22 



New Hampshire Experiment Station [Bulletin 239 



TABLE XIX. 



Labor Requirements and Costs Comparing Machine with Hand Planting 



and Difrging. 



1926 X 



I 



TI 

 III 



I 



II 

 III 



1927 



I 



II 

 III 



I 



II 

 III 



Method 



Machine 



Hand 



Machine 



Hand 



u 



Qi 



286.1 



158.4* 



195.5 



298 

 216 

 202 



274 

 184 

 210 



o 



XI 

 IS 



1.2 



7.2 



257.6 14.4 

 196.3 27.2 

 163.1 20.9 



6.0 

 9.1 

 6.6 



21.0 

 29.0 

 25.9 



it 

 c 



"So 



o 



43.1 

 43.7 

 42.0 



6:9.3 



78.4 

 651.2 



44.6 

 63.1 

 47.0 



68.2 

 73.0 

 68.5 



o 



o 



99.1 



100.9 



93.8 



152.2 

 199.1 

 165.7 



115 



162 



'116 



178 

 201 

 180 



o 



1-1 



3 



m 



Sh 



.35 



.64 



.48 



.59 

 1.01 

 1.02 



.38 

 .54 

 .59 



.65 



1.09 



.86 



o 



3 



Da 



Ph 



$ .52 



1.01 



.83 



.59 



.96 



1.08 



.52 



.75 

 .79 



.64 



L.03 



.88 



=T 



*Dry weather in 192G accounts for the low yield per acre. 



in other parts of the state, farmers will be handicapped in the com- 

 petition with other reg'ions. 



Special machine costs are shown in Table XVII/. These costs 

 are: planter, $18.55; sprayer, $33.35; and digger, $1^3.11. If it is 

 assumed that small differences in area do not seriously affect the 

 life of a machine,**^* the man with a machine cost of )$75.01 on 3.7 

 acres could raise 5 to 7 acres without increasing the total cost of 

 machinery. The acre costs would then be reduced from $5.01 for 

 planter, $9.01 for sprayer, and $6.25 for digger on the 3.7 acres to 

 $3.71, $6.67 and $4.62 respectively on 5 acres; and to $1.86, $3.34, 

 and $2.31 respectively on 10 acres. Savings in labor- of 20 to 40 

 hours per acre are shown between machine and hand methods on 

 the same areas, and greater increases on the larger a-reas. On 10 

 acres a total cost of $7.51 per acre for machinery :1s more than 

 balanced by the saving in labor. On the basis of 40 c(J^nts per hour 

 for labor as small an area as 3.8 acres will save enough labor to pay 

 for planter and digger costs. (Table XIX.) 



While planting and digging show the greatest ; advantage in 

 labor saving in hand versus machine methods, other ^ operations — 

 fitting the land, cultivating, and cutting seed — sho\^ved material 

 savings. v 



