420 ANNUAL REPORTS OF DEPARTMENT OK ACJRICULTURE. 



• 



Tlie Huroau of Crop Estimates, l)ein«>" the FtMleial aj^ency created for 

 that purpose, should he streu<rthene(I to aile(|uately iiieet this iiec(L 



J hat agriculture is unclergoin<i; <4reat changes is evident to all who 

 observe and reflect on the j^reat movements now under way. These 

 changes will affect the standard of livin<^ and the cost of living of 

 the entire po})ulation, and should therefore be effected wisely and 

 along conservative lines, wdiich is possible only on the basis of full 

 information regarding the essential statistical facts of agriculture. 

 Economy is necessary, but it is the reverse of true economy to cripple 

 any branch of the public service by inadequate appropriations which 

 is so Aital to the i^roper de\el(>})ment of a stable and profitable 

 agriculture as the crop-reporting service. 



To encourage production Avorkers must expect a fair reward. To 

 the farmer this reward must come through fair prices; these in turn 

 from correct general knowledge of relative supply ; and this can come 

 only from unl)iased and accurate Government crop reports, based 

 upon adequate information summarized by competent men. 



COUNTY AGENTS AS CROP REPORTERS. 



Because the county agent is prominent as a leader in promoting 

 better methods of farming, is widely known to and in close touch 

 with farmers in his county, travels over the county fmjuently, de- 

 votes his entire time to the w'ork, leceives a regular salary, has an 

 office, a clerk, and equipment, and because he represents the county 

 farming interests, the extension service of the State agricultural 

 college and the States Relations Service of the United States Depart- 

 ment of Agriculture, it is naturally assumed by many people that 

 he would make an ideal cro^) reporter, and the suggestion is fre- 

 quently made that the comity agent should be utilized to the ex- 

 clusion of other sources of information by the Bureau of Crop Esti- 

 mates. Members of the two agricultural committees of Congress 

 in its l{)19-20 session seemed to be of the opinion that county agents 

 can be utilized for crop estimating work at a considerable saving in 

 expense, and this reason was assigned as the prijicipal justification 

 for reducing the already inadequate appropriation of the Bureau of 

 Crop Estimates. This belief is wdiolly theoretical and will not work 

 out in actual practice, as has been fulh^ demonstrated by the bureau 

 through repeated attempts to utilize them ever since there have been 

 any county agents. 



The Bureau of Crop Estimates realizes that county agents are 

 one of the best sources of information through which its State agri- 

 cidtural statisticians and crop specialists can ascertain quickly the 

 names and addresses of w^ell informed and experienced farmers in 

 their counties and for this purpose they are used extensively. How- 

 ever, the bureau has been forced to recognize certain limitations 

 which make it impracticable to rely upon county agents as country- 

 wide and State-wide bases for its crop estimates. These limitations 

 are, briefly: (1) About one-third of all counties in the United States 

 have no county agents, and no system can be uniform in its applica- 

 tion with such gaps; (2) in many counties, if not in all, it is a rule 

 not to appoint legal residents of the countj^ as county agents, so that 

 in such counties they can not be expected to be thoroughly familiar 



