wanted supplemental land, the majority preferred to rent. Probably the num- 

 bers are too small for the preferences to be of much significance, but it 

 may be that farmers consider the more complete control that goes with owner- 

 ship to be more essential for the farmstead and their principal acreage than 

 for supplemental acreages. 



2. Farmers' Attitudes Toward Lease Terms 



Farmers indicated that the rent they would be willing to pay and the 

 improvements they would be willing to make would depend considerably on 

 their estimates of the present and potential productivity of particular pieces 

 of land. Most thought that, on a fair grade of land on which the hay was 

 running out, they could get most of the benefit of their fitting, fertilizer, and 

 seed over a five-year period. Some might want more than five years if al- 

 falfa were considered. Pasture was a little more difficult problem in Green- 

 land and Stratham if it required fencing; farmers thought some pastures 

 (probably those with considerable brush and stones) would not pay for the 

 fence in five years, even if the pasture could be had rent free, and the fence 

 wire would not be worth anything if taken down. On the other hand, some 

 farmers in Hopkinton thought pasture fence was frequently not too much 

 of a problem because a barbed wire on top the usual stone wall was sufficient. 

 Fanners were more reluctant to make the longer-lived fixed improvements. 

 This is as expected, but it poses a problem when it is recalled that some 

 owners were unwilling or unable to make these improvements. 



There appears, then, considerable basis for owners and operators to 

 get together to permit improvements for crop production, but there may be 

 cases in which it would be difficult to find a way to handle fencing and more 

 permanent improvements. Considerable exception can be made to both of 

 these general statements, however. In the large number of cases where the 

 owners of idle land are uncertain, they do not want to give long leases, and 

 without some assurance of long use farmers do not want to make land im- 

 provements. The permanent improvements may be a problem in only a minor 

 number of cases because probably the majority of the larger places on which 

 the owner would not make improvements could not be rented as farm units 

 anyway due to the current use of the houses. 



Expressed Land Needs 



If there were hope of agreement on rental terms, to what extent could the 

 present active farmers use the currently idle farm land? To be considered 

 are: (1) the kinds and amount wanted and available, and (2) the location of 

 farmers wanting land in relation to the idle land. The relative location of 

 active dairy farms and idle land is shown on the maps in Chapter II. 



In Hopkinton one man wanted to buy a family size dairy farm but the 

 interviewer did not encounter such a farm for sale there. In Greenland and 

 Stratham one man wanted to rent and one would rent or buy a dairy farm. 

 There were no really good opportunities in the way of entire farms to rent, 

 not because of lack of land but because of lack of suitable buildings available 

 to the renter. Houses were generally occupied by the owners and barns were 

 generally small, inconvenient, or badly deteriorated. There were some farms 

 for sale but, because of residential values, a buyer would have to exercise 

 considerable care to avoid overpaying for an inadequate farm. 



In Greenland and Stratham the active farmers (including the 11 farmers 

 on 8 farmsteads who wanted supplemental land) and the idle places were 



37 



