CLEARING FARM LAND 21 



where necessary, increasing the total amount of arable land on farms in order to 

 obtain an efficient and economic family unit capable of using modern mechanical 

 methods."* 



In order to demonstrate the economic significance of adjustments in farm land 

 utilization through clearing and improvement, a dairy farm in the 100-139 acre 

 size group of the agricultural census was adjusted to the standard requirement 

 for a one-man dairy farm. The necessary adjustments and costs are shown in 

 Table 2. Boulders and stone walls were removed from crop and hay land for 

 about $500. Other open pasture was cleared of occasional bushes and boulders 

 for another $500 to furnish more improved pasture for a larger herd. 



Much the same type of comparison could be made with poultry farms, to 

 indicate the amount of improvement needed to develop poultry ranges. Also, 

 standards might be set up for fruit farms, showing the amount of renovation and 

 enlargement necessary on apple orchards; or for vegetable farms, to show the 

 probable extent of clearing and improvement work needed to build an economic 

 unit. Selected cases are presented to illustrate the effects on size, organization, 

 and farm income where improvement work has been done. The majority of 

 farms on which heavy equipment has been used for land clearing and improve- 

 ment in recent years are above the average in acreage, livestock numbers, and 

 volume of business. Many of the units are 2- or 3-man farms. Likewise, in the 

 future most of the improvement will probably be done on the larger than average 

 farms, to enable more efficient operations and to expand the volume of business. 



There is no reliable source of data for estimating the acreage of land in the 

 State on which it would pay to perform improvement work. The decisions in 

 this respect must be made on an individual basis, measuring probable costs against 

 probable benefits and considering alternatives. In many cases, the only possi- 

 bility for increasing the size of unit is through land improvement, because no 

 suitable land can be purchased. 



Costs of land improvement through use of heavy equipment will need to be 

 compared in individual instances with costs of expanding size of business through 

 purchase of additional land. If adjoining fields can be acquired at reasonable 

 prices and if this available land is well adapted to the use intended, purchase 

 rather than improvement may well be the choice. On the other hand, if addi- 

 tional land is av£.ilable only at a distance or at high prices per acre then purchase 

 is undoubtedly the more expensive. The persons interviewed in this study were 

 usuall}' of the opinion that it was cheaper to spend money on lands within the 

 boundaries of their farms than to purchase additional crop, pasture, or orchard 

 lands. 



The choice will depend upon the particular situation. The small farm with 

 limited acreage will not be able to make extensive additions to cropland or pasture 

 through land reclamation. If the farm is to be enlarged, purchase of more land 

 is the only possibility. The larger farm, with a woodlot, a sizable tract or two of 

 unimproved pasture land, or a swampy area — any one of which is potential crop 

 or pasture land — may be able to do the improvement work just as economically 

 as to buy more land. 



Costs and Returns 



In a majority of cases the costs of land improvement on the farms studied 

 were paid from current earnings and accumulated savings. Whether funds were 

 on hand or were borrowed each activity has to meet the test of the return that 

 may result from the improvement. Capital invested in land improvement work 



^Massachusetts Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 430, page 7. 



