RECORDS AND ACCOUNTS 



403 



their demands for labor in the later operations. The cutting of the 

 tobacco preceded the cutting of the corn and the husking or shredding 

 of the corn preceded the stripping of the tobacco. Had! the corn been 

 cut for silage, the harvesting of the corn and the tobacco might have 

 demanded labor at the same time. 



Hay harvest took the labor of the farm from the corn and tobacco 

 fields for about a week at the end of June. Hay crops differ with 

 respect to the time they must be harvested. The later in the season 

 of corn cultivation the hay harvest comes the less serious is the con- 

 flict with the corn crop. The cultivation of corn when it is small is 

 a slower process than when it has attained a height of a foot or more. 

 The amount of corn one can cultivate when it is small sets a limit to 

 the size of the corn crop. One can cultivate this amount at the later 

 stages and have time left for making hay. Hence the hay harvest 

 may come at a time when it can be counted complementary to corn. 

 A study should be made of alfalfa, clover, and other hay crops with 

 respect to the way hi which they can be fitted into a system of com- 

 plementary enterprises. If, for example, it should be shown that the 

 first cutting of alfalfa must be harvested just at the time when corn 

 demands its first cultivation, it would become obvious that to increase 

 the alfalfa crop will necessitate a reduction of corn. The question then 

 would be, "Which of these crops adds most to the profits of the farm ?" 



The next step in the study is to compare the relative profitableness 

 of the competing crops. The accompanying table illustrates methods 

 of comparing relative profitableness. 



METHODS OF COMPARING PROFITS* 



* Based upon records secured in co-operation with the 

 United States Department of Agriculture. 



These figures are for the same farm for which the labor distribu- 

 tion is shown in Figs. 14-19. In calculating profits on the specific 

 crops the general farm expenses were not considered. It is relative 

 profitableness, not the absolute net profit, which is compared. 



