In considering profits the enterprise as a whole must be kept in view. For example, if a man is producing milk, it may be cheaper, so far as the production of milk is concerned, to allow the liquid excrement to run to waste rather than to arrange for sufficient bedding. If, however, by using an abundance of bedding and saving all the high-priced nitrogen and the larger part of the potash in the manure, he is able to raise twelve tons of silage in place of eight tons, or three tons of hay in place of two tons, his enterprise as a whole will be more profitable when he uses the extra amount of bedding, although so far as the production of a quart of milk is concerned the cost is increased. It may be that by feeding corn to cattle or sheep one will obtain only 50 cents a bushel for his maize, while his neighbor is selling it to the elevator at 60 cents. If, however, the man who feeds his maize year after year thereby raises 60 bushels instead of 40 bushels, his enterprise, as a whole, may be more profitable than that of his neighbor.

As a matter of fact, the Pennsylvania experiment station has substantially these two conditions in certain of its fertilizer plats. When for 25 years the conditions have been similar to those where crops are sold from the farm, the yields have been: Maize, 42 bushels; oats, 32 bushels; wheat, 14 bushels; and hay, 2,783 pounds per acre. But when conditions exist which represent the feeding of corn, oats and hay and the return of manure to the soil, the yields have been: Maize, 58 bushels; oats, 41 bushels; wheat, 23 bushels; and hay 4,190 pounds per acre. In the first instance the value of the products has been $15.75 an acre, while in the other case it has been $22.90 an acre.

Having worked out a cropping system that gives the proper yearly production of several crops desired, the next question to decide is how this cropping system and the disposition of the crops is going to affect the fertility of the soil. From a financial or economic point of view the most important soil element is nitrogen. First, because it costs from 18 to 20 cents a pound, while phosphoric acid can be purchased at five cents, potash at four cents; and, second, because of the readiness with which nitrogen may disappear from the soil under improper management, either through nitrification and leaching or by denitrification and passing back into the air.

Assuming a given type of management, the question is, How much of the required nitrogen will be obtained from the legumes in the cropping system, how much from the manure, and how much must be purchased in commercial fertilizers? No satisfactory cropping system can be devised at the present prices of farm products and cost of fertilizers for the production of the ordinary cereals and hay that does not include the production of some legume. Assuming a legume in the cropping scheme, the fertility of the soil may be maintained by yard manure alone or by commercial fertilizers alone. Illustrations of both methods are to be found in actual practice. Generally speaking, however, the use of yard manure supplemented with commercial fertilizers will be found more scientific and in the end the most economical.

A factor entering into this problem will be the amount of purchased feed. If considerable amounts of purchased feeds are used and the resulting manure carefully preserved and judiciously applied, the commercial fertilizers required will be reduced to the minimum.

A concrete illustration may bring out the philosophy underlying farm schemes better than abstract problems.

The following outline shows a five-course rotation with the method of fertilization which the results of the Pennsylvania Station indicated would be advisable, at least on limestone soils in eastern United States.

1. Maize yard manure, 8 tons per acre. 2. Oats nothing. 3. Wheat acid phosphate, 350 lbs. muriate of potash, 100 lbs. 4. Clover and timothy nothing. 5. Timothy nitrate of soda, 150 lbs. acid phosphate, 150 lbs. muriate of potash, 50 lbs.

This rotation is suggested for the purpose of maintaining a farm that is already in a fairly fertile condition and one on which there is no considerable amount of purchased feed. Where concentrates are purchased liberally, yard manure should be available to use on the timothy and meadow in place of the commercial fertilizers.

Where there is plenty of manure and it is desired to increase the amount of maize and hay and reduce the amount of oats and wheat, the following rotation and method of fertilization would be indicated:

1. Maize acid phosphate, 200 lbs. 2. Maize yard manure, 8 tons. 3. Oats nothing. 4. Wheat acid phosphate, 350 lbs. muriate of potash, 100 lbs. 5. Clover and timothy nothing. 6. Timothy nitrate of soda, 150 lbs. acid phosphate, 150 lbs. muriate of potash, 50 lbs. 7. Timothy yard manure, 8 tons.

Where there is plenty of yard manure, it would be also applied to maize under No. 1, or the yard manure could be applied to maize under No. 1, and commercial fertilizer applied to timothy under No. 6 could be repeated under No. 7. If the land is more or less depleted, an application of 200 pounds of acid phosphate to the oats would be advisable. However, the purpose is not to prescribe exact methods, but to point out underlying principles and their possible application.

As further illustration, it seems probable that the practice of a market gardener in using excessive amounts of stable manure might, in some instances at least, be modified to good advantage by reducing the amount of manure and increasing the amount of commercial fertilizer used. Unfortunately there is no experimental evidence bearing upon this question.

Potash required to maintain fertility is largely to be found in the coarse fodder, such as hay, maize stover and silage, and in the straw used for bedding; hence where these substances are used in abundance and returned to the soil the amount of potash required to be supplied in fertilizers is reduced to a minimum. Where, however, the amount of live stock is limited and the products sold contain large quantities of potash, such as hay and straw, the supply furnished in fertilizers must be liberal.

Phosphoric acid is always being slowly depleted from the soil either from the sale of farm crops or animal products. There is no way of returning this loss completely, except from the addition of a commercial fertilizer.

The above fertilizer suggestions are based on the experiments covering a period of more than 25 years on a limestone soil. Soils may modify materially the amount and application of the fertilizers, but not the principles enunciated. For example, a soil on which common red clover grows luxuriantly and has a prominent place in the farm scheme will require less nitrogen in commercial fertilizers in order to maintain the fertility than where legumes are raised with difficulty or do not form a part of the farm scheme.

One of the most important points to be emphasized is the fact that haphazard fertilization is not effective in maintaining soil fertility. If one starts out to establish a five-course rotation and build up his soil through a rational system of fertilization, he will obviously not obtain the full benefit of the rotation until he begins to get crops from the second round, which will be the sixth year from the beginning. It may happen, and unfortunately it has perhaps usually happened in the past, that during the first rotation the increase in crops has not paid for the cost of the fertilizers applied. In many instances a rational system of fertilization has not been introduced because the owner of the land could not afford to wait six years for his return. Profit in farming, therefore, does not consist in raising one big crop or even in obtaining a large balance on the right side of the ledger in a single year. It is both interesting and valuable to know that five tons of timothy hay, 45 bushels of wheat, 100 bushels of maize and 40 tons of cabbage may be raised on an acre, but the real profit in farming only comes through a lifetime of effort. To the man of capacity who prepares for his work the results will surely come, but they will not come all at once and, as in every other business, he must pay the price in hard work and close application to details.

In this connection it may be emphasized that one of the difficulties in successful farming is to find one man both interested and capable along the various lines essential to a successful farm enterprise. The danger is that a man will ride his hobby to the detriment of the other activities of the farm. A farmer friend of the writer, who keeps a horse and buggy, cares so little for a horse that for several years he has walked two miles each morning and each evening rather than to take the trouble to hitch up his horse. If one visits a high-grade breeder of dairy cattle, he is very apt to find his pigs of ordinary character. On the other hand, a specialist in hogs is likely to keep scrub cows. A man may be an excellent wheat raiser and a poor potato grower, and the reverse. The breeder of live stock is likely to be lacking in his methods of producing farm crops, while the up-to-date, so-called general farmer is not likely to be a special lover of live stock. In like manner, the man may be a successful farmer, dairyman or horticulturist from the producing side, but be a poor salesman. In fact, those qualities of mind and heart which make for the best success from the standpoint of production, whether soil products or animal products, is not that which makes the best trader.

It is not expected that the young farmer will be materially different from his hundreds of thousands of predecessors, but the better a man is trained and the more fully he studies his own adaptabilities and deficiencies, the more likely he is to succeed in the open country. For this reason, the young man should be careful to get as broad a training as possible. It is, therefore, often more important for him to study those things which he dislikes than to study the things for which he has a natural taste.

There was a man in our town And he was wondrous wise. He knew that if he wanted crops He'd have to fertilize.

"Its nitrogen that makes things green," Said this man of active brain; "And potash makes the good strong straw, And phosphate plumps the grain. But it's clearly wrong to waste plant food On a wet and soggy field; I'll surely have to put in drains If I'd increase the yield.

"And after I have drained the land I must plow it deep all over; And even then I'll not succeed Unless it will grow clover. Now, acid soils will not produce A clover sod that's prime; So if I have a sour soil, I'll have to put on lime.

"And after doing all these things, To make success more sure, I'll try my very best to keep From wasting the manure. So I'll drain, and lime, and cultivate, With all that that implies; And when I've done that thoroughly I'll manure and fertilize." Vivian



CHAPTER IX

THE ROTATION OF CROPS

The two essential reasons for a rotation of crops are: (1) The possibility of obtaining for the soil a supply of nitrogen from the air by introducing a legume at regular intervals, and (2) the prevention of injury to the crops from fungous diseases, insect enemies, weeds or other causes. Other reasons are often advanced, some of which are entirely erroneous, while others are of quite secondary importance.

The rotation should be carefully studied with reference to the farm scheme as previously outlined. Reasons for modifying the rotations are: (1) To change the kind or proportion of crops grown, (2) to change the amount of labor required, or (3) to increase the crop-producing power of the soil.

During 25 years the four crops of maize, oats, wheat, timothy and clover hay have been taken in rotation from the four tiers of plats at the Pennsylvania State College, so that the influence of the soil has been entirely eliminated. At the December farm prices for the decade ending December 1, 1906, the value of these four crops per acre have been: Maize, $29.67; oats, $14.49; wheat, $18.49; and hay, $18.05. It will be noted that during 25 years the average income from an acre of maize has been almost exactly twice that from an acre of oats. The region where these results were obtained is relatively unfavorable to a large yield of maize. It is obvious, therefore, that a modification in the rotation may modify the average income from the farm materially, provided such modification does not reduce the fertility of the soil. Thus, while the average income per acre during 25 years for the four-course rotation above mentioned was $20.17, if the rotation were increased to a five-course rotation by the addition of another year of maize, the average income would be $22.45 an acre.

It may be desirable to modify the rotation in order to increase or decrease a certain crop usually fed upon the farm. Thus, with a four-course rotation of maize, oats, wheat, clover and timothy, one-fourth the area would produce hay; while with a six-course rotation, composed of maize, oats, wheat, each one year, and hay three years, one-half the area would produce hay. If it is desired to still further reduce the area in oats and wheat, a seven-course rotation could be arranged with maize, two years in succession. This is the rotation that would be desirable for a dairy farm where it is planned to keep as many cows as practicable and to buy the concentrates largely. Either the wheat or the oats could be taken out of this rotation if either the one or the other were thought undesirable and a still greater amount of roughage desired.

On the other hand, there are places where the minimum amount of roughage is wanted. There are certain sections of the central West where it is possible to sow oats on corn stubble without plowing and where occasionally a rotation is practiced of maize, oats and mammoth clover. The clover is plowed for maize, the oats are disked in upon the corn stubble and the next year the clover is pastured until about June 1, when it is allowed to go to seed. In this rotation the only roughage obtained is the corn stover and the oat straw.

Another result reached by this rotation is that only one-third the land is plowed annually. In the four-course rotation mentioned above three-fourths of the land must be plowed, while in the six-course rotation one-half is plowed each year. In other ways the character of the rotation modifies the labor. For example, the labor and cost of harvesting an acre of hay is much less than that of producing, harvesting and threshing an acre of wheat.

Rotations may often be planned with reference to the main or cash crop. Thus in the Aroostook (Maine) potato district the rotation is potatoes, oats and clover. The chief purpose of the oats and clover is to keep down the blight in potatoes and add through the clover nitrogen and organic matter to the soil.

A system of cropping that is best when the owner operates the farm may not be desirable when the farmer is a tenant. When a farm is rented, the lease should provide that clover or other legumes occur with sufficient frequency to keep up the supply of nitrogen without the purchase of a considerable quantity in chemical fertilizers. The lease should be so drawn as to make it necessary for the tenant to keep live stock in order to realize the largest profit. The landlord should provide an equitable proportion of the mineral fertilizers when such are required.

The provisions of the lease and the character of the rotation will necessarily vary with circumstances, but the following system of tenant farming which has been employed for many years in Maryland will illustrate the principles just stated:

The lease provides for a five-course rotation consisting of maize, wheat, clover, wheat, clover. The landlord and the tenant share the maize and wheat equally, but the clover for hay or pasture goes entirely to the tenant, unless hay is sold, when it is divided equally. They each provide one-half the commercial fertilizer and one-half the seed, except clover seed, which the tenant is required to furnish.

This lease provides for two clover crops out of every five crops raised, thus supplying nitrogen abundantly, and the terms of the lease are such that it is necessary for the tenant to keep live stock to consume these clover crops in order to secure the most profitable returns. The feeding of the clover makes it necessary to feed some or all the maize and may lead to buying additional concentrates.

Stable manure is thereby supplied for the field which is to raise maize, while mineral fertilizers may be applied to the fields sown to wheat. On the limestone soils of the eastern states 50 pounds each of phosphoric acid and potash per acre applied to the wheat, and 10 loads of stable manure per acre to the maize will probably be found sufficient to maintain the crop producing power of the soil.

In laying out a farm for a rotation it is desirable to plan the number of fields or tracts that will go in a rotation and try to get these as nearly equal size as possible. Having decided upon the number of years the rotation is to run and having adjusted the fields or tracts accordingly, it is quite possible to modify the proportion of crops by adding one crop and dropping another at the same time. Thus, if there are six 20-acre fields, any one of the following rotations might be used and the change from one to another easily made:

1. Maize Maize Maize Maize Maize 2. Oats Maize Maize Maize Barley 3. Wheat Oats Oats Wheat Alfalfa 4. Clover and Wheat Clover and Clover and Alfalfa timothy timothy timothy 5. Timothy Clover and Timothy Timothy Alfalfa timothy 6. Timothy Timothy Timothy Timothy Alfalfa

During the first year the 20-acre field could be divided into four tracts of five acres each, containing potatoes, cabbage, tomatoes and sweet corn, and then followed for four or five years by any succession of crops above outlined. The point is that a definite adjustment of the farm to some general method of rotation and a definite system of fertilization and soil renovation do not prevent a considerable latitude in the crops raised. It will be obvious that the longer the rotation the more flexible it becomes in this particular, which is a point to be considered in laying out the farm and in adjusting fields and fences.

In some cases it may be desirable on account of the arrangement of the farm or the character of the crops to be raised to have two distinct rotations of crops. For example, if the farm lends itself to be divided into eight tracts, a five-course rotation of maize, oats, wheat, each one year, and clover and timothy two years, and a three-course rotation of potatoes, oats or wheat and clover may be arranged.



CHAPTER X

THE EQUIPMENT

The workman is known by his tools. The problem of obtaining the most efficient machinery for the conduct of the farm without having an excessive amount is not easy of solution.

It is probable that the cost of maintaining machinery and tools is not less than 15%, 10% for upkeep and 5% for interest, even under the most careful management. Doubtless in practice it is as much as 25%. If this is conceded there must be a limit to the amount which may be economically invested in equipment. This is a place where the lead pencil may be used profitably. For example, if $125 is invested in a self-binder, the annual cost of the machine at 15% will be $18.75. If one has but 15 acres of grain to harvest, it may be better to hire a self-binder at $1 an acre. On the other hand, it may be necessary to own a self-binder in order to get the grain harvested at the proper time.

Among the machines requiring a considerable investment for the number of days used may be mentioned hay loaders, hay tedders, corn-binding harvesters and lime spreaders. There is a certain class of labor-saving devices, however, for which there is more or less constant need, as, for example, means of pumping water, methods of handling manure, both from the stable to the manure shed, and from the manure shed to the field. This leads to the remark that there is at present great need of modifying our traditional ideas concerning farm barns. Why do persons usually sleep on the second floor, while horses and cattle are placed in the basement? Three things have brought about the need of a radical revision of our practices concerning the planning of barns: (1) Our present knowledge of the difference in the function of food in keeping the animal warm, and that of producing work, flesh or milk; (2) the discovery of the bacillus of tuberculosis; and (3) the invention of the hay carrier. It is not the purpose here to discuss barn buildings, but merely to call attention to the fact that the traditional barn has long since outlived its usefulness, and that the young farmer should plan his farm buildings to serve the purposes required in the light of modern knowledge.

Various attempts have been made to manufacture combined machines; that is, a machine which, by an interchange of parts or other modification, may be used for two or more purposes, as, for example, harvesting small grain and cutting grass. Such attempts have usually been unsuccessful. On the other hand, the young farmer should consider the range of usefulness of any given type of machine or tool; thus, a disk harrow is more efficient for some purposes than a spring-tooth harrow. For other purposes the spike-tooth harrow is better than the spring tooth. The spring-tooth harrow, however, will do fairly well wherever the disk harrow or the spike-tooth harrow is needed. When, therefore, only one of these tools can be afforded, the spring tooth may be a better tool to buy than either the disk or the spike-tooth, although it is not for certain purposes as efficient as either of the others.

The kind of machine should obviously be adjusted to the conditions, as, for example, the size of the farm, and the character of the farming. Riding plows may be desirable on level land, but where it is necessary to plow up and down hill, walking plows should be used. The extra weight of the wheel plow is not a serious matter on level land, because the sliding friction has been transferred to rolling friction, but no mechanical device has been or can be invented which will decrease the power necessary to raise a given weight a given height. The various machines requiring horse power should be adjusted, as far as possible, to require the same number of horses. If the main unit is three horses, then, as far as possible, all machines should require three horses, such as plows, harrows, manure spreaders, harvesters, etc. If the activities of the farm are sufficient to require six horses then some of the tools may require three horses each, while others require a pair.



A farm with six work horses is rather a desirable one from several aspects. Among other things, it enables the farm owner to employ two men who can perform most of the team work with two three-horse teams, while at other times three pairs of horses may be arranged when the owner needs to use a team. This leaves the farmer time to attend to many activities not requiring horses, and time to plan the work and to look with more care after the purchases and sales. The size of such a farm will depend entirely on the nature of the activities. If it is a so-called general farm with a minimum of live stock, it would, perhaps, consist of from 150 to 180 acres of tillable land with some additional pasture and woodland. Ideally, every farm should have sufficient activity to make it something of a center. It should be an organism. It is difficult to organize one man.

It will be useful, when we come to discuss how profits may be estimated, to divide the capital into three general groups: (1) The plant, which in addition to the real estate, will include the machines and tools, horses used for labor, and other animals used for breeding purposes or for the production of animal products, such as butter, wool or eggs; (2) materials, which will include animals which are to be fattened for sale, and all seeds, fertilizers and foods intended to be turned into products to be sold; (3) supplies, which may include foods for teams, and money with which to pay labor, be this labor that of the farmer or his employees.

The purpose of this classification is to bring sharply into view the fact that the nature of different kinds of equipment varies. All the things named under the plant are in the nature of an annual charge against income. The charge under materials may or may not be an annual charge. If a man invests $2,000 in 50 head of cattle, which he intends to feed and sell for $3,250 at the end of one hundred days, he does not have to calculate interest on $2,000 for a year, but only for 100 days. Cattle paper is held in large quantities by banks in the cattle feeding districts of the United States. The farmer would, in fact, be unwise to keep $2,000 in the bank nine months in the year in order to use it three months. Like any other business man, if he has the money, he invests it and borrows the money to buy his cattle. The same thing applies to food and fertilizers. If the food is fed to cattle, some of the money invested in the food must pay interest during the fattening period. Food fed to dairy cattle and chickens may be paid for out of each day's income. In practice, the amount of money invested in food for dairy cattle and chickens is dependent only upon the most economical unit of purchase. One may apply fertilizers to buckwheat, give a three months' note for the fertilizer, and pay the note out of the proceeds of the crop. If the fertilizer is applied to one-year-old apple trees, this investment may be required to pay interest for fifteen years.

The same principle applies to supplies. If one starts into raising horses for sale, he needs to have some money or other income on which his laborers and his own family can live, say for five years, this being the age at which a horse is supposed to become salable. More people would raise apples and horses if they could afford to wait for the return on the investment.

While this is a serious handicap, it is an advantage to the man who arranges his farming methods so that he can secure an income from some other source in the interim. The young farmer will do wisely to so arrange his farm methods that a portion, perhaps the major portion of his farm, will give him quick returns while making some long-time investments, which later in life will give him a greater return because so few people are sufficiently forehanded to make them.



CHAPTER XI

HOW TO ESTIMATE PROFITS

No man who engages in manufacturing or merchandising knows how much he is going to make annually during life. Much less does he know how much he will be worth when he dies. Neither does the man who works for a salary or practices some profession for fees know what his annual income will be even during the following decade. Neither one nor the other knows whether he will die a millionaire or a pauper. It is a problem too complex for any human mind to analyze. It is less certain than what the weather will be on this day next year, because it is the resultant of more variable factors.

In some respects there is more hazard in farming than in manufacturing or in merchandising, while in other respects there is much less. The profit which may be obtained from farming is neither easier nor more difficult to estimate than is that of other commercial enterprises. However, there is no business in which more foolish estimates are made as to the probable profits, except, perhaps, in mining.

The purpose of this chapter is not to give advice as to possible or probable profits, but rather to point out the general character of the data required for any individual problem, where the data may be obtained and how it may be applied.

There are two forms or methods of stating the financial gain that has been obtained from farming or other business ventures during a year or other specific period. The first may be called the interest on the investment method, and the second the labor income method.

With the interest on the investment method, all expenses may be subtracted from all the sales. From the cash balance thus obtained the increase or decrease in inventory may be added or subtracted. This balance may then be divided by the capital invested, to determine the rate of interest received.

The rate of interest method is the usual method in the commercial world. The prosperity of the railroad or industrial concern is judged by the rate of interest it pays its stockholders on the par value of the stock. The stock itself takes on the capitalization in accordance with the present and prospective dividends. The fact that this method is generally used in the commercial world is evidence that it is well suited to its needs.

The young farmer who wishes to know whether the operation of a given tract of land in a certain manner offers him a worthy opportunity will not find the interest on the investment method the best suited for his purpose. This is especially true when applied to a single product. For example, it may be shown that 50 hens will, when properly managed, in connection with other farm enterprises, return a remarkable interest on the capital employed. It does not follow, however, that a man can make a living with fifty hens or even 500 hens. If a man has an investment of $5,000, on which he obtains 10 per cent, his income would be $500. If, on the other hand, he has an investment of $25,000 and obtains a return of only 6%, his income is $1,500, or three times the former amount. In neither case, however, does this form of statement tell a man how much of his income is due to his brain and brawn and how much to the capital invested.

What the young farmer wishes to know is how much will he receive for his own time, energy and skill, after deducting all expenses and a reasonable interest charge on his investment—such a rate of interest as he could get by placing his money in good securities or what he would be required to pay for his capital if he borrowed it. This is best obtained by the labor income method. With this method all expenses are subtracted from all sales and to the cash balance thus obtained is added or subtracted the increase or decrease in the inventory. This balance may be called the farm income. Thus far the procedure is just the same as the interest on the investment method. From the farm income is now subtracted a reasonable interest on the investment, the balance remaining is called the labor income. This is the return which the farmer has obtained by and for his own efforts. If this balance is zero, then he should change his methods or get into some other business.

This statement of his income, whatever it may be, enables him to compare his prosperity with that of the man who is employed upon a salary. Here, again, however, it is difficult to make comparisons because of the differences in expenses of living. The chief difference, however, in the expense of the wage earner in the city and the farmer is in the matter of house rent. For example, if the wage earner pays $300 a year house rent that must be deducted from his income in comparing it with the labor income of the farmer. It is often stated that the farmer also has his living from the farm. This was much more true formerly than it is at present. Under present methods of distributing food products and with modern types of farming, the amount of food supplied the table from the farm is comparatively small. The rancher in Montana eats foods canned in Maine or Delaware, while the New Hampshire farmer buys his vegetables from Boston commission merchants. The Minnesota farmer cannot supply his breakfast table with oranges, grapefruit or oatmeal. Many of them buy, if not their bread, at least their flour, and also their butter. The fact that the city man indulges in high living is no argument in favor of the country man expecting less wages. Some of those things which are necessary to make the country an ideal place to live are expensive. Some of them are more expensive to obtain in the country than in the city, as, for example, educational facilities. In justifying his purchase of an automobile, a young farmer recently stated that his wife had certain cares, responsibilities and even privations which her city friends did not have. He thought that the automobile would help to offset them.

To my mind there is no more ideal place to live and rear a family than in the open country when the conditions are what they should be and may be. I believe, however, it is well to insist that it costs something to live in the country as well as in the city if one lives as well as every farmer has a right to expect to live.

Let us now consider the steps necessary in order to arrive at a fair estimate of the labor income. To make the matter concrete, we will assume a farm of 200 acres worth $60 an acre located in central Pennsylvania on a limestone clay loam soil over 1,000 feet above sea level. This farm is to contain 20 acres of timber, a 30-acre apple orchard two years old, 40 acres of pasture, 96 acres of cultivated land divided into six 16-acre fields. The rest of the 200 acres consists of small yards, roadways and waste land. One-half of each of the six 16-acre fields is to consist of a rotation of maize, oats and wheat, each one year, and hay three years, the latter clover and timothy followed by timothy. The other half is to consist of maize, barley, followed by alfalfa four years. In the young orchard there will be grown for a few years potatoes, tomatoes, cabbages and garden peas. After the orchard attains a size which forbids these intertilled crops, a portion of the pasture may be broken up so that these market garden crops may be raised. There will be kept six horses, 20 milch cows, 20 ewes of some mutton breed of sheep, five brood sows and 50 hens.

First of all, let attention be called to the broad knowledge of farming required to operate this moderate-sized and comparatively simple farm. The crops to be raised are maize, oats, wheat, clover, alfalfa, timothy, potatoes, tomatoes, cabbages, garden peas and apples. The animal products sold will be chiefly butter fat, wool, mutton, veal, pork and eggs. This is neither a long nor complex list of products. They are all adapted to the farm which the writer has in mind. Yet the man who operates this farm to the highest success will need to have a knowledge of agronomy, or the raising of field crops, of horticulture, animal husbandry, including poultry husbandry and dairying. He needs to have a good understanding of the principles of agricultural chemistry, to have a knowledge of how to prevent and combat fungous diseases and insect enemies. To get the most out of his timber land he should know at least some of the first principles of forestry, and if he has gained some instruction in the study of landscape gardening, his home will be more attractive, and his farm a source of greater pleasure to him.

To proceed with the estimate, the first thing to be done is to make a record of the cropping system, giving the areas and the estimated production of each crop. How is the yield per acre to be determined? Clearly, one cannot afford to estimate his profits on the basis of some unusual yields. If one could be assured of 40 bushels of wheat, 60 bushels of oats, five tons of hay, 300 bushels of potatoes, or 200 bushels of apples per acre, or 500 pounds of butter fat per cow, or 150 eggs per hen per year, there would be no difficulty about obtaining a snug labor income. Such results are possible and are appropriate ideals for which to strive, but are not safe as estimates on which to do business.

The year books of the United States Department of Agriculture contain the annual estimate of the yields, and the average December farm price of staple crops by states. These figures may serve as a basis for making estimates. If the natural conditions are about the average stated, one may properly assume that he can obtain an increase of 50%. He may even hope to double the yield, although it is not safe to assume such an increase in making an estimate of profits. If the natural conditions are more favorable or less favorable than the average, he must take the fact into consideration in his estimates. In the same way he may consider whether the average December farm price represents fairly his expectation of the price, or whether because of favorable location or superior quality of the article purchased he can expect higher remuneration.

It is here assumed that the young farmer is himself going to be more than an average farmer. If he is not he will only get average results, in which case his labor income will be only that of the ordinary day laborer.

To repeat the idea in concrete terms. If the young farmer is located in central Pennsylvania and finds that the average yield of wheat for the state is 17 bushels an acre, he may safely estimate that his improved methods will bring him 25 bushels of wheat to the acre. He may even hope for 34 bushels per acre. At the Pennsylvania station several varieties of wheat have, during the past 18 years, averaged over 30 bushels per acre. One year one variety produced 43 bushels. It would not be safe, however, to use such figures in estimating profits.

Having outlined the cropping system and made a careful estimate of the total annual production of each crop, the next step is to determine the amount of food and bedding required for the live stock. From this data it may be determined what products will be available for sale, and what foodstuffs must be bought. Thus, it may be found, for example, that the amount of oats raised just meets the requirement, while more maize must be purchased, together with nitrogenous concentrates, and that a portion of the hay is available for sale. In the farm under consideration there will, of course, be wheat, potatoes, tomatoes, cabbages, garden peas and the animal products previously mentioned for sale, and later there will be apples and some lumber from the wood lot.

The data are now at hand by which to estimate the total receipts. Having made the estimates of receipts, the expenses are estimated, and the difference gives the cash balance, if there is any. The most important items of expense will be labor, feed, seeds, fertilizers, harvesting and threshing expenses, spraying material, shipping packages, blacksmithing and repairs. After all expenses that can be thought of are included not less than 10% should be added for incidental expenses.

The amount of commercial or natural fertilizers to be purchased is, of course, related to the yard manure which will be produced on the farm; therefore some estimate of the probable amount is desirable. In a roughly empirical way the amount of manure produced may be estimated at twice the amount of dry food and bedding used, provided it is hauled daily to the field. Where stored and drawn to the field at stated periods, the shrinkage in weight, although not necessarily in plant food, may be as much as one-half.

The estimate of what the inventory should be at the beginning and end of the year is not so simple a matter as it may at first seem to be. The purpose of taking the inventory is twofold: First, to determine whether the inventory has increased or decreased, and second, to determine on what amount of capital interest is to be calculated. For example, one must carry forward each year seed for the next year's crop. Feed must be carried over to feed live stock until other food becomes available, and there must be money on hand with which to pay for labor unless there is a cash income from the sale of products sufficient to care for the labor bills.

In the case of the farm under consideration there is a young orchard of about one thousand trees. This orchard is not bringing in any income, but there is a constant expenditure of money on it, and a constant increase in its value. While, therefore, it decreases the cash income it increases the farm income and the labor income. On the other hand, it increases the interest charges because the plant or farm is increasing in value. How much will it increase in value? In some sections it is customary to consider that an orchard increases in value $1 per tree per year. If this is a correct estimate, this 1,000-tree orchard will increase the value of the farm $1,000 a year until it comes into full bearing. The farm under consideration was purchased two years ago for $9,500. On the assumption just stated, at the end of 15 years from date of purchase this farm should be worth $25,000, at least $15,000 of which will be due to a 30-acre orchard. This is at the rate of $500 an acre for the orchard itself.

In order to bring out some of the phases of the inventory more clearly the following classification of items is given below:

INVENTORY

A. PLANT.

The real estate, 200 acres at $60 per acre. The live stock. Work horses and breeding stock. Machinery.

B. MATERIALS.

Seeds, potatoes, oats, maize, wheat. Feed, hay for cattle and sheep, silage for cows, maize for pigs. Growing wheat, 8 acres at $6 per acre. Live stock, calves, lambs and pigs.

C. SUPPLIES.

Hay and oats for horses. Money for current expenses.

In estimating the inventory at the end of the year, a deduction should be made for the decrease in the value of the live stock under the plant and also for the machinery. Perhaps 5% for the live stock and 10% for the machinery and tools will be a fair deduction. Under materials and supplies those items have been inventoried which are to be carried over each year from the preceding year. In the case of seeds the amount required must be deducted from the amount sold, or they must appear as a charge in the expense account. Ordinarily they are carried over from year to year and thus become a part of the permanent investment. Since on the farm under consideration there is a considerable monthly income from the sale of butter fat and eggs, it may be possible that no allowance will be needed in the inventory for current expenses, although it is always desirable to carry a bank account in order to be able to make favorable purchases when opportunity offers.

As a part of the work in a course in farm management, the writer asked each student to secure the financial history of an actual farm covering a period of three years. The financial history of 30 farms during the years 1901 to 1903, inclusive, and 28 farms during the years 1902-1904, inclusive, was thus obtained and is given herewith.

SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL HISTORY OF FARMS

Average size of farm, acres 143.21 133 Average area in crops (includes pasture), acres 121.1 112

Capital at end of three-year period $14,009 $8,893 Capital at beginning three-year period 12,962 7,704 ———- ——— Difference $ 1,047 $1,189

Interest on capital, $13,485, at 5 per cent[B] $ 674 $ 415 Increase in capital per annum 349 396 Average yearly receipts 3,613 2,208 Average yearly disbursements 1,907 1,221 Average yearly cash balance 1,706 987 Average yearly farm income 2,055 1,383 Average yearly labor income 1,381 968

These figures show the application of principles enunciated in this chapter. A careful reader will have no difficulty in recognizing how the different items have been obtained. For example, the difference between the receipts and disbursements in the first column gives the cash balance of $1,706. The farm income, $2,055, is obtained by adding to the cash balance $349, which is the annual increase in the capital. The labor income is obtained by subtracting from the farm income the interest on the capital at five per cent. The amount of capital is determined by dividing by two the sum of the inventories at the beginning and end of the period.[C]

It will be noted that the gross receipts, the expenses, the farm income and the labor income on these actual farms are all more closely related to the capital invested than the size of the farm. Thus, on the 30 farms with a capitalization of about $13,500, the average yearly receipts were about $25 an acre, while on the 28 farms with a capitalization of about $8,300, the average yearly receipts were about $16 an acre. Likewise on the high-priced farms the labor income was approximately $10 an acre, while on the lower priced ones it was about $7.

——-

[B] Obtained by dividing by two the sum of capital at beginning and end of three-year period.

[C] For further details see Hunt, "How to Choose a Farm," Chaps. X and XI.



CHAPTER XII

GRAIN AND HAY FARMING

An important and primary factor in the production of all wealth is labor. Aside from the professional and domestic classes, the people of the world devote themselves to three forms of work: (1) Changes in substance, or natural products; (2) changes in form, or mechanical products; (3) changes in place, or exchange of products. The second of these forms of work gives rise to manufacturing; the third, to trade and commerce. Under the first sub-division two classes of natural products may be recognized; first, what, for want of a better name, may be called chemical products, such as ores, coal and salt, from which are derived mining and the metallurgical arts; and second, vital products, or, in other words, vegetation and animals. It is work applied to the production of vegetation and animals that gives rise to agriculture. Agriculture is labor applied to the production of living things.

KINDS OF AGRICULTURE

The industries which deal with the production of living things may be divided, theoretically, largely on the basis of the character of the results, but to some extent upon the nature of the activities involved.

{ Grain Farming—Cereals and } { grasses. } { } Agriculture { Plantations—Cotton, sugar, } { tobacco, coffee. } Plant Production { (Soil Culture) { Truck Farming, Market } { Gardening—Vegetables. } { } Horticulture { Fruit Growing—Fruits. } { } { Forestry—Trees, shrubs. }

{ Stock Raising—Work, meat, fats, hides. { Stock Feeding—Meat, fats. { Stock Breeding—Animals. Animal Production { Dairy Farming—Milk, butter and cheese. (An. Husbandry) { Sheep Husbandry—Wool raising. { Poultry Raising—Eggs. { Beekeeping—Honey.

Mixed Husbandry

The manner in which this theoretical classification has worked out in actual practice will be indicated in some measure by the inquiries of the United States Census Bureau. The twelfth census has classified farms on the basis of their principal income. If 40% or more of the gross income of the farm was from dairy products, it was called a dairy farm; if from live stock, a live stock farm; if from cotton, a cotton farm. If no product constituted 40% of the gross receipts, the farm was classified as a miscellaneous or general farm.

In 1900 there were 5,740,000 farms in the United States, which were, according to the rule just stated, classified as follows:

FARMS CLASSIFIED ACCORDING TO PRINCIPAL SOURCE OF INCOME

Gross Average income Total area, size per Kind of farm. acres. Number. acres. farm.

Hay and grain 210,243,000 1,320,000 159 $760 Vegetables 10,157,000 156,000 65 665 Fruits 6,150,000 82,000 75 915 Live stock 335,009,000 1,565,000 227 788 Dairy produce 43,284,000 358,000 120 787 Tobacco 9,574,000 106,000 90 615 Cotton 89,587,000 1,072,000 84 430 Rice 1,088,000 6,000 190 1,335 Sugar 2,689,000 7,000 363 5,317 Flowers and plants 43,000 6,000 7 2,991 Nursery products 166,000 2,000 82 4,971 Miscellaneous 113,144,000 1,059,000 107 440 —————- ————- —- ——- Total 844,000,000 5,740,000 147 $656

Including miscellaneous or general farms, there are just a dozen kinds of farms mentioned. Of this number, nine kinds obtained at least 40% of their products, and probably much more, from vegetable rather than from animal forms. However, live stock and dairy farms constitute about one-third of the total number of farms, and almost one-half the farm acreage. There are four kinds of farms on which the production of grain and hay forms an important part of their activities; namely, the hay and grain farm, the live stock farm, the dairy farm, and general farm. These constitute, in the aggregate, 75% of the farms of the United States, and by virtue of their larger area, they occupy 85% of the total farm area.

GRAIN AND HAY STATISTICS

At the close of the nineteenth century less than one-half the area of the United States was owned in farms. Only one-half of this farm area was considered to be under cultivation. The total area in cereals was one-tenth the total land area, while 3% was devoted to hay and 2% to all other crops except pasture.

Without going into details, it may be stated with reasonable assurance that: (1) During the last half of the last century, the production of cereals has increased much faster than the population. For example, in 1850, there were raised in the United States one ton of cereal grains per capita; by 1900 this amount had increased to one and one-half tons for each inhabitant.

(2) Since the number of persons engaged in agriculture has decreased in proportion to population, the quantity of cereals produced in proportion to persons engaged in agriculture has increased in still greater ratio. So far, therefore, as the amount of cereals is concerned, the farmer has been getting an increasingly larger return for his labor.

(3) The quantity of cereals has increased in proportion to the arable land. This may be due to one or more of three causes: (a) greater average yield per acre; (b) greater proportion of cereals to other crops; or (c) to a change in the ratio of the different cereal crops. The following table, giving the average yield of grain, reduced to pounds per acre, shows not only how the substitution of one cereal for another might affect the total production of cereal grains, but also suggests to the young farmer how he may modify the total product of his farm:

Yield Lb. Lb. in bu. per bu. per acre Maize 24.2 56 1355 Barley 23.7 48 1138 Rye 15.0 56 840 Oats 26.2 32 838 Wheat 13.2 60 792 Rice Paddy 746 Buckwheat 14.0 48 672

Yields will vary relatively in different regions and with different types of soil, and should be studied with reference to one's conditions.

(4) The wheat and oat crops have increased about six and one-half times in 50 years, the hay crop five and one-half times, while maize has increased four and one-half times. Cotton, the only other great staple crop, has increased four times in the same period. The oat crop has increased the most rapidly of any since 1880. It is interesting, and may be significant, to note that, while the production of wheat and barley in Great Britain has decreased about one-half in thirty years, the production of oats has increased somewhat.

(5) The greatest rate of increase in the production of cereals in the United States during the last half century has taken place since 1870. This increase is coincident with three other facts of the utmost importance: (a) The development of the central West, a treeless plain—prior to this period much of the farm land in the United States had been hewn out of the forest, tree by tree; (b) the consolidation of the steam railways into transcontinental lines; and (c) the introduction of the self-binding harvester. Formerly it took at least five men to do what is done today by one man in the harvesting of cereals.

ADVANTAGES OF GRAIN FARMING

(1) The cost of land excepted, the production of hay and grain requires a small outlay of money. During the past fifty years, many thousands of persons have been able to obtain farms of 160 acres at almost no cost. With a few hundred dollars invested in horses and tools with which to plow the prairie and sow the seed, these fortunate persons have oftentimes been able to pay the whole of their expenses, capital included, from the first crop. The renter who operates a hay and grain farm usually has but a small capital invested in his business.

(2) The cereals bring a quick return. Wheat may be sown in September and sold in July; maize may be planted in May and sold in November; oats may be planted in April and sold in August. The short period between seed time and harvest makes the oat crop a favorite one among renters. On the other hand, it takes from three to seven years to produce a marketable horse. It may take ten to fifteen years to begin to realize on an apple orchard.

(3) The products are not easily perishable, and hence can be held almost indefinitely. The development of the magnificent elevator system, based upon the principle that the cereals can be handled like water, greatly simplifies the holding and preservation of these staple products.

(4) The products are in constant demand, and hence they always find a market.

Agricultural commodities may be divided into three classes, depending upon the area which controls the price of the commodity, as follows: (a) price units world-wide, as wheat, cotton, pork; (b) price units local to large districts—products too bulky to ship long distances—such as hay, potatoes and apples; (c) price units local to relatively small areas, such as strawberries and green vegetables. It is obvious that the larger the area which controls the price, the more constant will be the demand.

OBJECTIONS TO GRAIN FARMING

(1) It exhausts the soil. About two-thirds of the wheat of the United States is consumed outside the county in which it is raised.

(2) It requires a large quantity of land to produce a competence. Land must be low in price, or the interest on the money invested in the land will consume the profits. The relation of crop to income is suggested by comparing the gross returns from an acre of potatoes or tobacco with an acre of maize. The average gross income during a decade was, from an acre of maize, $9.50; an acre of potatoes, $38; and from an acre of tobacco, $61.50.

(3) Only such part of the land as is suited to tillage can be used.

(4) The marketing of cereals requires the transportation of bulky products. Hay is handicapped much more seriously. The distance a product can be shipped depends somewhat on the price per pound received for it. If it costs one cent a pound to ship maize to a grain market, obviously it cannot be transported without loss when it brings only 50 cents a bushel. On the other hand, two cents a pound may easily be paid for shipping butter which is worth 25 cents a pound. The transportation of $2,000 worth of maize to a railway station ten miles distant is a laborious and expensive operation, but when this same maize is turned into beef or pork, it will transport itself to the station with comparatively little trouble. Notwithstanding the excellent transportation facilities which the farmers of the United States enjoy, 80% of the maize is consumed in the county in which it is raised. Cereal production demands better transportation facilities than cotton farming, tobacco growing or the rearing of domestic animals.

(5) Capital must lie idle much of the time. The self-binding harvester or the hay rake is only used a few weeks, or perhaps more often only a few days, each year. A cream separator or a churn may be used every day in the year. In the first instance, there is not only interest on unemployed capital, but the capital is actually deteriorating through nonuse.

(6) The production of hay and grain does not give continuous employment. The slightest consideration of the following table must show that unless live stock is kept, there are considerable periods of the year in which very little labor is required, while at other times considerable work is necessary to prevent loss.

TABLE SHOWING THE AVERAGE ACREAGE PER FARM OF PRINCIPAL CROPS.

New York Ohio Wisconsin Virginia Maize 3 13 9 11 Wheat 2 12 3 6 Oats 5 4 14 1 Barley, rye or buckwheat 2 — 5 0 Hay and forage 23 11 14 4 Potatoes, beans or other vegetables 3 1 2 1 Fruits 2 2 0 1 Miscellaneous crops 2 1 0 2 Pasture, wood or unimproved land 58 45 70 93 —- — —- —- Total size of farm 100 89 117 119

(7) Much depends upon natural forces. While there is opportunity for the use of knowledge and judgment in the production of high-grade seeds and even of large yields, there is not the same scope for skill that there is in some other lines of agricultural enterprise. Skill means the capacity to do something difficult, and the more effort required to produce an object the more value it has, provided its utility is unlimited. The farming which requires the most skill pays the best if one has the skill to apply to it. This is because those who do not have the requisite skill are usually unsuccessful.



CHAPTER XIII

THE COST OF FARMING OPERATIONS

Several millions of the inhabitants of the United States, not to mention those of other countries, are engaged each year in the preparation of the soil for the cereal and forage crops and on the work of seeding and harvesting them. The welfare of one-third the population is directly and that of the other two-thirds, although less directly, is quite as surely dependent upon the effectiveness of this effort. If, for example, as sometimes happens, one-third the population receives on account of untoward seasonal conditions but four-fifths of the usual product, everyone must suffer on account of this unrewarded labor. Many, perhaps most, financial panics have their origin in crop failures aided, doubtless, by an improper financial system.

Although widely and sometimes bitterly discussed, little is really known concerning the relation between the effort expended and the returns obtained in producing the great staple farm products; yet one of the most important and vital considerations in the organization of a farm enterprise is the income, both gross and net, which may be expected from the different crops contemplated. Obviously the yield and price of the several crops will vary with the locality and with the season. It is, therefore, impossible to predict for any year either what yield may be obtained or what price will be secured. If, however, a sufficient number of years are selected, an average may be found which will form a basis for calculating the probable result for another series of years. The following table gives the yield and the average farm values per acre for five staple crops for five years, 1905-1909 inclusive, for the United States and for four widely separated states, viz., Pennsylvania, Iowa, Texas and Oregon.

AVERAGE YIELD PER ACRE, 1905-1909.

Pennsylvania Iowa Texas Oregon Maize, bu. 36.6 33.4 21.1 27.3 Wheat, bu. 17.8 15.5 9.6 20.6 Oats, bu. 28.9 28.9 26.6 32.8 Potatoes, bu. 84.4 85.8 67.0 119.0 Hay, tons 1.39 1.56 1.32 2.11

AVERAGE FARM VALUE PER ACRE, 1905-1909

Pennsylvania Iowa Texas Oregon Maize $22.59 $13.80 $12.17 $19.58 Wheat 16.61 12.42 9.11 16.10 Oats 13.33 9.28 12.97 15.20 Potatoes 55.87 44.75 65.15 71.18 Hay 18.74 10.13 13.92 19.60

Such figures as the above may be compiled by anyone at any time for any year or series of years from the yearbooks of the United States Department of Agriculture. They form a fairly sound basis for calculating the gross income which may be expected from the staple farm crops, particularly for the cereals, potatoes, hay, cotton and tobacco. Five questions, however, present themselves, which should, as far as possible, be settled before applying them to an individual problem.

(1) How nearly do the conditions, especially those of soil and climate, of the given location correspond to the averages of the state? The question can be settled only by a thorough study of soils and their crop adaptation. It is a matter requiring study, experience and judgment.

(2) How much larger yields may be expected on account of better methods employed? It is here that most mistakes are made in estimating possible farm profits. Necessarily, all statistical averages of production are much below those which an enterprising farmer considers an average crop and habitually produces. Not more than 50% increase upon these figures, however, should be anticipated by reason of the improved methods which one is going to employ.

While the average yield of maize, even in the so-called corn states, is not far from 30 bushels an acre, and while it is quite common for good farmers to produce 60 to 75 bushels of maize per acre, it would not be safe to assume a yield of more than 45 bushels unless the conditions are more than ordinarily favorable.

The application of the averages given on pages 149-150 to an individual farm enterprise may be illustrated by calculating the possible results which might be obtained on 80 acres of arable land in Iowa and Pennsylvania with the four great soil products of northern United States.

Iowa Pennsylvania Acres Income Acres Income Maize 40 $552.00 15 $340.85 Oats 20 185.60 15 200.25 Wheat 5 62.10 15 249.25 Hay 15 151.95 35 655.90 Total 80 $951.65 80 $1,446.25

If 50% is added for the increased yields which may be expected on account of the employment of better methods, the total yield from 80 acres of arable land would become for Iowa $1,428 and for Pennsylvania $2,169. This does not mean that farming is necessarily more profitable in Pennsylvania than in Iowa. Not only may the cost of cultivating an acre of arable land be greater in Pennsylvania, but usually a larger territory must be owned in order to obtain 80 acres of arable land. Eighty acres of these four crops is probably as often grown on a farm of 100 acres in Iowa as on one of 160 acres in Pennsylvania. The total farm acreage in Iowa is, in round numbers, 35 millions; in Pennsylvania, 19 millions. In Iowa about one-half the farm area is in the farm crops under consideration, while in Pennsylvania these four crops occupy only one-third the farm area.



(3) Will there be a general increase or decrease in the price of crops during the coming years?

The following table gives the average farm price for Missouri by five-year periods.

THE AVERAGE DECEMBER FARM PRICE BY PREVIOUS DECADES COMPARED WITH AVERAGE OF FIVE YEARS, 1906-10.

1866 1875 1886 1896 1906 to to to to to 1875 1885 1895 1905 1910 cts. cts. cts. cts. cts. Maize, bu. 40 33 33 35 49 Wheat, bu. 103 87 64 71 87 Oats, bu. 30 27 26 27 39 Potatoes, bu. 57 48 49 53 68 Hay, ton 902 799 704 700 875

An examination of the last column shows that the average price of these staple farm products has been considerably greater during five recent years than during the previous thirty years. Will this increase in price continue, or will there be a series of years of unusually low prices which will bring the average price of the decade down to that of the previous three decades? Few persons will care to venture an answer to this question, which is of the utmost importance to all farmers and especially to the beginner.

(4) The figures employed are taken from the yearbook of the United States Department of Agriculture and are the estimated farm price on December 1 of each year. Can the commodities be sold for the December farm price? Will potatoes sold at the time of digging bring less than the December price? Will wheat or maize held until May bring a higher price? To what extent, by the judicious holding of products, can advance in price be obtained?

(5) Will the products be sold for cash, or may they be turned into animal products at an increased profit? In some sections of the United States animals are reared primarily because of the increased profit due to manufacturing soil products into animal products; in other regions, however, they are kept primarily for the purpose of maintaining the fertility of the soil and only incidentally on account of the increased profits.

COST OF PRODUCTION

For a number of reasons it is difficult to determine the cost of growing farm crops. One reason deserves to be especially emphasized. In any business enterprise it may be necessary to run at a loss, because to stop would entail a still greater loss. This is particularly true in farming, where men are employed by the month in order that they may be had when needed. Since they are receiving pay, it is better that such men should be employed some days at farm operations which return only a portion of their wages rather than not to have them employed at all. Under such circumstances, therefore, the cost of producing a given crop may be greater than is indicated by the time actually employed in its production.

Many other factors also enter, as the average number of hours per day which it is possible to work. This is greatly influenced by weather conditions. The Minnesota station determined that the working day on about thirty farms in that state varied from seven and one-half to eight and one-half hours, with two to three and one-half hours on Sunday. The average length of the working day for horses varied from 3.1 to 3.3 hours.

The cost for labor of cultivating a given area of land will depend not only on the crop or crops to be raised, the climate, the topography and character of the soil, the size and shape of the fields and the system of cropping, but also upon the man's ability for organization. It is said that the European farmers, and even the farmers from eastern Canada, are several years in adjusting themselves to farming in western Canada. When the farmers from Iowa, Kansas, Nebraska or surrounding states move into western Canada with their three-horse teams and other suitable equipment, applying their thorough knowledge of prairie farming, they are at once successful. The man is thus an important factor.

TIME REQUIRED FOR CULTURAL OPERATIONS

The following table will be helpful as showing time required to perform certain operations, since it is a record of labor actually employed on a field of 18 acres of easily tilled land in central Ohio. All labor was employed at prices named, board for man and food for horses being furnished in addition at the prices estimated. The owner of the land furnished the horse for the harvester.

Plowing 7.5 days at $2 $15.00 Harrowing 3 days at 2 6.00 Planting 2 days at 2 4.00 Cultivating (4 times) 7 days at 2 14.00 Cultivating with harvester 6 days at 1 6.00 Husking and cribbing by the job 45.54 Estimated cost of board 25-1/2 days 7.95 Estimated team maintenance 25-1/2 days 4.90 ———- $103.39

According to these figures the cost for labor of raising the crop and the cost of harvesting was almost exactly the same, each being a little less than $3 an acre.

THE COST OF PRODUCING FARM CROPS

The Minnesota station has determined the cost of growing the staple farm crops on 45 farms in different sections of the State. The total expense per acre for an average of six years is shown in the following table, not including land rental or cost of marketing.

COST OF PRODUCING FARM CROPS IN MINNESOTA.

Spring wheat, land fall plowed $5.54 Oats, land fall plowed 5.80 Barley, land spring plowed 6.89 Maize, husked from standing stalks 9.41 Hay, timothy and clover 3.68 Potatoes, land not fertilized 23.36 Potatoes, land fertilized 34.72

Some years ago the writer made an estimate of the cost of producing maize, oats, wheat and clover hay in a four-course rotation on a tenant farm in central Pennsylvania. The soil was a heavy clay and required plowing for each crop, except, of course, the hay crop, one acre a day being considered a good day's work.

Counting the expense of man and team at $2 per day, the labor cost per acre was found to be $7 for maize, $5.10 for both wheat and oats, and $2.30 for hay, or an average of about $4.90 per acre for the four crops. The interest on the capital invested in operating this farm, exclusive of the land, was estimated at $1.45 per acre.

INFLUENCE OF YIELD UPON THE COST OF PRODUCTION

The Illinois station has prepared a set of estimates upon the cost of producing an acre of maize, showing variations in cost due to differences in yield. In these estimates, instead of making a charge for the actual cost of manure or fertilizer applied, an estimate is made of the value of the plant food removed.

COST OF PRODUCING ONE ACRE OF MAIZE IN ILLINOIS AS MODIFIED BY YIELD.

Yield Yield Yield Yield 50 bu. 75 bu. 100 bu. 35 bu. Disking $0.40 $0.40 $0.40 $0.40 Plowing 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Preparation .75 .75 .75 .75 Planting .15 .15 .15 .15 Seed .35 .35 .35 .35 Cultivation 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 Plant food 1.02 1.53 2.04 .71 Husking 1.25 1.87 2.50 .88 Marketing 1.00 1.50 2.00 .70 ——- ——- ——— ——- Cost per acre $6.92 $8.55 $10.19 $5.94 Cost per bushel .14 .11 .10 .17

The average yield per acre in Illinois for 12 years preceding date of this estimate was 35 bushels per acre; the average price per bushel during the same period was 32 cents.

LABOR COST OF PRODUCING A BUSHEL OF GRAIN

Not counting rent of land or interest on capital invested in equipment, nor depreciation of soil fertility, it has been shown that under favorable conditions, the labor cost of growing and harvesting an acre of wheat or oats may be as low as $4.50, and that of maize as low as $5 per acre. Assuming the average labor cost of producing an acre of wheat or oats at $5.50 and of maize at $6 per acre, and taking the average yields per acre for a series of years to be 13.8 for wheat, 30.9 bushels for oats and 24.9 bushels for maize, the average labor cost per bushel will be: Wheat, 40 cents; oats, 17-1/2 cents; and maize, 28 cents.

The data given in this chapter are to be accepted as suggestive rather than as determinative. The chief purpose in presenting them is to place before the young farmer an appreciation of some of the problems involved in the production of the chief and basic agricultural commodities. The young farmer's success will be modified by the role which they occupy in his farming system and by his ability to adjust them to the economic conditions in which he may find himself placed. A thorough understanding of the principle underlying the data submitted will go far toward enabling him to make this adjustment, although none of the illustrations given may have been obtained under conditions identical to his own.



CHAPTER XIV

THE PLACE OF INTENSIVE FARMING

The doctrine of the survival of the most fit applies equally to the field of biology and to the field of economics. The general introduction of vegetables and fruits into the human dietary has, by banishing the loathsome diseases of the Middle Ages, greatly increased human efficiency. It follows that those peoples or nations who employ vegetables and fruits in abundance, other things being equal, will be most fit to survive and must outstrip others less fortunately situated. We may for this reason alone look forward to the increasing importance of vegetable growing and fruit raising; but there is a more obvious and perhaps more direct reason. There is in the production of vegetables, at least, a method of satisfying the dietetic needs of an increasing population. The employment of a part of the area now in cereals and forage crops for the production of potatoes, cabbages, legumes, roots and tomatoes is one of the most ready means of increasing the food supply. Whether such substitution will be advantageous to the human race depends, however, not so much upon the food returns from a given area of land as upon the products from a given amount or unit of labor.

KINDS OF HORTICULTURE

In that form of intensive agriculture to which is given the designation horticulture, there may be recognized several more or less distinct divisions, as fruit growing, market gardening, truck farming and floriculture. Each has its own special problems, based upon conditions of culture and market. While, as in all classifications, there is more or less overlapping, the tendency is for them to become more and more distinct. The market gardener is the producer of vegetables for a local market, while the truck farmer produces similar products for a larger or wider distribution. The former grows a great variety of products, disposing of them in relatively small quantity, not infrequently directly to the consumer. The latter raises a few highly specialized crops which he sells in gross, usually through a commission merchant. Truck farming has developed since 1860, in consequence of the growth of large cities, which require enormous supplies of vegetables of fairly uniform quality, and on account of the continuous demand for fresh vegetables as nearly as possible throughout the year. Watermelons and sweet potatoes can be raised in the southern states and laid down in New York City or Boston more cheaply than they can be raised in the suburbs of these cities, and, what is equally important, they will be of superior quality.

The extension of railway facilities, the introduction of refrigerator cars and the building of cold storage plants has made it possible to grow in one climate products to be consumed in another. Cold storage has enabled the fruit growers of California to supply the eastern markets with peaches and other fresh fruit. Chicago, to give only one example, begins to receive strawberries, cabbages and tomatoes from the shores of the Gulf of Mexico early in the year and continues to receive these products, until finally they are being shipped late in the summer from the shores of Lake Superior. It is estimated that the change of locality from which these products come, travels northward at the rate of from 13 to 15 miles a day.

IMPORTANT FACTORS IN INTENSIVE FARMING

In the neighborhood of large cities, notably in the environs of Paris, market gardeners often produce their vegetables in made soil. The local character of the soil under such conditions is a matter of comparative indifference, since a board floor would answer every requirement as a resting place for the artificial soil. The large expense in preparing and constantly renewing the seed bed is only economically possible, however, where proximity to a large city out-weighs all other considerations.

Ordinarily climatic and soil adaptation are prime factors in successful horticulture—much more than in any other branch of agriculture. Each fruit has a restricted climatic range, and in most cases the number of soil types on which a given fruit can be made a commercial success is likewise limited. Thus, in general, apples and pears require heavier soils than peaches. Success in commercial apple growing requires even greater discrimination, since different varieties of apples demand different soil conditions. Thus Baldwins are grown the most successfully where a northern climate is modified by proximity to the Great Lakes. Rhode Island Greenings will succeed on soils too heavy for many other varieties. The York Imperial has not yet achieved a great commercial success save on one type of soil. Some varieties of apples are much more restricted in their adaptation than others. Thus, while the King is quite restricted, the Ben Davis has a fairly wide cultural adaptation. No one should plant an orchard until he has made a thorough study of his soil and climatic conditions and has received the highest possible expert assistance in choosing the varieties best adapted to his conditions.

There is an increasing tendency to specialize in vegetable growing. The production of celery, onions, muskmelons, watermelons, cabbages, cauliflowers, tomatoes and sweet corn, to mention only some of the most striking examples, are becoming more and more localized. Even where vegetables and flowers are grown under glass, not only is each house devoted to a single species, but, notably in the case of roses, growers are restricting themselves more and more to a few varieties. This is due to the fact that it is impossible to give in one house, or even in one establishment, the special set of conditions required for the most economic development of each species or variety of plant, just as in the open air the natural conditions are best adapted to a limited number of horticultural products.

So much being admitted, it follows that it is folly to attempt to grow plants under unfavorable climatic and soil conditions when competing in the same market with those possessing favorable ones. It is true, of course, that where one man fails another often succeeds, but this is no reason why a man should apply his talents under unfavorable circumstances. In fact, one of the important attributes of most successful men is their ability to recognize and apply their energies under conditions which will give them the most effective return for a given effort. There is no virtue in unnecessary toil. Progress in any enterprise, as progress in the human race, can be accomplished only in reducing the amount of labor required to produce a desired result.

All this is axiomatic. The purpose of emphasizing it here is that it is fundamental to the success of those who attempt to produce horticultural products. The necessity for the emphasis lies in the fact that these factors are so often disregarded. They are of most vital importance to the man who attempts to raise tree fruits. A mistake in the planting of celery, cabbage, or onions may be rectified the following season, but if a mistake is made in planting tree fruits, it may, as in the case of apples, require ten or even 20 years to discover the error.

The growth in commercial orcharding is due in part to the need of special knowledge and facilities for combating fungous diseases and insect enemies and to the better markets which a large production of uniform quality makes possible. While these are extremely important considerations, there is a more fundamental reason, which may in the long run exercise an even more potent influence. The location of the ordinary family orchard, so called, has been determined in almost every instance by the location of the farm buildings. There is no necessary relation between a good site for a farm dwelling and a suitable location for an orchard. It happens, therefore, that family orchards, taken as a whole, are not grown under as favorable conditions as are commercial orchards. This is a sufficient reason in itself, even if the other reasons above mentioned did not exist, why the commercial orchard must, in time, supplant these accidental plantings.

ADVANTAGES OF HORTICULTURE

The advantages of this intensive form of agriculture as compared with the more extensive forms discussed in Chapter XII may be stated as follows:

(1) A large gross income per acre may be obtained. An investigation of truck farming made some years ago indicated a gross return per acre about 40 times as great as that obtained on an average from all forms of agriculture.

(2) There is a large opportunity for the use of skill in raising and preparing products for market and an equal opportunity for the exercise of judgment in choosing the best markets.

DISADVANTAGES OF HORTICULTURE

(1) It requires considerable capital, particularly for machinery and labor. In the investigation in truck farming above mentioned the capital per acre invested in land, buildings, implements and teams was eight times that in the more general forms of agriculture.

(2) The products are for the most part readily perishable, requiring special facilities if held for any length of time.

(3) Growing out of above-mentioned fact, the market is easily overstocked at any given point, and hence prices often fluctuate widely.

(4) The yield is also quite variable, this class of products being especially influenced by seasonal conditions and particularly subject to insect attacks and fungous diseases. Since large capital is invested in labor, the horticulturist may be involved in financial ruin through causes which he is unable to control.

(5) The labor question, in certain forms of horticulture more than in others, involves difficulties, among which is need of large quantities of cheap labor for short periods of time.



CHAPTER XV

REASONS FOR ANIMAL HUSBANDRY

Animal products in the United States nearly equal in value those of all other farm products. Those soil supplies which constitute the food of domestic animals are not implied. Practically every farm in the United States keeps domestic animals, either for their labor or their products, and nearly every household in both city and country keeps one or more animals for companionship. The domestication of animals has been a prime factor in the civilization of the human race by furnishing man with motive force by which he has been able to increase his productive power; by giving him a larger, better and more regular food supply; and by furnishing the materials for clothing, making it possible for him to inhabit temperate and even arctic climates. Animals have not been less important in advancing the spiritual welfare of the human race, by inculcating habits of regularity and kindliness, which the care of domestic animals imposes.

INCREASE IN ANIMAL PRODUCTION

During the last half century animals have not increased in numbers as rapidly as have the inhabitants, but the value of animals has increased much more rapidly. While a part of this increase in value is due perhaps to a greater cost of production, a couple of illustrations will suffice to show that part of this increase in value has been due to increase in the individual merit of the animals. In 1850 sheep in this country produced 2.4 pounds of wool per fleece; in 1910 they produced 6.9 pounds per fleece. Thus, while in 50 years sheep have not quite doubled in numbers, the production of wool has increased more than five times. This is a striking example of the value of improvement in breeding, because the improvement in wool production is due to the influence of heredity in far greater degree than to the effect of improved feeding. Wool, like the hair on one's head, is not greatly influenced by the food supply, assuming it to be reasonably ample. Beef cattle offer another illustration of the way in which animal products have been increased without increasing the number of animals. Formerly beef cattle were matured in their fourth and fifth years, or even their sixth year. They are now placed upon the market in their second and third years. If animals can be matured in their third instead of their fifth year, it is obvious that a much smaller number of animals must be kept upon the farm in order to provide an equal annual supply for slaughter.

The increase in the size of our horses and the increased production of butter fat per cow which have occurred in the past half century are hardly less important factors in increasing the value of domestic animals and their products.

THE FUTURE OF DOMESTIC ANIMALS

One of the most striking features of recent progress in domestic animals is the large increase in the number of horses and the still greater increase in their value. There are those who have believed that the invention of many beneficent forms of mechanical power would in time, if not in the very near future, supplant the use of animals as a motive power. The fact seems to be, however, that they merely augment man's resources and increase his opportunities without lessening his need for animal power.

It appears reasonable to suppose that there will be witnessed in the United States a gradual shifting of live stock centers. During the past half century, the great central West has been noted for the production of live stock, particularly for beef, mutton and wool, as an incident of its pioneer development. Already the production of large herds of cattle and flocks of sheep has disappeared for the central West, and is now confined largely to Texas and the mountain states. The northeastern states are unrivaled in the production of grass, and have considerable areas less fitted for tillage than the prairie states. In time, therefore, the tendency will be for the regions best fitted to rear animals to increase their numbers of breeding animals. On the other hand, those states which produce grain in relatively large abundance may give more attention to fattening animals and to the production of dairy products which can be shipped long distances. As time advances, the history of other countries will doubtless be repeated. A greater distinction between the breeding and rearing of animals, and their fattening and preparation for market will occur.

ADVANTAGES OF KEEPING LIVE STOCK

Since animals occupy a place in practically all farm organizations, it is desirable to state briefly the advantages and disadvantages which may accrue to any individual enterprise. The most striking advantages affecting the farmer are:

(1) Animals make it possible to use land that would otherwise be wholly or partly unproductive. Hillsides and mountain slopes, soil too stony to cultivate, fields traversed by winding streams, and land partially covered with trees, are familiar examples. As previously mentioned, only about one-half the farm area in this country is improved land, and only two-thirds, even of the improved land, is in cultivated crops. The other third of the improved land and a considerable portion of that half of the farm area known as unimproved land are utilized as pasture for domestic animals.

(2) They make use of farm crops which would be entirely or partially wasted. Straw, the stalks of maize, clover and alfalfa hay and other leguminous forage crops would not have sufficient value to pay for raising if animals were not kept to convert them into useful products. In fact, the usefulness of a given animal may be judged by the economy with which he converts these otherwise useless products into food or other materials for the use of man. The most profound studies are being made to determine the conditions under which this takes place.

(3) In thus acting as machines in manufacturing raw materials into finished products animals convert these coarse and bulky materials into those which are much more concentrated, thus making their transportation economically possible. A pound of beef has required food containing ten pounds of dry substance, and a pound of butter has required thirty pounds of dry matter to produce it.

These refined products may be shipped around the world, while the raw materials may not be profitably transported beyond the county in which they are raised. Moreover, the farmer has the profit which comes from manufacturing the raw materials into refined products.

(4) In the production of these finer products much of the essential materials of plant growth are left upon the farm. The experiments of Lawes and Gilbert show conclusively that in fattening animals more than nine pounds out of ten of the essential fertilizing ingredients of the food reappear in the solid and liquid excrements. Prothero says: "Farming in a circle, unlike logic, is a productive process."

The fiscal policy of one of the great nations of the globe is based upon this idea. Everything possible is done by Germany to encourage the keeping of live stock, because the more live stock that is kept, the more productive will be the soil. The larger the crops raised the more people will be required to harvest them and the larger will be the population to recruit the army and navy. The Kaiser and the German scientist recognize that the fighting force of the Empire is related to the number of domestic animals reared. The meat supplies of the people are, therefore, taxed to bring about this end.

(5) The rearing of live stock makes it possible to arrange a better rotation of crops. A five-year and, even better, a six-year rotation, is more effective than a four-year in maintaining the crop-producing power of the soil and enables the farmer to reduce his cost of production. It is possible to keep a larger proportion of the farm in grass and other forage crops, thus reducing the amount of land plowed annually and at the same time decreasing the exhaustion of the land, provided the forage crops are fed to live stock upon the farm.

There is an old Flemish proverb which reads:

"No grass, no cattle; No cattle, no manure; No manure, no crops."

The point of this proverb is that good grass is the basis of good agriculture. Investigations have shown that one may go farther and say that one of the most ready means of increasing the crop-producing power of the soil is by adding fertilizers to grass land. The large number of plants per acre enables the plants to utilize the fertilizer to the highest degree, and plowing under the resulting dense sod is one of the most effective methods of enriching the soil.

(6) Animals require constant care, thus making possible a more constant use of labor and other capital. The wheat farmer of North Dakota sows his wheat in April and May and harvests it in July and August. He usually threshes it immediately, and is practically without employment for himself, his teams or his men from September until April. On live stock farms the labor employed in the summer in the field is needed in the winter in paddocks and stables.

(7) The management of live stock, including the rearing of poultry and the manipulation of dairy products, may be made to require a higher skill than the production of farm crops as ordinarily practiced. The communities which have given the most attention to dairying and to the rearing and fattening of animals have generally been the most prosperous.

DISADVANTAGES OF KEEPING LIVE STOCK

(1) Keeping live stock increases the capital required to operate a given area of land, especially where animals are kept in connection with the production of hay and grain. Not only must there be capital with which to purchase animals, but usually more is invested in buildings. In a self-contained farm—that is, one which raises sufficient food for the requirements of the live stock—ten dollars an acre may be considered a moderate investment for animals. If, however, the plan is to raise only the coarse feed, while the necessary grain as well as other concentrates is largely purchased, a farm may easily carry from $25 to $35 worth of live stock per acre. Lack of capital is one of the most potent influences in preventing a larger production of animals and animal products. Cattle paper, or notes given to secure money for the purchase of fattening animals, is a common bank asset in the feeding districts of the central West.