EXPERIMENT STATION RECORD. 689 



RURAL ECONOMICS. 



Farm management in the Gallatin Valley, E. L. Currier (Montana Sta. 

 Bui. 97 {19U), pp. 103-120, figs. ^).— In a survey of 50 farms, the author found 

 that the average labor income on the 25 better farms was $1,365.92 while on 

 the 25 poorer farms there was a loss of $361.92, the farmers on these farms not 

 receiving 6 per cent interest on their farm investment. Among the conclusions 

 reached by the author in making a comparison of these two types of farms are 

 that the better farms were stock and gi-ain farms while the majority of the 

 poorer farms produced only grain. The most successful farms averaged over 

 four important sources of income while the poorer farms averaged slightly 

 over two. The crop yields of the better farms averaged 22.8 per cent larger 

 than the ix)orer, due to a more efficient system of soil management through 

 greater diversification. The better farms had 8.6 acres per animal unit to 11.9 

 acres on the poorer farms, and had more dairy cows and sheep. The better 

 farms produced a net return of $2.41 yter dollar of labor while the poorer farms 

 produced only 49 cts. 



Profits in farming on irrigated areas in Utah Lake Valley, E. H. Thomson 

 and H. M. Dixon (U. 8. Dcpt. Arjr. Btil 111 {WlJt), pp. 21, figs. 7).— In this 

 study 95 farms near Provo and Si)anish Fork were u.sed as a basis. 



Among the results shown were that the greater part of the farm receipts 

 were from sugar beets. The growing of other crops such as small fruits and 

 vegetables which are suited to intensive agriculture was seriously limited by 

 market conditlon.s. 



The total labor expense constituted nearly 50 per cent of the total farm ex- 

 penses. The average lalior income on 35 small farms with 16.5 acres in crops 

 was $247 ; on 30 general fruit and sugar-beet fai-ms with 42 crop acres the 

 labor income was $589 ; and on 4 grain and live-stock farms with 74 crop acres 

 the labor income was $620. The px'ofits received were largely influenced by the 

 size of the farm business, the type of farming followed, and the diversity of 

 the income. Many of the farms were so small in magnitude of business that 

 the owners could not possibly make a comfortable living without outside em- 

 ployment. Of the 54 farmers who had less than 40 acres, only 2 men made 

 over $1,000 labor income, and more than 60 per cent of them made less than 

 $300. The high initial cost of land plus the cost of water rights and cost of 

 improvements all combine to make such a heavy investment that intensive 

 agriculture becomes almost imperative, even though such a form is wholly 

 unsuited in its market relations. In most successful forms of intensive agri- 

 culture diversification of enterprises is important, and the limited markets in 

 this region were in this way a severe handicap to the most efficient farm 

 organization. 



The management of farms growing sugar beets in Austria- Hungary, E. C. 

 Sedlmavr [Mitt. Landw. Lehrkauz: K. K. Hochsch. Bodenkul. Wicn, 2 (1914), 

 No. 3, pp. 487-556). — The author gives detailed information showing the areas 

 devoted to the different farm purposes, rotations followed, kinds and amount 

 of fertilizers used, number and kinds of agricultural implements owned, average 

 yield of the pi-incipal farm crops, number of live stock kept, and the wages 

 paid for male and female laborers at different seasons of the year. 



The determination of the cost of production, C. S. Obwin (Jour. Bd. Agr. 

 [London], 21 (1914), No. 3, pp. 193-201). — The author asserts that since farm 

 accounting is in its initial stages it would be easier to develop uniformity in 

 methods than later when difl'erent systems have become accepted. He concludes 

 from his study of the present systems that it is not possible to determine the 

 cost of any one farm commodity without a complete calculation of the cost 

 of all the produce of the farm. 



