Lakes districts sustained heavy loss on account of spring frosts, which caught 

 considerable fruit in blossom. This loss was reflected in their labour incomes, 

 as is shown in Table No. 3. 



KESUI/T OF THE FARMING OPERATIONS BY DISTRICTS. 

 Table No. 3. 



Table No. 3 shows, by districts, the average result of the year's operations 

 of the farms studied. The labour income is shown with interest on capital 

 calculated at both 7 and 3%%. All labour incomes show as minus when 

 interest on capital was calculated at 7%, while they all show a plus when interest 

 was allowed at 3%%. This simply indicates that the average returns in all 

 districts were not sufficient to allow the higher rate of interest and still leave a 

 balance as income due to labour. 



The farmers of the Arrow Lakes group had small tillable area and a high 

 capitalization per acre. Their receipts were greater per acre, but the size of the 

 farms was not sufficient to bring the total receipts high enough to leave as good 

 returns in labour income as was secured on farms of the other groups which had 

 greater acreage. This disadvantage will be lessened as more land is cleared. 

 The farms of this district show the greatest minus labour income at 7% and the 

 smallest labour income at -3%-%. It has been previously stated that the fruit 

 farmers of this district suffered a loss owing to spring frosts. In the other 

 districts the amount of the minus labour incomes, when interest was calculated 

 at 7%, increased in proportion to the size of the farms. This was probably due 

 to one of two causes: either the land values were too high, or too high a rate of 

 interest was allowed on the valuation. The valuation of farms was based upon 

 current selling prices of farms in the various districts. It is realized that the 

 farmer who does the greatest amount of business should receive best returns. 

 Table No. 3 shows that, with the exception of the farms of the Arrow Lakes 

 district, the increased total farm business did not increase the return in labour 

 income when interest on capital at 7% was allowed. When the rate of interest 

 was calculated at 3%%, the returns as shown in labour income increased as did 

 the size of the business. Table No. 3 proves, then, that on the farms studied 

 during the year the average farmer did not make interest on his investment at 

 7%. The best farms of the various districts did make more than an interest 

 income, even when 7% interest on investment was allowed, as in their case 

 considerable farm income was left. This farm income appears as labour income 

 in Table No. 4. 



Table No. 4. 



The average tillable area of the best farms of the Arrow Lakes district is 

 much below that of other districts. Considerable acreage is yet to be cleared. 

 Along with this handicap, spring frosts reduced fruit yields. A combination of 

 the two factors resulted in low returns on even the best farms in this district. 

 In the Ladner district, the greatly reduced returns, as compared with Courtenay, 

 Salmon Arm and Chilliwack, were chiefly due to fall rains and drop in grain 

 prices. 



