10 



A STUDY OF FAEM EQUIPMENT IN OHIO. 



original cost of the property, less a reasonable depreciation charge 

 based on its condition, the length of time already in use, and its 

 expected total life. Contemplation of this difference of method will 

 lessen the apparent difference between these farms and the average 

 for the State. 



Table I. — Comparison of average values for all Ohio farms (census of 1900) with average 

 values for a group of 21 farms of this investigation. 



Items of valuation. 



For the State (average area 

 88.5 ar-res; 78.5 per cent im- 

 proved). 1 



Per 



farm. 



Total of land, improvements, live stock, 



and niacliinery 



Of land, fenceii, drainage, water supply, 



etc. 



Of buildings 



Of implements and machinery. 

 Of live stock 



$4,333 



2, 953 

 703 

 132 



455 



Per 



acre. 



$48.96 



33.37 



8.96 

 1.49 

 5.14 



Per 



cent. 



100. 00 



08. 16 



IS. .30 



3.04 



10.50 



For 21 farms of this investiga- 

 tion (average area 165.88 acres; 

 80.9 per cent improved), i 



Per 

 cent. 



100.00 



60. 48 



21.08 



5.36 



13.08 



1 In the average for tlie entire State the item of improved land includes all land regularly tdled or mowed, 

 land pastured and cropped in rotation, land lying fallow, land in gardens, orchards, vineyards, or nurs- 

 eries and land occupied by buildings. No instructions were given to census enumerators as to the dis- 

 position of public and private roads, all or part of which may be included in the farm areas covered by 

 deeds In the average for the 21 farms, waste land, roads, and barn lots are classed together as nonpro- 

 ductive. Pastures, tilled fields, and orchards constitute 80.9 per cent of the total area. (See Table II 

 for details of acreage.) 



Of the 21 farms 6 include dairying as the principal enterprise, 

 1 is devoted largely to feeding sheep, and 2 others place greater 

 emphasis on the feeding of cattle than the average farm, but in no 

 instance are the equipment and management those of a liighly 

 specialized type of farm. They represent, on the whole, the most 

 common t3'^pe of farm to be found in the State. 



Concerning the farms visited by Mr. Thompson and those cov- 

 ered by circular letter it may be said that they represent the general 

 rather than any special type, and are probably better organized, 

 equipped, and managed than the average of all farms in the State. 

 It is the equipment of tliis class rather than that of higlily special- 

 ized farms or that of groups including both the best and poorest 

 examples of farming that has been studied in the endeavor to estab- 

 lish logical relationships between the land, improvements, stock, 

 and machinery required for successful operation. 



The data here presented are conclusive only in so far as the farms 

 studied are typical. It is held, however, that similar analyses of a 

 large number of farms in any section would afford reliable averages 

 from which the proper distribution of capital in equipment for a 

 given farm could be predetermined with scientific accuracy. 



212 



