Silt Catchment Trenches.—Granted the ultimate necessity of clean clearing, it becomes necessary to take some precautions to prevent loss of soil by “wash” in young areas planted on sloping land. An argument often used in extenuation of the practice of allowing large surface timber to remain until it becomes rotten is that it is an aid in preventing loss of soil by wash. Its removal necessitates the institution of some method of preventing “wash.” The establishment of terraces on steep slopes tends to the achievement of the desired result, but this method is not extended to more moderate slopes where loss by wash is still considerable. It is the opinion of the writers and others that the general case calls for the institution of silt catchment trenches, which, as the name denotes, fulfil the duty of catching any surface soil and of retaining rainwater. These trenches are usually laid out on contour, and do not exceed a length of 20 feet. They are usually from 18 inches to 2 feet wide and deep, and are so arranged on the slope that they occupy overlapping positions. The actual number of trenches required will depend upon the angle of slope; the steeper the slope the greater the number required—i.e., the shorter will be the length of slope between any two trenches. Given a clean area, it is obvious that the momentum acquired by running water (and hence the amount of soil removed) on any one slope will depend upon the distance travelled. It is advisable, therefore, to place a larger proportion of the trenches on the upper part of the slope than on the lower, so as to guard against the breaking down of the trench system under an abnormal downpour of rain.
On land thus prepared the writer has seen areas successfully planted, which, under ordinary conditions, were condemned as being too steep for planting. It is true that these trenches necessitate continual upkeep until the soil becomes well shaded by trees, but the actual amount of work demanded in cleaning and maintaining the trenches will depend largely upon the thoroughness with which the original work was planned and executed. Whatever may be the weaknesses exposed as a result of providing an insufficient number of trenches of inadequate dimensions, there can be no question that they are a necessity.
CHAPTER II
FIELD MAINTENANCE
Clean Weeding.—Intimately connected with the growth and development of the rubber tree one has to consider the conditions under which it is allowed to mature. The argument has been used that, since the habitat of Hevea Brasiliensis is in the jungle, we should be proceeding against nature by introducing conditions unlike those under which the “wild” rubber tree grows. It is difficult to treat such an argument seriously, as by quoting parallel instances in arboriculture it could be shown that growth, development, and yields are improved by cultivation of “wild” plants.
It needs small experience with rubber-tree plantations to be convinced of the necessity for dealing with other growths, which would otherwise soon surround and overshadow young rubber trees.
Apart from checking and preventing woody undergrowths it is considered advisable to keep the ground more or less free from light vegetable growths, which are roughly grouped under the heading of “weeds.”
Naturally, if these weeds are allowed to flourish and seed, their eventual eradication may be a matter of extreme difficulty and expense. It is the aim, therefore, of properly conducted estates generally to institute such a system of work that the weeding-gangs cover the whole estate at regular intervals; and, as a general rule, it may be accepted that the shorter the interval between successive visits by the gang to any particular area, the easier it is to keep weeds in check, and the cheaper the work will eventually be done. This procedure defines roughly what is implied by the term “clean weeding,” and it is the policy adopted by most estates.