the breadbasket to America and much of the grain-hungry world.

Sources:

Andrist, Ralph K. 1964. The Long Death. New York: The MacMillan Company.

Carlson, Paul H. 1998. The Plains Indians. College Station, Texas: Texas A & M University Press.

Foreman, Grant. 1972. Indian Removal. Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press.

Foreman, Grant. 1934. The Five Civilized Tribes. Norman, Oklahoma: University of Oklahoma Press.

Nordin, Dennis S. & Scott, Roy V. 2005. From Prairie Farmer to Entrepreneur. Bloomington, Indiana: University of Indiana Press.

Ridder, Mary. 2007. Root of Change: Nebraska’s New Agriculture. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.

Webb, Walter Prescott. 1931. The Great Plains. New York: The MacMillan Company.

Wishart, David J., Editor. 2004. Encyclopedia of the Great Plains. Lincoln, Nebraska: University of Nebraska Press.

U. S. Land Laws

The Homestead Act of 1862 was just one of many laws passed by the United States to transfer land from the public domain into private ownership. Below are just a few of those other laws:

SALE LAWS – The sale of public lands at auction was the first general means of disposing of the public lands. The Congress under the Articles of Confederation first provided for sale in the Land Ordinance of 1785 and the Land Ordinance of 1787 [Northwest Ordinance]. Under the Constitution the first sales act came in 1796, with changes enacted in 1800, 1803, and 1804. The Act of April 24, 1820, became the major sales act until repeal in 1891. Lands were offered at public sale to the highest bidder under the 1820 law at a minimum price of $1.25 an acre. There was no limitation on the acreage that could be purchased by an individual. None of the laws had residence or cultivation requirements.

MILITARY BOUNTY LAND LAWS – To reward those who had served in the nation’s armed forces; it was the practice of the federal government before the Civil War to give veterans public lands in reward for their service. The amount of land provided and how it could be taken differed under the numerous military land bounty acts. The practice was discontinued with the Civil War; however, veterans were given concessions under the homestead laws.

PREEMPTION LAW – Preemption allowed for settlers who built a residence and improved public lands to purchase claims at minimal price for public lands prior to the lands being offered at public sale. The first preemption law was enacted in 1799, after which, Congress continued to enact preemption laws of temporary nature from time to time. A permanent preemption law came with the passage of the Act of September 4, 1841. This legislation permitted an individual to settle and cultivate up to 160 acres of land and to then purchase that land within a specified time after either survey or settlement at $1.25 per acre. It was repealed in 1891.

SCRIP – By definition, scrip is a certificate which allowed the recipient to select a specified number of acres from the public domain. There were numerous types of script, among them being Agricultural College Scrip, Supreme Court Scrip, and Sioux Half-Breed Scrip. Conditions as the use of each type of scrip varied, as did the acreage given

DESERT LAND LAW – The Act of March 3, 1877 provided for the entry of 640 acres of irrigable public land. Claimant had to construct an irrigation system but no residence required. At the end of three years, land could be patented after payment of $1.25 per acre. In 1890 acreage for entries was reduced to 320 acres. Provisions of the act were at first extended to only the states of California, Nevada, and Oregon, as well as the territories of Arizona, Dakota, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. The law was extended to Colorado in 1891. This settlement law is still “on the books.”

DONATION LAWS – In an effort to encourage Anglo-American settlement of certain territorial acquisitions, Congress offered grants of lands to individuals who were already in possession of lands or were willing to immigrate to the areas of concern. Donation acts were passed for Florida in 1842 and 1844, Oregon and Washington in 1850 and 1853, and New Mexico in 1854. Most of the laws required residence and cultivation.

ENLARGED HOMESTEAD LAW – This legislation provided for 320 acre homesteads on semi-arid public lands designated as not susceptible to irrigation. Residence and cultivation were required. Enacted on February 19, 1909, the law was an act first extended to Arizona, California, Colorado, Kansas, Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and Wyoming. In 1910 the law was amended to include Idaho and in 1915 South Dakota was brought under its provisions. It was repealed 1976.

GENERAL SEVERALTY LAW – The primary purpose of the act of February 8, 1887, also known as the Dawes Act and the General Allotment Act, was to provide Indians living on reservations with individual freeholds, or allotments. A little-known provision of the law, Section 4, however, provides allotments to Indians who occupied public lands. These public domain allotments were administered in a manner similar to the other public land settlement laws.

FOREST HOMESTEAD LAW – The Act of June 11, 1906 opened entry lands chiefly valuable for agricultural purposes within national forests to entry under the Homestead Law. Entries limited to 160 acres. It was repealed 1962.

RECLAMATION ACT LAW – The Newland Act of June 17, 1902 provided for federally funded irrigation projects. Lands within the projects were subject to the basic provisions of the Homestead Law. Individuals limited to overall ownership of 160 acres. In effect, the homestead provisions of this act were repealed with the Homestead Act in 1976.

STOCK-RAISING HOMESTEAD LAW – The last major settlement law, enacted December 29, 1916, this act provided for 640 acre entries on public domain classified as chiefly valuable for grazing and forage crops. Residence and certain improvements required. Passage of the Taylor Grazing Act in 1934 made this ineffectual. It was repealed in 1976.

TIMBER CULTURE LAW – This 1873 legislation offered 160 acres of public land to an individual willing to plant 40 acres of trees for ten years. Later amendments changed planting and time requirements. Residence on the claim was not a requirement. The act was of little success. It was repealed in 1891.

[This information came from a document published by the Bureau of land Management in March, 1992: “A Few of the Major Public Land and Mineral Laws” by James Muhn, Denver, Colorado.]

The Canadian Homestead Act

The Canadian Homestead Act is more commonly called the Dominion Lands Act which is short for it’s official name: An Act Respecting the Public Lands of the Dominion. It passed in1872 and was in use until 1918. It aimed to encourage the settlement of Canada's prairie provinces of Alberta, Saskatchwan, and Manitoba. It was modeled on the U. S. Homestead Act of 1862. The Act's purpose was to encourage settlement by European and American pioneers, as well as settlers from Eastern Canada.

by Gene Finke

The act also launched the Dominion Lands Survey, which laid the framework for layout of the prairie provinces that persists to this day. The Dominion Land Survey was the method used to divide most of Western Canada into one-square-mile sections for agricultural and other purposes. It was based on the layout of the Public Land Survey System used in the United States.

The Canadian Homestead Act gave 160 acres for free to any male farmer who agreed to cultivate at least 40 acres and to build a permanent dwelling within three years. The only cost to the farmer being a $10 administration fee. This condition of “proving up the homestead” was instituted to prevent speculators from gaining control of the land.

An important difference between the Canadian and U.S. systems was that the Canadian system allowed the farmers to buy a neighboring 160 acres for the same $10 registration fee. This allowed most farms to quickly double in size. This was especially important in the arid areas of the prairie provinces where a farm of 160 acres was not large enough to be successful.

Manitoba wheat field

The Canadian Homestead Act did not immediately cause a great migration into the prairie provinces. Large-scale immigration to the prairies did not begin until 1896. The first version of the act limited the free land to areas more than 20 miles from a railway. It was very difficult for farmers to show a profit if they had to transort their products by wagon for 20 miles or more and therefore settlement was slow in the beginning. In 1879 the exclusion zone was shrunk to only 10 miles from the tracks and in 1882 it was finally eliminated.

The act went through many changes and amendments and was finally done away with in 1918 when a new system was set up designed to help World War I veterans settle more easily. Then in 1930 Parliament passed the Natural Resources Transfer Acts, turning over the control of public lands and resources in the prairies provinces to the provincial governments and thus relinquishing its right to legislate in these fields. Overall about 480,000 square miles of land were given away by the government under the Canadian Homestead Act.

For more information:
"Homesteading"in The Canadianen Encyclopedia
"Canadian Homestead Act" at E-How
"Dominion Lands Act/Homestead Act" in The Encyclopedia of Saskatchewan

Why the World Requires a Bread Basket

Field where the Bread Basket of the World begins

 The economics of homesteading is difficult to quantify in precise numbers, but late in the nineteenth and early twentieth century agriculture was a primary source of U.S. wealth. The United States is called the “Bread Basket of the World.” This simply means that the grain belt of the country provides grains and grain-based products to all corners of the globe. Previously, I had written about the increase in transportation and agricultural technologies that made physically moving the grains around the world possible, but what were some other forces at work that turned the Great Plains into an agricultural giant? The focus here is to begin thinking about what was happening in the United States and the world, and why did the world require a bread basket?

The United States, torn by the Civil War, was busy piecing the country back together during the 1860’s. During this time the government was trying to populate the western portion of the country by removing the American Indian and offering this land to individuals willing to live on and work the land. While agricultural production increased in the first decades following the Civil War, it took some time for the technology and population on the Great Plains to begin producing a surplus. During the 1860’s agricultural exports averaged a modest $182 million a year. The grain belt was just being born.



Grain belt of the Great Plains

By the 1870’s the grain belt was being settled rapidly, railroads were connecting cities to the farthest reaches of the Great Plains, and agricultural colleges were being built to supply the increased demand for applied technologies. Between the decades of 1870 to 1890 nearly 2 million new farms, double the total number that had existed in 1860, spread throughout the middle of the United States. One million new farms were being created every decade until the 1920’s when expansion finally reached a plateau.

I can only speculate on what factors allowed for the United States to emerge in the 20th century as the world’s leading agricultural superpower. European agricultural production would have been crippled during World War I and World War II as crop fields were turned into battlefields. The explosion of the world’s population that began around the beginning of the 20th century increased demand for agricultural products.

The timing of the Homestead Act is important because by the time these other key events began the agricultural infrastructure of the United States had been established and American farmers were in a position to contribute a large supply to the increasing demand. This is a complex issue that will require more extensive research, but there are some interesting questions to be asked about this history that have relevance to our present society.



The addition of the new farms directly led to an increase in production, but the population was growing as well, so surpluses were being consumed and profits grew proportionally to the number of farms. In order to become the “Bread Basket of the World”, a world market is required. So where did this market come from? Here, I do not pretend to know the answers. The U.S. was seeing the number of farms increase, and the production of those farms was increasing, in the decade of 1910-20 agricultural exports skyrocketed to an average of 1.9 billion annually.

The Importance of Water in the Homestead Experience

I read a quote by Bernard Frank, deceased journalist and writer, in which he claimed, “You could write the story of man’s growth in terms of his epic concerns with water”. Initially, I passed this off as an oversimplification of human history; however, I began to contemplate man’s “epic concerns” with water, and consider the implications this had on past events. The ability to obtain and control fresh water sources has been one of the key features of civilization from antiquity through the present. This was especially true to homesteaders who decided to stake their claim in the semi-arid regions of the Great Plains.

Humans have a few basic needs in order to survive; food, air, shelter, and water. Histories of homesteading often focus on food production and the primitive shelters that settlers were living in; while water, and its acquisition, often remains a tertiary focal point unless it was lacking as it was in the 1930’s. I can only assume the former are more appealing because sod houses and tar-paper shacks are more visually engaging or crops are the measurable products of a farmer’s painstaking efforts.

The link between crops and rain is so intertwined that the two seemed to have reached a causal relationship, thus we overlook the importance of water for human and animal consumption.

Homesteaders ideally sought land that was situated near a water source. Quarter sections that had a stream or pond on them were ideal because the worry for water was immediately nullified. As lands began to be distributed and homesteaders moved farther west, water sources became less abundant.

This caused two problems. One, the homesteader had to expend a great amount of time and energy traveling to and from a water source. Once they arrived they were limited only to amounts they could efficiently carry back with them. Secondly, they were limited to only a certain number of animals they could supply adequate amounts of water for. Combining wasted energy and limited animal stock; homesteaders could be crippled by efforts to maintain fresh water supplies.

This problem was alleviated for many homesteaders when they discovered the abundant ground water that existed under the majority of the Great Plains. The aquifer, named the Ogallala Aquifer, provided the much needed fresh water homesteaders were seeking. Initially the aquifer served two purposes.

First, and most importantly, homesteaders now had access to fresh water without having to waste the time and energy seeking out fresh water supplies. This provided for more time that could be spent trying to improve their claims. Increased time in the fields allowed for expanding farms; expanding farms provided for larger production; more production increased the chances of a homesteader being successful.

Secondly, homesteaders were able to provide fresh water to livestock. Increased amounts of livestock provided an abundant, renewable food supply. Byproducts from livestock were important to the success of homesteaders as well. Hides provided for clothing and blankets and waste made excellent fertilizer.

It would be difficult to overstate the important role water played in the success, or failure, of homesteaders. A homesteader’s ability to prove up their claim, and really, life and death, hinged on their ability to maintain a fresh water supply. I do not know if Bernard Frank’s quote is applicable to all of human history, but there certainly appears to be a bit of truth with respect to the history of homesteading in the United States.

The Tallgrass Prairie

Oh give me a home where the buffalo roam, where the deer and the antelope play… What do you think of when you hear those lyrics most recently sung by Neil Young? I don’t know about you but I think of a wide open hilly field with grass swaying beautifully in the wind. I am fairly certain that is what Brewster Higley had in mind when he wrote the original poem in1872 titled The Western Home.

by Michaela Papp

Southeast Community College

Apparently he was living in Kansas at the time and was describing what is now known as the tallgrass prairie. Chances are if you are sitting in this room, you are currently living in Nebraska and have seen how beautiful what is left of the tallgrass prairie is. Having been born and raised in Nebraska, I could take you to a few areas that remind me of those lyrics. Today I have the opportunity to share my knowledge and love of the tallgrass prairie. First, I will be informing you about what exactly the tallgrass prairie is and how it was created. Then, I will discuss some of the plants and animals that live within it and how some of them dealt with this harsh environment. Finally, I will tell you about what people are doing to preserve and restore the tallgrass prairie.

Back in the 1500’s, the tallgrass prairie was part of a grassland that stretched from Manitoba, Canada to the Gulf of Mexico and from the Rocky Mountains to Kentucky (Preserving our Prairie Heritage, 2009). Unfortunately, if you have traveled to any state in the area recently, you will notice that it seems like all you will see is fields of corn, beans, and other crops (Allen, 2007). According to the Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve, “The tallgrass prairie was the dominant presettlement vegetation type in the eastern third of the Great Plains occupying approximately 142.62 million acres; today, only an estimated four percent remains.” Most of this four percent is located within the Flint Hills in eastern Kansas and northern Oklahoma. This area has been preserved from plowing up for farmland because of its unique rocky landscape (Tallgrass Prarie National Preserve).

It took about 20 million years to make this large stretch of tallgrass prairie (Allen, 2007). If you are anything like me this comes as a bit of a shock to you. Grass isn’t too hard to grow and it comes up in a lot of places, so how could it take that long? According to Preserving our Prairie Heritage from 2009, “It was a unique, finely tuned system of living things and environmental factors – the result of millions of years of interaction among soil, climate, fire, changing surface features such as hills and valleys, and a host of plants and animals.” Basically, what this quote is saying is that the tallgrass prairie wasn’t just a bunch of grass growing; it was pretty organized when you really look into it.

Believe it or not, fires had a lot to do with the creation of the tallgrass prairie. How could such a destructive thing help create such a beautiful landscape? Long before people inhabited the tallgrass prairie, lightening would cause a fire to start, three to four times a year. Winds would spread the fire rapidly, cutting back the grass in a pruning type of way. The fires wouldn’t actually kill the grass but after being cut back time and time again, the root systems on the grass would become very stable (Preserving our Prairie Heritage, 2009). According to The Harsh Prairie Environment, written by Tricia Andryszewski, “Grasses often grow even better after a fire, which clears away years of dead stalks, allowing light and air to reach new growth at ground level.”

Not only were these fires helpful for strengthening the grass, they were also helpful in keeping the tallgrass prairie from over-population. As stated in Preserving our Prairie Heritage from 2009, “Many animals perished in a prairie fire. Among those lucky enough to escape were adult birds, burrowing creatures, and surface dwellers that were swift enough to get to water.” The animals that were able to survive the fires lived on food they had stored underground. A few days after a fire, new green plants would make their way up from strong roots (Preserving our Prairie Heritage, 2009).

Due to these fires and the lack of rain fall, most trees were only able to survive around bodies of water. However, some trees that don’t need a lot of rainfall to live, survived. The fires are the main reason the tallgrass prairie didn’t turn into a forest. (Andryszewski, 1993).

At first the humans only helped the process of making and retaining the tallgrass prairie. The early settlers would start fires to help scare out animals and clear out areas to put their villages. We were not quite as helpful after John Deere revealed his first plow in 1837 (Allen, 2007). Thus began a little bit of the agricultural revolution, and the beginning of the disappearance of the tallgrass prairie.

Now that we know a little bit more about what the tallgrass prairie is and how it was made, let’s discuss some of the plants and animals that lived in it. We all are familiar with the plants and animals we see in our area, however it is rather interesting to find out what used to live around here and how they have adapted to the new landscape.

As stated in Ecology (2009), “The ability to resist the damaging effects of drought and to actually benefit from fire has helped big bluestem grass become the most common species of grass on the tallgrass prairie…”
Studies have shown that after burns this grass grew faster and thicker with more abundant leaves, and produced more nutrients, more efficiently than the big bluestem grass that remained unburned. As I pointed out before, it was concluded that the fires removed the dead leaves and stems from previous years. By cleaning this out, more sunlight was able to reach the new grass, apparently strengthening the species.

Another characteristic that helped big bluestem grass thrive was that its leaves curled up to reduce the amount of sunlight striking them. This also helped reduce the water lost through transpiration (Ecology, 2009).

The second most common species of grass found on the tallgrass prairie is switchgrass. Switchgrass needs more moisture for it to be able to survive, but still not as much as most other types of grass (Ecology, 2009).

Despite the disappearing tallgrass prairie, no plants from it are on the Species in Need of Conservation list. There are, however, two plants on the federal threatened species list: western prairie fringed orchid and the meads milkweed (Tallgrass Prarie National Preserve).

About 120 mammal species are currently found on the tallgrass prairie. The most common of these are the mule deer, white-tailed deer, antelope, and bison. The black bear, grizzly bear, mountain lion, and elk have been sighted in the past, but not since the late 1800s (Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve). Even though the thought of mountain lions and bears running around here is a little scary, I think it would be awesome to be able to see such beautiful creatures. While learning more about the tallgrass prairie, I can’t help but wonder how different our landscape could have been.

As for birds, there have been 428 species documented. While studying the birds that live within the tallgrass prairie, the U.S. Geological Survey and the Biological Resources Division suggested to burn prior to the breeding season or in the fall to ensure they will not become extinct (Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve). This is a good recommendation because as stated by the Tallgrass Prarie National Preserve, “Spring burning followed by grazing resulted in reproduction levels below replacement rates.”

There are 28 species of amphibians (8 salamanders and 20 frogs) and 53 species of reptiles (4 turtles, 12 lizards, and 37 snakes). However the Tallgrass Prarie National Preserve thought it was important to point out that these were identified mostly by untrained volunteers over a two day period. So these numbers aren’t exact, but they give us a pretty good idea of how many amphibians and reptiles are still living in the tallgrass prairie area (Tallgrass Prairie National Preserve).

Finally, now that we know more about what the tallgrass prairie is and how it was made, and what kinds of plants and animals inhabit it, let’s discuss what people are doing to preserve and restore it.

As I stated before, the prairie burned on average every three to four years. Today, ranch managers that are working to preserve the tallgrass prairie are burning off their preserved prairie every year. They are doing this because this causes their grazing cattle to gain more weight and in turn be more profitable. As of now they are using cattle; however, their hopes are one day to reintroduce bison to the landscape.

While cattle and bison are similar, their effects on the tallgrass prairie are different. Cattle usually eat more of the native forbes while bison are almost exclusively grass eaters. (Schlyer, 2008) According to At Home on the Prairie, written by Krista Schlyer in 2007, “As with any altered ecosystem, especially on as altered as the tallgrass prairie, trying to reconfigure the natural system is difficult.” This just goes to show that they have come to terms with the fact that the restoration of the tallgrass prairie will take a while to figure out.

The biggest challenge to restoration lies underground where 70 percent of the tallgrass prairie’s biomass resides. As I stated in my first point, in order for the grass to be successful in growing back after all of the burns, the root system needs to be strong. According to Rebirth in the Prairie State written by Karen Schmidt, “Even after 15 years of restoration, a prairie’s soil ecosystem still bears the shallow simplicity of the cornfield it was built upon.” Since it took millions of years for these root systems to become so strong, you can imagine it might take a few more than 15 years to fully restore the tallgrass prairie.

To ensure that the tallgrass prairie isn’t completely destroyed in the next few years, more and more prairie scientists and public and private organizations are encouraging state legislatures and land owners to donate or sell tallgrass prairie land for preservation (Preserving our Prairie Heritage, 2009). If we don’t try to preserve it, there is a good chance the rest of the tallgrass prairie will be gone in the next few decades.

Today we learned a lot about the tallgrass prairie. I shared my knowledge and love of this beautiful grassland. We talked about what exactly it is, some of the plants and animals that lived within the tallgrass prairie, and what people are doing to preserve and restore it. Hopefully one day we will be able to look back and be very glad that we saved the tallgrass prairie, not wish that we had tried harder.

References

Allen, L. (2007). Prarie revival. Science News. Retrieved April, 15 2010 from eLibrary research database.

Andryszewski, T. (1993). The dust bowl. Chapter 1: The harsh prairie environment. Retrieved April 15, 2010 from eLibrary research database.

Ecology. (2009). World Book Science Year. Retrieved April 15, 2010 from eLibrary research database.

Preserving our prairie heritage. (2009). World Book Year Books. Retrieved April 15, 2010 from eLibrary research database.

Schlyer, K. (2007). At home on the prairie. National Parks. Retrieved April 18, 2010 from eLibrary research database.

Schmidt, K. (1992). Rebirth in the prairie state. U.S. News & World Report. Retrieved April 15, 2010 from eLibrary research database.

Tallgrass prairie national preserve. The Affected Environment. Retrieved April 25, 2010 from http://www.nps.gov/archive/tapr/parkdocuments.htm

The Homestead Act Influence on Agricultural Identity

America has often been called the “bread basket of the world.” The title reminds us that we have the ability to produce large amounts of grains that can be shipped to all corners of the earth. But the capability to perform this task is a relatively recent phenomenon. About a century and half ago, the United States was still forging an identity in the world; and on its own continent. In 1862 President Abraham Lincoln, by signing the Homestead Act, created the opportunity for our young nation to grow into the largest agricultural producer in the history of the world.

The Homestead Act, coupled with advances in transportation, put the United States in a position to produce and distribute copious amounts of vegetables and grains. However, conquering the land would prove a long and arduous task. Homesteaders flooded the western United States and began plowing millions of acres of land. Most were focused on sustaining their own livelihood by producing enough to get them through the harsh winters the plains and prairies were infamous for. In an attempt to accomplish this goal an amazing thing happened; inventions and new agricultural techniques began to make farming easier and more productive. I do not mean to insinuate that farming a century ago was easy, but compared to the previous two millennia farmers were able to expend less energy and produce more yields than ever before.

This did not happen overnight; generations of homesteaders dedicated their lives, often in vain, to attain perfect farming techniques. As yields increased farmers turned to the railroads to distribute their products. Increased yields provided more feed for ranchers and in turn more beef became available. Large transport networks, preservation techniques, and refrigeration allowed perishable items to be transported over longer distances. The Midwest and Great Plains slowly became economically viable, not only to the United States, but to the rest of the world.

The emerging global economy was tested by World War I. While the rest of the world struggled to manufacture enough for themselves, the United States enjoyed a surplus. After WWI, grain prices plummeted and many farms did not survive; nevertheless, the grain belt of the United States was firmly established as a leader in global grain production. The depression of the 20’s and 30’s coupled with the disastrous dust bowl tested the will of a majority of farmers, but many persevered through these hardships emerging stronger and more determined than ever.

In the wake of the Second World War homesteaders and their descendents had firmly established themselves as, not only self-sufficient farmers, but the manufactures of global produce. The lessons of recent decades still fresh in the minds of many led to a greater respect and more careful treatment of the land.

Modern society often takes for granted where its produce comes from, but it comes from the sacrifice of several generations who endured the pains of our modern agricultural revolution. The Homestead Act was the conduit that accelerated Western development and created an agricultural identity unique to the United States.

Homestead Gardens

"No occupation is so delightful to me as the culture of the earth, and no culture comparable to that of the garden."-- Thomas Jefferson

Where do you get most of your food? If you are like me, in the winter, I go to the local grocery store and stock up for the week, taking advantage of sales and the fruits and vegetables that are in season at the time. But when May arrives, I am ready to plant my garden in the backyard. Last year I grew tomatoes, green peppers, summer squash, and cucumbers. It’s not difficult, but instead actually very rewarding. To see something start out as a seed or small plant and grow to be so large, bearing fruit so heavy that the plant falls over! What an accomplishment.

In contrast to modern society, homesteaders didn’t have the luxury of frequently visiting a town store just five minutes away. Store-bought items were special and few and far between. Instead, what they grew in the ground was what they had to eat. So they often had large gardens filled with a variety of vegetables. They learned how to preserve them for the winter months, when traveling was arduous and the weather brutal. Do you want a taste of what it would be like to eat from your own garden?

Here’s what to do: If you live near Homestead National Monument, you can take part in a new program – our community garden. Contact the monument for more information! But for the majority of you, who don’t live nearby, you can plant your own garden, either in your backyard or maybe at a community garden in your area (find one in your area by searching here: http://www.communitygarden.org/about-acga/)!

This can be an activity the entire family can participate in! As a child, every spring my parents and I would start our garden in our basement. I grew up in North Dakota and the growing season is so short, so we had to. We’d purchase the seeds we wanted to grow, as well as long shallow plastic planters, dirt and put the planters under lights and water them until it was warm enough outside to transplant the plants into the ground.

Tips to Remember:

*Do your research at your local library and online beforehand to determine what types of plants will be best for your climate and lifestyle.

*Read the seed packets for specific instructions on lighting, water, planting, etc.

*Depending on your location, you start transplanting to the ground at various times in the spring time. Check with a local nursery for more specific guidance.

*If you haven’t had a garden before, start small. Choose something that you will enjoy eating and only as much as your time schedule can handle.

You might say growing a garden is somewhat different today than it was for the homesteaders. However, the reasons behind it are still the same: to grow something yourself, to depend on the land for your food, to get outside, to care for something and enjoy the fruits of your labor. Why don’t you and your family try it this year?

Jayhawk Hay Stacker: A Two Dimensional History of Three Dimensional Objects

Homestead National Monument of America’s enabling legislation directs the Monument to collect and preserve “…literature applying to such settlement and agricultural implements used in bringing the western plains to its present high state of civilization…”

by Jason Jurgena, Museum Curator
Homestead National Monument

If you have been to Homestead National Monument of America you have seen that Monument staff is working hard to fulfill this legislation. You may have spent time at the Heritage Center in the museum, walked through the Farm Implement Room in the Education Center, or sat outside in the courtyard looking at the Monument’s collection of farm implements. Maybe you remember seeing similar tools and equipment on your grandparent’s farm, or maybe you used them yourself. You may have also noticed that some of these objects are big . . . really big. Collecting and preserving antique farm equipment takes a lot of space. Because of this, a lot of thought goes into what the Monument accepts into the collection.

Equally important to the collecting of farm implements is the collecting and preservation of brochures, manuals, and advertising of farm implements. “Many museums collect and display agricultural implements, as does Homestead, but we feel that it is also our duty to preserve literature related to this incredibly important aspect of American life before it deteriorates or becomes lost and forgotten,” says Homestead Superintendent Mark Engler. Because many farmers weren't near a big city, or didn't have easy access to a dealer showroom, catalogs and brochures were often the main way farming tool and equipment companies did their marketing. These catalogs and brochures featured specifications and pictures of the implements, testimonials from customers, and descriptions of their uses.

The Monument’s ever growing collection of this type of literature provides valuable information that may not be available through the study of the equipment itself. And the space requirements are considerably less. Homestead National Monument of America collects manuals, brochures and other related literature dating from 1862 through 1952 as this was the period of time when most homestead claims were filed. The availability of this literature has the additional benefit of aiding in the identification, repair and restoration of three dimensional farm implements in the collection.

Recently a Jayhawk Hay Stacker was donated to the monument. This wonderful piece of agriculture history is in pretty good shape considering it has been out in the Kansas weather for the last 80 years or so. Most of the metal is intact, though a few minor repairs will need to be made, but 95% of the wood has rotted away leaving many of the metal components no longer fixed in their designed location. Many are attached to what looks like pieces of rotting wood and others are no longer attached to anything. Fortunately, the donor of the Hay Stacker also donated a 1937 advertising catalog from the Wyatt Manufacturing Co., 1930 “Repair Parts Price List” for Jayhawk Hay Tools, 1941 and 1943 “Dealers Price’s” brochures, and (date unknown) “Instructions for Erecting and Operating the Automatic Jayhawk” including an inventory of what is shipped when a Jayhawk Hay Stacker is shipped.

1937 Wyatt Manufacturing Company catalog.

Thanks to this literature, volunteers at the park will be able to accurately restore this piece of equipment and maybe even demonstrate how it was used. New wooden components can be accurately cut using the descriptions and drawings in the catalog, and the machinery can be reassembled and possibly demonstrated using the “Instructions for Erecting and Operating” manual.

So, the next time you run across a 1891 Norwegian Plow Co trade card, 1903 McCormick Farm Implement Brochure, 1917 Dempster Windmill Parts Manual, 1936 John Deere Model A Tractor Operator’s Manual, 1952 Allis Chalmers Corn Picker Operator’s Manual, or similar literature lying in the bottom of drawer or a trunk in the attic, think twice before throwing it out. Items that are donated to the Monument will be saved for the benefit of future generations so that they might better understand farming practices and the lives of people as related to homesteading.

Wheel and Seeder Manufacturing Company Trade Card.

Dust to Eat: Homesteaders Pioneer No-Till

As we move from the reds, oranges, and yellows of fall to the glittering fairy dust of blowing snow across winter fields, it’s important to look back at how far agriculture has come. As with most things, Mother Nature did not want to cooperate with the farmers this year and the harvest was later than years past. But thanks to ‘no-till’ which is supposed to be economically sound, agronomically superior, and environmentally safer, farmers will pass this test of Mother Nature smoothly because they don’t need to get back into the fields to plow everything under before spring.

But why is no-till such an issue today? What happened to America that the farmers have gone to no-till? What was it like for the hard working men and women who did not use no-till? The answers to those questions lies in exploring William Vaughn Moody’s figure of speech, “Dust to Eat,” coined during the Dust Bowl from 1933-1939.

Caroline Henderson described the Dust Bowl in the book Letter from the Dust Bowl (p. 140-141) as: There were days when for hours at a time we cannot see the windmill fifty feet from the kitchen door. There are days when for briefer periods one cannot distinguish the windows from the solid wall because of the solid blackness of the raging storm. Only in some Inferno-like dream could anyone visualize the terrifying lurid red light overspreading the sky when portions of Texas are “on the air.” This wind-driven dust, fine as the finest flour, penetrates wherever air can go. . . “Dust to eat,” and dust to breathe and dust to drink. Dust in the beds and in the flour bin, on dishes and walls and windows, in hair and eyes and ears and teeth and throats, to say nothing of the heaped up accumulation on floors and window sills after one of the bad days.

Caroline’s description of what it was like during the dust bowl echoes Moody’s expression “Dust to Eat” as this was the reality of daily life. Daily life became even more bitter with each passing day and trying to describe it to those who did not experience it was a futile exercise, because who can really fathom ‘“Dust to eat,” and dust to breathe and dust to drink’ (Henderson, p. 141)?

President Franklin D. Roosevelt offered programs in his New Deal that would address the problems of the Great Depression and help farmers such as Caroline Henderson. The Soil Conservation Service created Soil Conservation Districts and encouraged new farming methods to conserve the land and reduce the impact of practices that had contributed to the dust bowl. Caroline Henderson describes those practices:

The almost unbroken buffalo grass sod has given way to cultivated fields. . . In one limited respect we realize that some farmers have themselves contributed to this reaping whirlwind. Under the stimulus of war time prices and the humanizing of agriculture through the use of tractors and improved machinery, large areas of buffalo grass and blue-stem pasture lands were broken out for wheat raising. The reduction in the proportionate area of permanent grazing grounds has helped intensify the serious effect of the long drought and violent winds. (p. 141)

So the breaking of the land by homesteaders proved to be too much for the soil. In addition, many homesteads were abandoned for various reasons, one of which was the lack of moisture. Although the Soil Conservation Service tried to reduce the impacts of the practices leading to the dust bowl, there was no one to implement these practices on the abandoned homesteads, further adding to the problem.

But it is through these lessons, learned the hard way by homesteaders such as Caroline Henderson that agriculture has advanced to our current economically sound, agronomically superior, and environmentally safer way of growing crops by using the no-till system.

So enjoy the fairy dusting of snow over no-till fields and thank the homesteaders who pioneered our current ways of agriculture.

Homestead Myth: The Rain Follows the Plow

Suppose (an army of frontier farmers) 50 miles, in width, from Manitoba to Texas, could acting in concert, turn over the prairie sod, and after deep plowing and receiving the rain and moisture, present a new surface of green growing crops instead of dry, hard baked earth covered with sparse buffalo grass. No one can question or doubt the inevitable effect of this cooling condensing surface upon the moisture in the atmosphere as it moves over by the Western winds (sic). A reduction of temperature must at once occur, accompanied by the usual phenomena of showers. The chief agency in this transformation is agriculture. To be more concise. Rain follows the plow.

--Charles Dana Wilber, 1881, in

“The Great Valleys of Nebraska”

These four words the “rain follows the plow” were used to encourage people to move west and to dispel the rumor that the middle of America was not good for farming. In the early 1800s the area west of the 100th meridian was labeled “the Great American Desert” by Stephen H. Long, an explorer and map-maker.

Because of this desert label there was very sparse settlement in the area beyond the Mississippi River in the 1840s and the 1850s. There were isolated homesteads here and there, but not settlers in vast numbers until the late 1850s and the early years of the 1860s. After the passage of the Homestead Act in 1862 and the end of the Civil War in 1865 people moving into the trans-Mississippi  West increased.  First by the hundreds, then by the thousands, then by the hundreds of thousands. As the population increased in the Great Plains people came to recognize that the old myth of the Great American Desert was no longer true.

And those eager to boost settlement and attract business and get railroad connections wanted the rest of the country to believe that the so-called Great American Desert was not a desert after all. And this belief was widely promoted in the 1870s as a justification for the settlement of the Great Plains.

In the 1880s some areas of Nebraska and Kansas were unusually rainy. As humans had recently pushed into the area, many human-centered theories sprung up about what could be causing the increased rainfall. Some people suggested that the “iron on the lines” or the “wires of the telegraph lines” were responsible. Others thought it “the disturbance of the atmospheric circulation through the concussions of locomotives and moving trains. Much more widespread was the idea, created by conservationists, that “forests produce rains.”

Samuel Aughey, a prominent Nebraska natural scientist, looked at the tree planting data and noted that the rains began before the trees. His conclusion was that it must be settlement. “There is, however, another cause most potently acting to produce all the changes in rainfall that the facts indicate have taken place. What then is that cause?’ Aughey wrote, “It is the great increase in the absorptive power of the soil, wrought by cultivation,  that has caused, and continues to cause an increasing rainfall in the State.”

But it was Charles Dana Wilber, an author, educator, geologist and entrepreneur, who said that he could prove scientifically that rainfall was bound to increase as the farming frontier moved westward. In his influential book, The Great Valleys and Prairies of Nebraska and the Northwest, published in 1881, Wilbur wrote that the ages old symbol of the farmer, the plow was the instrument of cooperation between God, nature and man. He said, “In this miracle of progress, the plow was the unerring prophet, the procuring cause, not by any magic or enchantment, not by incantations or offerings, but instead by the sweat of his face toiling with his hands, man can persuade the heavens to yield their treasure of dew and rain upon the land he has chosen for his dwelling.” He concluded, “The raindrop never fails to fall and answer to the imploring power of prayer of labor.”

During the 1870s and early 1880s unusually heavy rainfall made these claims sound plausible, and within ten years nearly 2 million people had sunk their roots into the prairie soil.

Climatologists now understand that increased vegetation and settlement can result in increased precipitation. The effect, however, is local in scope, with increased rainfall typically coming at the expense of rainfall in nearby areas. It cannot result in climatologically change for an entire region. They also understand that the Great Plains had had a wetter than usual few seasons as this theory and settlement were both taking place. When normal arid conditions returned, homesteaders were damaged.

 References

Libecap, Gary D. "Rain Follows the Plow:" The Climate Information Problem and Homestead Failure in the Upper Great Plains, 1890-1925." (2000): 1. Web. 11 Sep 2009.

Letheby, Pete. "Water-a Historical perspective we should remember today." Grand Island Independent n. pag. Web. 11 Sep 2009.

Schultz, Stanley K. "Which Old West and Whose?." American History 102. 2004. Web.

Editor's note: article is from the HNM archives.

Farming and the Homestead Act

“The Homestead Act of 1862 has been called one of the most important pieces of Legislation in the history of the United States,” according to an online passage from About the Homestead Act last updated on May 30, 2008.

By Lindsey Katz
Southeast Community College

When I was a freshman in high school, a class that I was enrolled in took a trip to the Homestead National Monument. I never knew that there could be such valuable history so close to home. Today I am going to talk about the Homestead Act.

I will start off by telling you about the Homestead Act of 1862. Then I will discuss to how it gave people the opportunity to own land. Finally I will be talking about how the Homestead Act still affects farming today.

In 1862, the Homestead Act was signed into law by President Abraham Lincoln (Homestead, 2008).According to the book, Homestead: National Monument of America by Rose Houk, on May 20, 1862 the Homestead Act would change the lives of Americans forever. The Homestead Act affected the majority of the United States. 30 out of the 50 states were changed because of it. Settlers were each allowed up to 160 acres of land according to online article The Homestead Act, last revised May 7, 2007.

Not just anyone was handed land. There were some requirements. Homesteaders that were able to claim land had to be the head of a household, or at least twenty-one years of age. Those who were immigrants weren’t just handed land, they had to file for citizenship. The settlers had to live on the land for 5 years, or live on the land six months out of the year (Homestead, 2008).

Daniel Freeman had the first claim under the act on January 1, 1863. Freeman’s homestead is now known as the Homestead National Monument. In 1936, the United States Congress identified Freeman’s homestead as the “first homestead” in the US (The Library, 2007).

The Homestead Act provided many opportunities for settlers. Without the Homestead Act, many may not have had the chance to own land (The Library, 2007). The goal of the Homestead Act was to give the less fortunate like immigrants and underprivileged Americans a chance (Houk, 2000).

Farmers and their children were the majority of people who claimed the land. The farmers and their families had the expertise to improve the conditions of the land and make use out of it. After certain requirements had been met, the homesteader was able to pay a $10 filing fee to claim the land. A $2 commission fee was also required for the land agent (Homestead, 2008). With this payment homesteaders were able to take ownership of their new purchase.

Each person who purchased land needed to find two people to give their word that all of your intentions for the land were true. They had to sign the “proof” document for certainty that they would follow through with their intentions (Homestead, 2008).

Farming in the 1800s has sure changed from farming today. There were many different types of farming techniques and inventions along the way. In a discussion with Jim Katz, on February 7, 2009 about farming then and now he stated, “Tractors, combines and custom harvesters weren’t available to the homesteaders, but I’m sure they would have made life much simpler.”

A way of farming during the time when the Homestead Act was passed was called the dry farming method. During my discussion with Katz (2009), I asked him if he knew of this farming technique. “The dry farming method was used in the Great Plains. This required planting seeds deep into sod where there would be enough moisture for the crop to start growing.” Being a third generation farmer himself, Katz was always eager to know how things work. He would analyze things now, and ask his father and grandfather how things were then and make comparisons.

As time went by, many different farming inventions were created. I asked Katz if he knew about any of the machinery that was used back then. He told me how the seed drill was a machine that would drill small holes into the ground then cover them up. This eliminated planting seeds by hand. Today, there is such a wide variety of equipment. Close to the seed drill is the planter that is used today. Technology has come a long way, and is helping improve agriculture all over the United States.

Now that I have told you a little bit about the Homestead and how it has affected farming, let’s review. Today I told you about the Homestead Act and farming. I first told you about the Homestead Act. Then I discussed how it gave people the opportunity to own land. Finally I talked about how the Homestead Act still affects farming today.

History is all around us. There is so much to learn. I never thought that one of the most important pieces of history in the United States would be only a few miles away.

References:

Homestead National Monument of America. (2008, May). About the Homestead Act. Retrieved February 2, 2009, from http://www.nps.gov/home/historyculture/abouthomesteadactlaw.htm

Houk, R. (2000). Homestead: National Monument of America. Fort Washington, PA: Eastern National.

J. Katz (personal communication, February 7, 2009)

The Library of Congress. (2007, May 7). The Homestead Act. Retrieved February 2, 2009, from http://lcweb2.loc.gov/ammem/today/may20.html

Planting Corn: Then as a Homesteader, Now as a 21st Century Farmer

By Jarred Thimm
Southeast Community College

The year was 1862 and the words “Free Land, Free Land” echoed from east to west and “the Homestead Act of 1862 opened millions of acres across the nation to settlement and cultivation” according to the pamphlet “Homestead” from the Homestead National Monument of America.

The Homestead National Monument is just a few miles west of Beatrice off Highway 4 and it is something most of us around here take for granted. I have walked the paths of the Homestead National Monument and stood up on the hill looking over the land settled by Daniel Freeman. But, it wasn’t until I planted fields of corn myself that I could really imagine the challenges he faced taming the land with its dense grass cover. I will compare planting corn as the early homesteaders did with corn planting today and challenges of both. I will describe the equipment used to prepare the soil for planting, planting itself as well as the challenges of producing corn then and now.

Corn was one of the crops that early homesteaders brought with them according to Nicoll’s 1967 book, Nebraska a Pictorial History. The first step in planting corn is to prepare the soil for planting. Try to imagine yourself cutting through a thick mat of dense grass with an underground root system that is anchored deep in the soil. According to an undated pamphlet printed by Homestead National Monument of America, “tough steel plows were needed to cut through the deep tangled roots of prairie sod” and as stated in Homesteading in the 19th Century and it was pulled by a strong team of oxen, guided by the farmer. The plow would take a 9 inch swath and the farmer would have to walk 10 miles to plow an acre of land according to the 2008 video demonstration Plowing and Planting from the Homestead National Monument of America website. An acre, according to my calculations, is 43,560 square feet about the size of a football field.

Today, most farmers I am familiar with practice no-till which means the soil is not disturbed before planting. I know from my personal experience that no-till farming benefits the soil because it leaves residue on the soil surface and prevents erosion. Most farmers today I am familiar with spray herbicides, which are chemicals, to control weeds.

There is a big difference in how the soil was prepared by the homesteaders which involved grueling hours and days spent behind a plow to carefully calculating chemical rates to control weeds today. There is also a big difference in how corn is planted.

Corn and corn planting equipment have changed greatly over the years. Today’s ear of corn is much different from the corn produced by the homesteader. Homesteaders saved corn from one year’s harvest for the next year’s seed and was planted with a “hand operated mechanism

that dropped the seed into the furrow” as demonstrated on the 2008 planting video from the Homestead Monument website.

Today, farmers do not plant corn from last year’s crop. Instead I have the choice to plant conventional seed, seed that has not been genetically modified, or seed which has been modified to resist certain insects or herbicides. Farmers, such as myself, also use larger equipment to increase efficiency.

In our area, most corn is planted with 8 to 24 row planters. I plant with a 12 row planter pulled by a 100 horsepower tractor. I have a monitor in the cab that will alert me if one of the rows is not dropping seeds at the rate I have set. The planter precisely places the seed at a depth I have selected. I can plant approximately 10 acres an hour.

Advancements in corn planting have been made in the last 150 years. One thing that both, homesteaders of the past and farmers of today, have in common is the challenge of working with nature.

Producing corn has been a challenge and continues to be a challenge often because of things outside of farmers’ control. Weather…too much rain…too little rain. The price a farmer receives for the crop doesn’t always cover the cost of production. Weather and other natural disasters were factors for early homesteaders. Homesteaders contended with dust storms, hail storms” and the list goes on as described in Homestead National Monument of America 2000 publication by Houk. Farmers today are not only affected by natural disasters but are also influenced by global conditions. Last summer I noticed drop in corn prices which was a direct result of decrease in oil prices which brought down the demand for corn in ethanol plants.

Comparing the practice of corn planting by homesteaders of the 19th century and farmers of the 21st century has been an interesting journey. Farmers have made advancements to make production more efficient but still face many challenges.

I compared corn planting “Then” as a homesteader and “Now” a as 21st century farmer including some challenges. I described how the soil is prepared before planting, the planting process and finally a few challenges homesteaders and farmers face. Next time you see a planter in the field, stop and remember the first tillers of the soil, the homesteaders. To learn more about them and to appreciate their legacy, visit the Homestead National Monument.

References:

Homestead. (n.d.). Homestead National Monument of America. National Park Service.

Homesteading in the 19th Century. (n.d.). Homestead National Monument of America. National Park Service.

Houk, R. (2000). Homestead National Monument of America. Fort Washington, PA: Eastern National.

Nicoll, B. (Eds). (1967). Nebraska a pictorial history. Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press.

Plowing and planting. (Last updated 2008, November 28). Video demonstration. Homestead National Monument of America. Retrieved April 28,2009, from http://home.nps.gov/home/photosmultimedia/video-demonstrations.htm