Category Archives: Newsy Notes

Energy on the Marguerite Messier Farm and the St. Hyacinthe CSD, St. Hyacinthe, Quebec

Posted on by

Figure 1a. Simone Durant holding cured leaves of cigar, left, and cigarette tobacco leaves, in Joliette, Quebec, 1949. Like St. Hyacinthe in the nineteenth century, Joliette became part of Quebec’s tobacco producing region in the early twentieth century. Although this photograph was taken long after Marguerite Messier grew tobacco on her farm in St. Hyacinthe, it shows a woman participating in this branch of agriculture, not unlike Messier almost a century earlier. Library and Archives Canada/National Film Board or Canada fonds/e011175785, https://recherche-collection-search.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/home/record?app=fonandcol&IdNumber=4948554&new=-8585570900960126382

The Messier farm in Quebec’s St. Hyacinthe CSD is an example of a Farm with Average Land Funds (land and pasture), Low Livestock Funds/Flows, and Specialized Cash Crops (tobacco) and Animal Products (wool and honey). In terms of its land size and crop energy flows, the Messier farm was almost the perfectly average farm in the CSD. It is in many ways a typical operation for this region.[1] It stands out in one important respect, however, because it was owned by a woman. In 1871, 59-year-old Marguerite Mefsier (Messier), a widow, was head of the 36.4 hectare (ha) farm.[2] Marguerite’s husband Michel died in 1865 at 58 years of age.[3] She continued to farm the completely cleared parcel, and like many farms in the region she produced cash crops such as tobacco and surplus cereals. In other ways, the Messier farm was smaller than average, such as its lower number of livestock and the flows they generated.

Her two sons Améde and Antoine, ages 23 and 19, were farmers who must have done much of the farm work. A second family of the same surname, Messier, lived with them in the same house. This was 38-year-old Michel, who was a commis (or clerk), his wife Marie who was 35, and their five children, Joseph, Albina, Georges, Jean, and Ema, ages 13, 11, eight, four, and two. In the 1871 Census of Canada Michel did not report any land, livestock, crops, or products. Although we do not know the exact relationship between Marguerite’s immediate family and Michel and his family, they were probably relatives–possibly her eldest son, daughter-in-law, and grandchildren–who lived at the farm as family members or as boarders and who pitched in to get work on the farm done. The farm was successful because of Marguerite’s good fortune to have extensive pastures and other cleared land as well as family labour to work it. Her two adult sons, plus Michel, Marie, and probably Ema, their eldest child, all could have contributed labour. This was not the case for all women, of course. Another widow whose farm we examined in St. Hyacinthe, Esther Beauregard, was not nearly as well supported as was Marguerite. Esther, who had three young children, the eldest deaf, lost her farm and ended up in Hotel Dieu of St. Hyacinthe where nuns cared for the poor. Esther died impoverished at 60 years of age.[4]

Marguerite had an additional 12 ha in the Dominion of Canada that was outside the census subdivision in which she lived.[5] This additional 12 ha was likely close by to her 36.4 ha and used as a woodlot or, if it was improved, she may have had more pastureland, hay land, and cropland available than reported in Schedule 1 of the 1871 Census of Canada. When combined, Marguerite’s two parcels of land totaled 48.4 ha.

Figure 1b.  Carte du comté de St. Hyacinthe construite d’après les plans du Cadastre. 1:63:360. Bibliothèque de Archives nationals du Québec, 1930. Approximate 1871 CSD boundary shown in green. https://numerique.banq.qc.ca/patrimoine/details/52327/2244832

Figure 1c. Google Map of St. Hyacinthe, Quebec.

Farm Energy Funds

Marguerite Messier’s 36.4 ha was one hundred percent improved, was intensively cropped, and supported either one large family or two smaller families. Marguerite divided this parcel’s improved land roughly by thirds: 12.1 ha was in pastureland, 12.1 ha was in hay land, 9.8 ha was in cropland, and the remaining land was in gardens, orchards, buildings, and lanes. In contrast, the St. Hyacinthe CSD’s 9,747 ha was not completely improved, but had 1,363 ha in woodland with the remaining 8,381 ha improved. The CSD’s improved land was not evenly divided by thirds, as was the Messier farm. Instead, the hay land was proportionately smaller and the cropland larger so that the profile of the St. Hyacinthe CSD was 2,750 ha (32 percent) pastureland, 1,187 ha (14 percent) hay land, and 4,353 ha (53 percent) cropland, with the remaining 93 ha (one percent) dyked marshland, gardens, orchards, buildings, and lanes. The Messier farm was slightly larger than the average farm in St. Hyacinthe (34.4 ha); but, with the 12 ha that lay outside her CSD Marguerite had access to a bit more land than the average farmer in St. Hyacinthe. Marguerite kept horses, milk cows, and sheep, but she also had one other horned bovine and one pig. The greater region of the St. Hyacinthe CSD reported the same livestock types as the Messier farm with a similar emphasis on milk cows and sheep over other horned cattle and swine. The livestock intensity of the Messier farm was 17 LU/km2 and the grazing intensity was .35. In contrast, the St. Hyacinthe CSD was higher at  23.9 LU/km2 and .59 respectively. The Messier farm had a lower grazing intensity because proportionally it provided more pasture for its animals to graze upon and, as discussed in the next section, the farm had less livestock than the average farm in St. Hyacinthe.

Figure 2a. Area Visualization of Marguerite Messier’s farm in St. Hyacinthe, Quebec, 1871. Marguerite Messier’s 36.4 ha is represented by the coloured rectangle, and her 12 ha is represented by the grey area that surrounds it. Her 36.4 ha is one hundred percent improved, with about two-thirds in pastureland or hay land and the remaining third in cropland.
Figure 2b. Area Visualization of the St. Hyacinthe CSD shows that it was in an earlier stage of development than Marguerite Messier’s farm: approximately 20 percent of the available land was still wooded, and of the remaining 80 percent half was in fodder and half in cropland. About two-thirds of the fodder was in pastureland and one-third in hay land. As farms develop, often pastureland appears first, followed by hay land. Still, St. Hyacinthe’s agroecosystem was approaching the limits of land clearing, and the remaining forest was likely valued for firewood and other critical forest products.

Farm Energy Flows

In 1871, the Messier farm had 60 census standard red pine logs on hand, as well as 19 cords of wood. Likely these forest products came from the 12 ha that was outside the census subdivision in which Messier lived. The farm produced 70 bushels (bu) oats, 122 bu potatoes, 65 bu barley, 14 bu wheat, five bu peas, seven bu buckwheat, 30 bu corn, and ten pounds of tobacco. The St. Hyacinthe CSD reports the same crops as Marguerite Messier, plus beans, turnips, beets, carrots, grapes, apples, pears and/or plums, and maple sugar. The Messier farm had a feed deficit of 279,555 MJ, and a litter deficit of 83,841 MJ. For the St.Hyacinthe CSD, the feed deficit was 392,523 MJ per farm, and the litter deficit was 93,011 MJ per farm. Marguerite’s feed demand was 95 percent fodder, and with a very small hay crop in 1870, we see that even the residues from her grain crops failed to make up the feed deficit. It may be that Messier met her feed and litter requirements that year by feeding her surplus grains to the animals, or, more likely, by selling or trading them with neighbours who had feed and litter to spare. Certainly, her ten pounds of tobacco, a lucrative cash crop, would have put money into her hands.

Figures 3a and 3b. The Messier farm and the St. Hyacinthe CSD were similar in the crops grown, but the Messier farm had slightly less emphasis on tobacco. The Messier farm also reused more biomass (61.9 percent) than the St. Hyacinthe CSD (46.8 percent), partly because a higher share of Margeurite’s crop produce was in feed grade grains rather than non-comestible produce like tobacco. Still, if tobacco had been removed from both profiles, Marguerite’s crop produce was still consumed at a higher rate (85.8 percent) than the CSD’s (77.9 percent).

The Messier farm’s hay energy was less than half of its pasture energy which were 130,635 MJ and 293,349 MJ respectively. There were 224,360 MJ of residues, and the farm reused all of its fodder. For the St. Hyacinthe CSD, the hay energy (32,838,273 MJ) was about one-third of its pasture energy  (110,650,816 MJ). There were 81,506,961 MJ of residues and the CSD reused all its fodder.

Figures 4a and 4b. Fodder Crops and Pasture for the Messier farm and the St. Hyacinthe CSD. In terms of energy, the Messier farm had a greater return in pasture than in hay, and this was the same for the St. Hyacinthe CSD. Both the Messier farm and the St. Hyacinthe CSD reused all their fodder, including extensive residues. Messier reported only eight tons of hay cut from her 12.1 ha of hay land which is a low yield. It may be that she rented her hay land to another farmer for cutting and received the eight tons of hay as her share. If this arrangement had been the case, then it may be that she got about a quarter of the cut.

In 1871, the average farm in the St. Hyacinthe CSD had more livestock than did the Messier farm. Marguerite Messier had two horses over the age of three, two colts or fillies, three milk cows, one other horned bovine, eight sheep, and one swine. The farm either butchered or exported the one horned bovine, four sheep, and three swine.[6] These low, and apparently declining numbers combined with the low grazing density on her extensive pastures suggest that Marguerite was reducing the size of her herds. For comparison, and based on St. Hyacinthe’s 283 farms, the average farm in St. Hyacinthe had 2.5 horses over the age of three, .8 colts or fillies, 3.7 milk cows, 13.3 sheep, and 3.4 swine, and butchered or exported 1.6 horned cattle, 6.1 sheep, and 2.9 swine.

Marguerite may have been reducing her dairy produce and specializing in other animal products, such as those from bees and sheep. This is reflected in the yields she reported for her butter, honey, and wool, and her lack of cheese. The average farm in the CSD had slightly more than twice as much butter than did the Messier farm. Marguerite reported 50 pounds of butter, but the average farm in the CSD had 104.The tables were turned, however, when it came to honey and firewood. The Messier farm had one beehive, 40 pounds of honey, and 19 cords of firewood, but the average farm in the CSD had .8 beehives, 7.6 pounds of honey, and 7 cords of wood. Where the Messier farm and the CSD are more or less on equal footing is wool. Whereas the Messier farm had 30 pounds of wool, the average farm in the CSD had 28.9. Marguerite processed some cloth from the wool, although she likely sold much of the wool to others. The average farm in the CSD had 33.3 yards of homemade cloth, whereas the Messier farm had 25. One product that the Messier farm lacked completely was homemade linen. The CSD reported 3,543 yards of homemade linen, or 12.5 yards per average farm, but the Messier farm reported none.

Figures 5a and 5b. Livestock and Barnyard Produce for the Messier farm and the St. Hyacinthe CSD. The Messier farm and the St. Hyacinthe CSD have very similar patterns in regard to livestock and products from livestock.

Figures 5a and 5b. Livestock and Barnyard Produce for the Messier farm and the St. Hyacinthe CSD. The Messier farm and the St. Hyacinthe CSD have very similar patterns in regard to livestock and products from livestock.

Conclusion

Marguerite Messier’s 48.4 ha farm was larger than the average farm in the St. Hyacinthe CSD, yet her crop and animal energy flows were smaller. Her evenly divided pastureland, hay land, and cropland suggest a rotation of crops, possibly on a plan similar to that of the Maltais brothers whose farm we previously highlighted in this series of farm profiles. In year one the Maltais brothers’ fields were sown with cereals, in years two and three those same fields were used for hay, and in years four and five they were used for pasture. The Messier farm’s three milk cows produced enough milk and butter for the people living on the farm, and the slaughtered animals would have been meat for the table. Beyond providing sustenance to those living on the farm, Marguerite’s focus was wool and tobacco. All in all, Marguerite’s approach to operating her farm was balanced, as can be seen with her diverse crop types, probable crop rotation, and her reduced livestock density. Her farm was also multi-generational, and with a single woman as the matriarch it is perhaps not surprising that she appears to have been focusing her energy strategy on wool and tobacco, and perhaps even honey. With Michel working off the farm as a commis, or clerk, the frame for the farm becomes pluri-occupational as his wage would contribute to the farm’s economy. Ultimately, the Messier farm was successful because Marguerite, her sons Améde and Antione, plus Michel, Marie, and their eldest child Ema, provided needed labour. The photo of Simone Durant holding cured tobacco might have been taken 78 years later, but in some ways we see a little of Margeurite in her portrait.

Figure 6a. Workers storing cured tobacco in a Quebec barn, 1949. Library and Archives Canada/National Film Board of Canada fonds/e011175786, https://recherche-collection-search.bac-lac.gc.ca/eng/home/record?app=fonandcol&IdNumber=4948555&new=-8585570900960126382

[1]  Previously, we have written about farms that were exceptional. For example, we have written about farms that eventually won gold in Québec’s Concours Provincial de Mérite Agricole (Agricultural Merit Contest) of the early twentieth century. The Thomas Maltais farm of Jonquiere, Quebec, and the Edouard and Edmund Houle farm of Nicolet, Quebec, both won gold, for example. We have also written about farms that were exceptionally large, such as the Christian B. and Joseph Snyder farm of North Waterloo, Ontario. A third category we have written about is farms with exceptional products, such as the Philip Maher farm in Windsor, Richmond,Quebec, whose farm was actually a timber extraction enterprise. Finally, we have profiled farms whose owners were listed in the Dictionary of Canadian Biography, such as the diminutive-in-size (5.3 ha) Andrew Hay Johnson farm of Falmouth, Nova Scotia.

[2] “Marguerite Mefsier,” 1871 Census of Canda, RG31, C-10065, Library and Archives Canada (LAC), Ottawa.

[3]  “Michel Messier,” Quebec, Canada, Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621-1968, Ancestry.ca. Marguerite’s husband Michel died at age 58 and was buried on 18 November 1865.

[4] “Esther Beauregard,” 1871 Census of Canada, RG31, C-1005, LAC. See also Esther’s death certificate: “Esther Beauregard,” Quebec, Canada, Vital and Church Records (Drouin Collection), 1621-1968, Ancestry.ca. Esther died 7 February 1887. Esther’s husband Irénéé Beauregard appears in the 1861 Census of Canada, but does not appear ten years later when the 1871 Census of Canada was taken. Therefore, he died after 1861 but before 1871. Esther and her children are listed in the 1881 Census of Canada. They are living (along with dozens of others) in a religious poor house, probably the Hotel Dieu of St. Hyacinthe.

[5] “Marguerite Mefsier,” Schedule 3, 1871 Census of Canada.

[6] For the 1871 Canada Census, slaughtered or exported animals were counted over and above the head count for the animals on a farm. For example, Messier’s one swine plus three slaughtered or exported swine meant the swine herd had been four animals in 1871 and that 75 percent of the herd had been slaughtered or exported. The one animal that was not slaughtered or exported was probably a sow.

< Previous Profile (Houle)

Next Profile (Shadd) >

Energy on the Christian B. Snyder and Joseph Snyder Farm and the Waterloo North CSD, North Waterloo, Ontario

Posted on by
Figure 1a. Joseph B. Snyder and two oxen pulling stumps on Lot 63, CA MAO Digital 94, Mennonite Archives of Ontario. Used with permission. Joseph B. was given the easternmost section of Lot 63 (217 acres) by his father Christian B. Note: the oxen appear to be hauling cordwood or lumber, not pulling stumps, in this photo.

The Snyder farm in Ontario’s Waterloo North region is an example of a large and highly productive Mixed Animal Husbandry Agroecosystem with Extensive Family Labour Supplies. In 1871, Christian B. Snyder (b. 1824/d.1897) was head of the Snyder farm on Lot 63, German Company Tract.[1] Christian B. was married to Barbara Bauman (b. 1825/d.1914), and the couple had 10 children.[2] Christian B.’s grandfather and grandmother (“Old” Christian Schneider and Elizabeth Erb), both born in Pennsylvania, had immigrated with other Mennonite settlers to Waterloo Township, Ontario, in 1806. “Old” Christian acquired Lots 42, 63, and 83 in the northern part of the German Company Tract; however, his first homesteading was done on land in the southern part of the Tract near Doon.[3] By 1807, “Old” Christian had erected a two-story log house in the Doon area.[4] “Old” Christian’s son Joseph (b. 1796/d. 1874), who was Christian B.’s father, built a two-story log house on Lot 63, in 1839.[5] It was 40 feet by 44 feet, two stories, and made of logs 8 inches by 24 inches, all hand hewn.[6] This is the same land subsequently occupied by Christian B. Snyder and his family in 1871, which the census enumerator reported to be 440 acres (178 ha).[7] Schedule 3 of the 1871 census shows that Christian B.’s total land in the Dominion, however, was 659 acres (267 ha).[8] This additional 219 acre (88 ha) parcel or parcels would not have been located in the same census division as the 440 acres he occupied, but they were probably close by.

At the time of the 1871 census, Christian B.’s father Joseph still lived on Lot 63, but in a separate house with his second wife, Catherine Snyder (nee Weicker). Joseph also reported a few livestock in the census: therefore, for the purposes of this farm energy analysis Christian B.’s livestock numbers are rolled together with his father’s smaller herds. Christian B. eventually divided his land into three farms. In 1872, the eastern section (217 acres or 88 ha) was given to his son Joseph B. (who appears in Figure 1a). Joseph B. (b.1854/ d.1938) drew elm, basswood, oak, cherry, and pine from the woods of his farm, fully cleared 100 acres of woodland, and sold many hundreds of cords of wood to local mills. Sixteen years later, in 1888, Christian B. gave the central section of his farm (80 acres or 32 ha) to his son Franklin. That same year, 1888, he gave the western section with the old buildings (148 acres or 60 ha) to his daughter Lovina and her husband Israel B. Gingrich.[9] This is the same year that Lovina and Israel were married.[10] Christian, Barbara, and their youngest son Jared lived with Lovina and Israel, and by 1890 it was a three generation household again with the arrival of baby Helinda.[11] Thus, over the course of 82 years since the arrival of “Old” Christian and his wife Elizabeth from Pennsylvania, Lot 63 had changed hands between family members three times and had been divided into three farms.

Figure 1b. Christian B. Snyder and Barbara Snyder (nee Bauman). The couple were married in 1848. Photograph credit: Gingrich family, Waterloo. Used with permission.
Figure 1c. Location of Lot 63, German Company Tract. Illustrated Atlas of the Dominion of Canada, Containing All the Provinces, the Northwest Territories and the Island of Newfoundland. Toronto: H. Belden & Co., 1880. The Canadian County Atlas Digital Project, https://digital.library.mcgill.ca/countyatlas/searchmapframes.php.

Figure 1d. Google Map of Waterloo North with red pin marking Lot 63.

Farm Energy Funds

Christian B. Snyder’s 178 hectare parcel was 46 percent cleared in 1871 which was 20 percent less than the amount of land cleared by other farmers in Waterloo North (66 percent cleared). Perhaps this was because Lot 63 was in the northern reaches of the German Company Tract which was developed later than the southern region. This means Snyder had a greater percentage of woodland (54 percent) available on his 178 ha than did the Waterloo North CSD (33 percent), and it reinforces the narrative that Christian B.’s son Joseph began to clear 100 acres (40 ha) after receiving his 217 acre share of the farm in 1872. In 1871, Christian B. divided his cleared or improved portion of his 178 acres (80.9 ha), into the following four divisions and proportions: 59 percent crops, 20 percent pasture, 17 percent hay land, and four percent gardens or orchards. For the Waterloo North CSD, however, land use was 64 percent in crops, 13 percent pasture, 19 percent hay, and 4 percent gardens or orchards. The Waterloo North CSD also had a very small amount (.2 percent) in dyked marshland, most likely along the Grand River. Therefore, proportionately, Snyder’s 178 hectare farm had more woodland and pastureland, but less hayland and cropland, than their neighbours in Waterloo North. The average-sized farm in the district was 36.5 ha, or only about 20.5 percent of Snyder’s 178 ha farm.[12] Therefore, we assume that Christian B. Snyder’s farm was one of the largest farms in the Waterloo North CSD in 1871. It may be that because the patriarch “Old” Christian had purchased three lots in the northern part of the German Company Tract but had left them for future development while he lived in the southern region of Doon, Lot 63 was not as developed, nor had it yet been divided amongst the first Mennonite settlers’ descendants, as were other farms in the CSD.

Figure 2a. Area Visualization of Christian B. Snyder’s farm in 1871 showing his two parcels of land (266 ha) combined. The 88 ha parcel that was outside his specific division (but was probably in one of North Waterloo’s other three divisions) is in light grey, and the 178 ha that was part of his division is represented by the coloured polygons. Fifty-four percent of the farm’s 178 ha parcel was unimproved, meaning it was in woodland. The remaining 46 percent was in pasture, hay, crops, and orchards or gardens. Given that the 178 ha farm was five times the size of the average farm in the Waterloo North CSD, and despite his large woodlot, Snyder had ample cleared land for his livestock and crops.
Figure 2b. Area Visualization of all 425 farms in the Waterloo North CSD, North Waterloo, Ontario. Proportionately, Waterloo North had significantly less woodland available (20 percent less) of its agroecosystem than did the Christian B. Snyder farm. Moreover, 64 percent of the CSD’s improved land was in crops, with the remaining 36 percent in pasture, hay, garden and orchard. A very small amount (.2 percent) was dyked marshland.

The Snyder farm’s livestock intensity was 15.2 livestock units per km2 (LU/km2) on their 178 ha parcel, and the grazing intensity was 2.04 ruminant units per ha of pasture. This was lower than the Waterloo North CSD which had a very high livestock density of 28.2 LU/km2 and 2.19 ruminants per ha of pasture. The Snyders had 100 cords of firewood on hand in 1871 (50 per household), compared to the 7,530 cords of firewood produced in the Waterloo North CSD, which averaged to 18 cords of firewood per farm. One can assume that when Christian B.’s son Joseph cleared 40 ha of woodland and sold hundreds of cords of wood to local mills (after he received his 217 acre share of the farm in 1872), he was following in his father’s footsteps (Figure 1a). Perhaps, Christian B. had sold large quantities of cordwood to local mills before his son Joseph took up the wood business.

Farm Energy Flows

The Snyder farm is one of the few in the Farm Energy Profile project that produced more energy from a human edible crop (wheat) than from feed crops. In 1871, the Snyders produced 250 bushels (bu) of spring wheat, 100 bu of fall wheat, 170 bu of barley, 600 bu of oats, 280 bu of peas, 360 bu of potatoes, 2,500 bu of turnips, 3 bu of mangel-wurtzel, 1,500 bu of carrots, 90 bu apples, 4 bu plums, pears, or other fruit, 4 bu of grass or clover seed, and 800 pounds of maple sugar. The Waterloo North CSD grew the same crops, plus rye, corn, grapes, and small quantities of rye, beans, buckwheat, hops, and tobacco. Waterloo North farmers produced 56,621 pounds of maple sugar, or 133 pounds per farm. Snyder’s 800 pounds of maple sugar indicates that he was using his woodland in more ways than drawing out wood to be sold to local mills. He also benefited greatly from the annual flow of maple sugar coming from his woodland.

Figure 3a and 3b. Comparison of Crop Energy Flows between the Snyder farm and the Waterloo North CSD. Snyder has less emphasis on wheat and more on peas and carrots. His strategy of which crops (and how much of those crops) to grow resulted in 7.7 percent more biomass reused on his farm than the Waterloo North CSD which, in a situation of feed deficits, meant he needed to bring in less feed to satisfy his livestocks’ feed requirements.

In terms of energy flows from fodder, the Snyder farm consumed much larger amounts of feed than the average farm in Waterloo North. However, their mix of pasture, hay, and residues was quite similar to the township’s, proportionally. The Snyder farm’s residues were 4.26 times greater than the average farm in the Waterloo North CSD. However, when considering that Synder’s 178 ha farm was roughly five times the size of the average farm in the Waterloo North CSD, there is not a great difference in residues proportionally. The Snyder farm and the Waterloo North CSD also had very similar ratios of pastureland to hayland. Additionally, both reused 100 percent of their biomass (see figures 4a and 4b).

Figure 4a and 4b. Comparison of Fodder Crops and Pasture for the Christian B. Snyder farm and the Waterloo North CSD. Note that nothing was wasted. The animals ate all that was available to them.

In 1871, Christian B. and his father Joseph Snyder reported having five horses over three years old, three colts or fillies, four working oxen, 14 milk cows, 19 horned cattle, 80 sheep, and three swine. They also produced 1,000 pounds of butter, 100 pounds of cheese, 300 pounds of wool, and 300 yards of homemade cloth or flannel. Given the 300 pounds of wool that was on hand, his homemade cloth was probably wool flannel. They slaughtered or sold for export two swine, six cattle and 20 sheep. The Snyder farm exceeded the average farm in Waterloo North in all of these categories, except swine. The average farm in the Waterloo North CSD had six or seven swine and slaughtered or sold for export five or six. Snyder’s most notable farm productions were, perhaps, his butter and cloth. Whereas Snyder had 1,000 pounds of butter, the average farm in the Waterloo North CSD had 270, and, whereas he had 300 yards of cloth, the average farm had 4.5. In fact, Snyder’s 300 yards of cloth represented 16 percent of the 1,886 yards of cloth reported for the Waterloo North CSD. It may be that he had a small enterprise on his farm for wool flannel production. Farms in Waterloo North also reported producing honey and linen, where Snyder did not.

Both the Snyder farm and the Waterloo North CSD had feed and litter deficits. In terms of total energy deficits, Snyder’s animals were short by 1,065,484 MJ of feed and 334,866 MJ of litter. Figures 3a and 3b do not include peas in the feed balance, so it is likely that a tenth of Snyder’s feed deficit was satisfied by the farm’s pea harvest. The average farm in the Waterloo North CSD had only about a 290,177 MJ feed deficit and an 86,299 MJ litter deficit. The feed and litter deficits on Snyder’s much larger farm were 3.67 and 3.88 times greater than the average-sized farm in the Waterloo North CSD. Given that his farm was roughly five times the size of the average farm in the Waterloo North CSD, his feed and litter deficit was proportionally not as large. Snyder’s butter, cheese, wheat, maple sugar, cordwood, meat products, and cloth must have brought him enough cash to pay for his shortfall in feed and litter.

Figure 5a and 5b. Comparison of Livestock Flows between the Snyder farm and the Waterloo North CSD.Note that Snyder’s low number of swine is a significant departure from the Waterloo North CSD.

Conclusion

Christian B. and his father Joseph Snyder’s farm was five times larger than the average farm in the Waterloo North CSD. Fifty-four percent of their 178 ha farm was unimproved, or in woodland. This gave him the opportunity to develop a farm energy strategy that diverged slightly from the Waterloo North CSD. He made good use of his sizable woodlands by supplying cordwood to local mills and by tapping the annual flow of maple sugar. He had moderate dairy production, producing milk, butter, and cheese. He also had wheat, cloth, and meat products to sell from his farm. Noticeably, although he had a much larger farm he had far less swine proportionally than the Waterloo North CSD in 1871. This helped to keep his livestock numbers low, resulting in a lower livestock intensity than the Waterloo North CSD. Because of his lower livestock numbers, proportionally his feed and litter deficit was not as great as the average farm in the Waterloo North CSD. Snyder’s approach and farming strategy made extensive use of his woodlands while at the same time keeping his livestock numbers low and focussing on ruminants that supported his dairy and cloth production.

Figure 6a.”Old” Christian Schneider’s home was built about 1807. The house was situated in Beihn’s Tract, Unnumbered Lots, Doon, Waterloo County, Ontario. The Kitchener Public Library has the original photo.
Figure 6b. This plaque honours “Old” Christian Snyder who immigrated to Waterloo, Ontario, from Pennsylvania in the first years of the nineteenth century and his son Joseph who built a two-storey home from hand-hewn logs drawn from the land of Lot 63 where the Snyder farm was situated. In 1972, the log house was taken down, log by log, and moved to St. Jacobs Farmers Market. Because many of the logs were rotten, the new structure is much smaller and only one-storey. The original house was over 3,500 square feet. The Gingrich connection comes from Israel B. Gingrich who married Joseph’s granddaughter Lovina. The couple lived in the house with Lovina’s parents, Christian B. Snyder, his wife Barbara Snyder (nee Bauman), and their youngest son, Lovina’s brother Jared, probably from 1888, the year that Lovina and Israel were married.

< Previous Profile (Maltais)

Next Profile (Houle) >

[1] “Christian B. Snyder,” 1871 Census of Canada, RG31, C-9944, LAC.

[2] “Christian B. Snyder,” Christian Schneider, Waterloo Region Generation, The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding, https://generations.regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?personID=I16900&tree=generations

The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding actually lists 12 children, but it appears that two of the children who are listed are repeated.

[3] Ellis Little, “Snyder’s Corner: The History of G.C.T. Lot 63,” Waterloo Historical Society, Vol. 90 (2002): 21.

[4] “Christian Schneider,” Waterloo Region Generations.

[5] “Joseph Schneider,” Joseph Schneider, Waterloo Region Generations, The Next Generation of Genealogy Sitebuilding,  https://generations.regionofwaterloo.ca/getperson.php?personID=I16900&tree=generations

The Waterloo Region Generations website notes that the plaque is erected on a one-story log structure located at St. Jacob’s Farmers Market but the logs were moved from a two-story log house built on German Company Tract Lot 63 by Joseph Schneider.

[6] Little, Snyder’s Corner, 24.

[7] Historians have concluded that his main farm was actually 448 acres. Little, Snyder’s Corner, 25. The German Company Tract, some 60,000 acres, was divided into sections of 448 acres each. Therefore, each of “Old” Christian’s Lots, 42, 63, and 83, were 448 acres. The 1871 Census of Canada indicates that Christian B.’s father Joseph, who the enumerator put down as a Gentleman, was living nearby his son when the census was taken. He was listed as a tenant living with his second wife Catherine Snyder (nee Weicker). Catherine was from Germany and was 57 years old.

[8] “Christian B. Snyder,” 1871, LAC. Schedule 3 also lists three dwelling houses, three barns or stables, four carriages and sleighs, eight cars, wagons, or sleds, five ploughs or cultivators, three fanning mills, and one each of reapers or mowers, horse rakes, and thrashing machines.

[9] “Christian B. Snyder,” Waterloo Region Generations. These numbers–217, 80, and 148–do not add up to either the 440 acres reported by the enumerator when the 1871 Census of Canada was taken, nor do they add up to the 448 acres that historians agree was the size of Lot 63.

[10] “Lancaster, Pennsylvania, U.S., Mennonite Vital Records, 1750-2014,” s.v “Israel B. Gingrich,” Ancestry.com.

[11] Helinda was one and a half years old in 1891. “Christian B. Snyder,” 1891 Census of Canada, RG31-C-1, T-6374, LAC.

[12] The average farm in Waterloo North was only 13.5 percent the size of Snyder’s much larger 266 hectares of land (including the additional 88 ha he had that was situated on a neighbouring division).

Canada’s Newest Railway

Posted on by

The Quebec North Shore and Labrador Railway will be opened shortly to transport ore from the great ungava iron development to seven Islands on the St. Lawrence, where docks and facilities have been constructed to load it on great ore carriers. These freighters will carry it in an endless stream to the steel mills of Canada, the United States and the United Kingdom. The Ungava iron development has already created two very rapidly growing towns and a great hydro plant to supply electric current for the towns and the mining of the iron ore.

The construction of this 358 mile railway began in 1949. When completed, it will be the first large railway project undertaken in North America during the century. It is to operate six trains of 100 cars powered by fours diesel engines each, to move 80,000 tons of ore per day from the iron mines near Burnt Creek to the docks on the St. Lawrence at seven Islands. Sidings for the passing of these immense trains have been built at intervals of twenty miles along the route to provide for future requirements.

Canadian national train at no. 6 mine yard. (Source: Cumberland Museum and Archives Flickr)

It has been said that: Without oil, this project would be impossible.” The diesels will continue to use great quantities of oil in moving the ore to the coast, however, the Hollinger Ungava Transport Company that up to the present have been that means of transportation used to move men and equipment, by planes to and from this Ungava projects, have used a million gallons of aviation gasoline a year. The project as a whole used oil products amounting, in 1953, to 13,000,000 gallons. Oil and oil products have been used in the flame throwers to cut ice jams, drive power machinery in drilling rock, creosoting railway ties, spraying vicious northland insects and in every possible way, even for cooking food. Two aircraft tankers, carrying 1,000 gallon loads each, have been used solely to ferry oil to the construction crews.

The prototype English-Electric Type 5 locomotive, Doncaster UK, 1960 (Source: tatraškoda Flickr)

The airlift has taken to Burnt Creek and other points during the six years, everything that was needed, from furniture and food to bulldozers. They have carried as much as 300 tons of material a day, and from the Seven Islands airfield the planes have taken off at and average rate of twelve planes per hour, which exceeds in number the take-off per day of any of the large airports in Canada.

The manager of the Hollinger Ungava Transport Company has his headquarters at Mont Joli on the C.N.R., on the south side of the St. Lawrence River. He has from 70 to 75 crack pilots to service the airlift of the mining area. There are 13 airfields and strips linking Ungava with the outside world. These are continuously lighted and serviced. The airport at Menihek, some months ago, was the means of saving the life of an Arabian pilot, flying from Europe to the United States, who overshot the Goose Bay airport, and became lost in Ungava with only half an hour’s gasoline in his tanks. It was then that he saw the lights of a modern airport, and landed safely at Menihek.

Hillsborough Bridge, Charlottetown, PEI with Train (Source: PEI MHF Flickr)

The building of this railroad has been quite unusual, in that four contracting firms are joined together to complete the job. They operate under the title of Cartier McNamara-Mannix-Morrison-Knudesen, which they have simplified to CMMK. They have overcome obstacles that have presented baffling problems to the manger and his experienced crews. Within eleven miles of Seven Islands, and before they had reached the “Noisy Moisie” River, they had to drive a tunnel half a mile long through a mountain of solid rock, and as the railway emerges from the mountain, it crosses a gorge on a steel 708 ft. trestle. From there the tracks follow along the face of cliffs where dynamite cyr notches for them 100 to 150 feet above the roaring river, and with sheer rocks overhead from 40 to 60 feet above the right of way. From there for 140 miles the railroad climbs steadily until it reaches an elevation of 2056 feet above sea level.

Montague PEI, First Train (Source: PEI MHF Flickr)

The greater part of the 358 miles of right of way had to be stripped of muskeg, that almost impassable barrier of the northland of land travel, it varied in depth, but for 180 miles there was under the muskeg a granite hard layer of frost that had to be broken through, and under that an old lake bottom of shifting sand was found. Before they finish, they will have laid 100,000 tons of steel rails.

Seven Islands for several hundred years had just been a fishing village. It was named by Jacques Cartier, because of the seven Islands that guard its natural harbour. One of these was used during World War II to satisfactorily develop a protective serum against the dread Rinderpest disease of cattle, which it was feared the enemy might spread on this continent.

The population of Seven Islands did  not exceed 600 for three centuries, and many of these were Indians from a nearby reserve. It has probably over 5,000 people today, and is being rapidly built up. It has all the earmarks of a frontier boom town. Real estate prices have climbed on a single lot in one year from $2000 to $13000. A modern hotel of 24 rooms with a bath has been built at a cost of half a million dollars. The great docks at Seven Islands can accommodate at one time two 35-foot draft, 32,000 ton, oil fired ore-carriers. Imperial Oil has docks for its own oil tankers. The town is run on oil, the homes are heated with oil. Uncut wood is priced at $20.00 per ton.

Stationary locomotive. Date: 1940 (Source: Cumberland Museum and Archives Flickr)

Burnt Creek has the reputation of being on of the busiest towns of its size. Construction men, geologists and miners often work 98 hours a week. It is said to have: “The richest Main Street in the world.” Some workmen, in testing a drill, discovered that Burnt Creek, whose main thoroughfare was a rutted, muddy road, with makeshift bunkhouses and Quonset hut offices, set in uneven lines on either side, was right on top of the most valuable iron ore deposit in Ungava. The entire town is to be moved to a new site of Knob Lake, near an airfield and a seaplane base, and will be called Schefferville, after Bishop Scheffer.

Burnt Creek is as far north as Edmonton and Copenhagen. It has had temperatures down to 50 degrees below zero each winter, and usually has more than one snowstorm in July, It has central heat, electricity and running water. The country to the north and southeast has enormous potential water power, estimated at two million horse power. Thirty miles south of Knob Lake, at Menihek Rapids, a great power plant is being constructed, and the 12000 horse power hydro station is nearing completion. There seems to be no doubt but that will be shipping “iron ore in ‘54”

– Newsy Notes, May 15th, 1954.

Source: Islandnewspapers.ca

Soiling Versus Pasture For Swine

Posted on by

This is a point I would like to see the experimental farms take up. The fact that they would seem to strengthen the impressions now general among farmers that these farms are of doubtful utility. The soiling of dairy cows has been experimented with to some extent, but the system has not become popular. Those however, who reported the result, speak highly of the system. Soiling cows and sheep requires, of course, great attention, and the majority of dairymen prefer to pursue the less irksome system of pasturing or partial soiling at most. All admit that fully three times the number of cows can be kept by the soiling system as by ordinary pasturing.

But the soiling of swine would not seem so irksome, for pigs are soiled, as it were, in the majority of cases. When pigs ate feed in the pen, and not pastured, they are said in a measure  to be soiled. What I mean, however, by soiling is not feeding pigs in a pen with meal, milk, or boiled feed. Pigs on pasture to attain early maturity must not be allowed to depend on the grass alone, but require an addition of meal and grain. By soiling them, I mean cutting the grass and feeding it directly to the hogs in a large paddock contra-distinction to permitting the hogs to cut and feed on the grass at their own sweet will.

Feeding the Pigs

Pigs do very well, and probably attain greater weights by simple pen-feeding with milk, whey and meals than by either soiling or pasturage. But pen-feeding is expensive at the prevailing prices of hogs. We want to lower the cost of production to a paying point, and to this end endeavor to supplement the feeding with green feeding crops, to be fed either in the pen, or allow the pigs to harvest the crops for themselves The meal fed pig, in a close pen, does not make a good bacon pig, because exercise is precluded; the digestive organs become inactive, and there is a surplus of fat. Green feed then is apparently indispensable, either fed in the pen or allowed to be eaten on the field as it grows. Which is the more effective method? If heavy weights are to be attained in the shortest interval, I believe soiling the pigs in the pen will be found the most satisfactory. Pigs having the run of a pasture field waste a good deal of energy, and make too much muscle growth. It takes a hog, even in the best pasture, quite a while to graze the bulk of a bundle of grass that may be cut and thrown in the pen. 

 The object sought is another thing. If the pigs are intended as breeding stock, the exercise and fresh air obtained in a pasture field is quiet essential. If breeding stock are soiled, i.e., the green feed cut and carried to them, they will make greater weights in  a given time, but they will require very large yard and paddock I would not care for a breeding sow or boar that was fed all its life in a small pen and had gotten no soiling food during its growth. Good breeding stock can be produced without pasturing if the precaution is taken to have a large paddock connected with the pen, and green crops such as rye, clover, peas, corn, rape and turnips cut and thrown into these large yards, upon which there should be a generous feeding floor. Stock grown in this way should be very nearly as good as those kept i the Pasteur, and may be grown as cheaply. Grown in this manner, the pigs should make good breeding stock and excellent for the packer. This method of growing either breeding stock or bacon pigs will cost a little more, but maturity will be attained in a shorter time.

In 1958 The dramatic success story of Prince Edward Island’s Yorkshire hog is unique and perhaps unprecedented in the history of livestock production.

Better breeding stock, however, will result from pasturage, and it is quite essential that the brood sows have unlimited pasture from spring to fall. I do not think it well to have the pasture lot too large; an acre lot is large enough and is quite sufficient for 30 pigs. Pigs will not make much of pasture before they are three months of age. A good rule is to have an acre of pasture crops coming in in regular rotation to each three brood sows. If litters come in February, a field of rye will be right in month of May; when this is eaten down, a field of clover should be ready; after the clover peas, and alter the peas rape and the second growth of clover. The rape would be grown in the rye ground. Allowing an acre for the pigs of three brood sows, or 30 pigs, would mean three acres to carry them through the season, or, in other words, one acre of land to each brood sow on the farm. These three acres of land devoted to pasture crops, coming in regular rotation, as from the feeding of four tons of the best ground feed of a mixture of shorts and corn or barley, peas and bran.

At prices of ground feed in the older parts of our country, the growing of pasture crops makes quite a saving in cash laid out for purchased feed. Pigs grown on continuous pasture will not come to maturity, or be ripe for the  block, so quickly as if penned up all the time, or even as if soiled. Even fairly good herding stock may be produced by soiling, and maturity will be attained sooner. But this system does not give as good results and the cost of production is greater. It is a very good system, though, to produce bacon pigs. Pen-fed pigs I would not tolerate for breeders; but If I wanted to finish a batch of spring pigs for market in the shortest time, I should confine them in the pen all the time and feed as heavily as they would stand; and if these pigs were of the right breed, and from healthy, robust parents, and intelligently fed and managed up to weaning time, I would have no fears; but at five or six months of age they would be ripe for the block, and make good bacon pigs too. 

The points are: 1 To have the correct form and breed of brood sow. Never confine her. Let her roam the fields at will and the yards in winter; feed her intelligently while suckling, and wean at six weeks; then force the youngsters for all they are worth till five or six months of age ,and sell. 2. Breeding stock must not be confined in a pen. They must have unlimited pasture crops right through the season, or they may be confined in large paddock, and soiled. ― J. A. MacDonald, P. E. I., in Country Gentleman. 

– Pigs and Other Livestock, The Charlottetown Guardian. August 30, 1898

Source: Islandnewspapers.ca

Experiment With Millet

Posted on by

In the fall of 1942 a reader who takes an interest in these notes sent me three small packets of millet seed which she received from the neighbourhood of Winnipeg. Two of the samples were yellow and unnamed; the seeds in the third sample were of a glossy brown and were labelled “Early Fortune ”’ There were all together about four tablespoonsful.

Millet

I put the seeds by, in a cool dark place for the winter, and the following spring (1943), when the soil was well warmed up I planted them in the garden, in several short rows, mixing the two kinds (illegible) I did so. The year, as you will remember, was anything but ideal for the experiment,  but the millet grew amain, and towards autumn branched into the loose spray of the true millets – not the spiky heads of what are called Italian millets. (The latter are related to the pernicious foxtail grassss [sic] of our potato fields)

As the grain commenced to ripen my troubles began. All the birds of the air came a-prying and a-robing; and a flock of late chickens which were small enough to squeeze through the picket fence, found out about the millet and made good use of the knowledge. However, at the end of the season I had two large sheaves, and when I threshed them out I had two and one-quarter pounds of good seed.

Had the season been normal this millet might have been cut and cured as hay, while in an earlier stage But the summer and fall were very wet, and as I wanted to see how it succeed when sown for grain. I did not try that part of the experiment.

Millet

Millet is used for human food in some eatern countries, the seed being simply parched. Some who are the epicures of these lands, pound the grain and make it into a light paste with melted fat. I have heard that it was imported into Britain as poultry feed – for which it seems well adapted – but I never saw it used in the North of England. There is little notice of it in books from the U.S.A., in my possession; yet it must be grown there, as they advise farmers to sow about 25 lbs. to the acre, Canadian seed lists say it is grown for hay or live-stock feed. It would be an added interest if the generous donor of the “Early Fortune” seed, could tell us how farmers in the neighborhood of Winnipeg make use of this millet.

-Newsy Notes by Agricola, April 8, 1950

Source: islandnewspapers.ca