SAM DAVIS, left, and JOHN BUMGARNER in the 

 Dupage County office, Wheaton. Davis is fieldman 

 for the State Soil Conservation Committee of whicli 

 Bumgarner is a member. 



FIGURING ALLOTMENTS IN McHENHY COUNTY 

 Left to right: Earl Hughes, E. F. Euecker. chairman 



county committee. J. H. Brock, farm adviser, Bert 



Bridges, secretary. 



mailed out the picture was somcwliat dif- 

 ferent. Kendall county s allotment re- 

 quires an average cut of approximately 

 25 per cent in corn acreage. On manv 

 farms, for various reasons, tlie reduction 

 is greater. The painful process of read- 

 justing I93.S cropping plans will prove 

 a blessing if a big majority of farmers 

 really face the facts and take the re- 

 quired action. 



Myron Haag was just leaving the Farm 

 Bureau office at Yorkville with his corn 

 and soil depleting allotments. "Am I 

 going along with the program?" he re- 

 peated. "Yes, I am. 1 believe in it. 

 I had 73 acres of corn last year on my 

 180 acre farm. This year my allotment is 

 57.6 A., the soil depleting 106.4 acres. 

 Our farm is practically all tillable, bl.ack 

 soil. I'll put about 15 acres in soybeans 

 for h.iy. It's going to work out all right. " 



In Kno.\ county, Chairman B. L. I3aird 

 said that corn acreage reduction based on 

 the county allotment w.is approximately 

 20 per cent below the 1937 corn acreage 

 limit. He looked for a substantial in- 

 crease in compliance this year over last 

 when apj-iroximatcly 3X per cent applied 

 for payments. In 193*, S2 per cent of 

 Knox county farmers cooperated in the 

 corn-hog program, in 1935, 69 per cent 

 went along, and in 1936, 59 per cent 

 supported it. 



Allotments were out in Stark county 

 before mid-April. The corn acreage al- 

 lotment there means a reduction of 21.75 

 per cent compared with last year. Coun- 



ty Chairman Jas. A. Briggs said that a 

 campaign of information and under- 

 standing was needed. He planned to 

 call a county-wide meeting to discuss the 

 reasons tor acreage reduction. 



"One of the biggest ob.stacles to the 

 program is the share landlord, " said 

 Briggs. "Many are opposed to it. They 

 insist on putting a big acreage in corn, 

 and a tenant who wants to go along can't 

 do much about it. Sometimes it s the 

 other way around, the landlord wants 

 to cooperate and the tenant opposes it. 

 This program isn't perfect, we know. 

 One of our problems is to get greater 

 uniformity among the township commit- 

 tees on the No. 203 sheets where each 

 farm is scored and graded for produc- 

 tivity, slope, and degree of erosion. But 

 this is the farmer's own program. Its 

 right in principle and our only chance to 

 get fair prices. ' 



Chas. E. Williams, secretary of the 

 Tazewell (bounty Committee said that 

 1 ,000 or more farmers attended the 1 "" 

 meetings held there, double the atten- 

 dance of any previous year. Tazewell s 

 allotment ot corn acreage, he said was 

 17.7 per cent below 1937. The com- 



mittee was eng.igcd in carefully checking 

 the farm rainigs by the township commit- 

 tees as to slope, soil productivity, and 

 erosion. 



In the haste of getting out allotments 

 on time, committees undoubtedly iiave 

 made mistakes. It isn t humanlv possible 

 to avoid error creeping mto the many 

 figures involved in arriving at allotments. 

 Where allotments are clearly out of line 

 and look unreasonable, the farm owner 

 or operator has the privilege of protest- 

 ing to the county committee or to the 

 review committee, or both. Necessary 

 corrections have lx;cn and are being 

 made. On the whole the committees are 

 doing an excellent and impartial job, 

 giving every farm its fair share of the 

 i.ounty allotment. 



In figuring individual allotments, crop 

 acreages grown in 1936 and 1937 arc the 

 starting point. 1 he acreages of corn and 

 soil depleting crops, after being cor- 

 rected for unusual situ.itions and for 

 cuts made in these years by cooperators, 

 are given about equal weight to the re- 

 sults of the No. 203 form whith class- 

 ifies each field on the farm as shown in 

 (he table following: 



FIELD 



No, of 

 Acres 



SLOPE 



Level 



Undulating 



Rolling 



Hilly 



Steep 



DEGREES OF 

 EROSION 



INHERENT 

 PRODUCTIVITY 



PRESENT 

 PRODUCTIVITY 



20 

 16 



12 

 8 



4 



None 



Slight 



Medium 



Heavy 



Serious 



2G 

 16 

 12 

 8 

 4 



High 



Good 



Medium 



Fair 



Poor 



20 

 16 

 12 

 8 



4 



High 



Good 



Medium 



Fair 



Poor 



20 



16 



12 



8 



4 



DUPAGE ALLOTMENTS WERE 

 OUT EARLY 

 Michael F, Lies, chr„ Walter T, Kuhn, 

 and Louis M, Oestmann oi the county 

 committee. 



MYRON HAAG 

 'I think its a good program." 



HERE IS THE WAY ITS DONE 



Elmer Henker, center, treasurer of the 

 Kendall county committee expains al- 

 lotments. 



