82 N. H. Agr. Experiment Station [Bulletin 260 



There were 110 farms that had only one factor np to requirements 

 and their average labor income was about $400 better than the previ- 

 ous group, but still minus. About one in ten of this group got a labor 

 income as high as $500. 



The grou]) of 112 farms that had two factors as good as average 

 provided labor incomes averaging $277, and the group with three fac- 

 tors average or better returned their operators an average labor in- 

 come of $985. The group in which every farm was as good as average 

 in size, efficiency, production, and price received for milk, comprised 

 only 37, but the average labor income for the group was $1,755. 

 Seventy-nine per cent of the number got labor incomes of $1,000 or 

 more. 



It is usually more important in the farm organization to improve a 

 factor that is very low than to attempt perfection with one that is al- 

 ready above average. The striking results from sorting farms with re- 

 spect to factors that are average or better are due to the elimination of 

 extremely weak s])ots in the organization and to a general summing up 

 of the several important factors that contribute to better incomes. It 

 :s unfortunate when a farmer, Avho has gained some success in develop- 

 ing a high-producing herd, gets so enthusiastic over the results that 

 he loses sight of similar advantages to be obtained from improvenuMit 

 in other factors like size or efficiency. Compared to improvement in a 

 Aveak factor, perfection is hard to ai)proach in any line ; the results will 

 be less striking, and the costs will be exaggerated. One of the advan- 

 tages to be derived from an analysis of normal conditions within a 

 region is to provide averages by which one may measure his failures 

 and successes. 



Table 72 indicates the results from a similar grouping of the farms, 

 but with three of the factors raised to 110 per cent of average. In this 

 case only 18 farms qualified with man work units per farm 454 or 

 more, man work units per man 254 or more, milk production per cow 

 5,665 or more, and price of milk sold not less than the average of all, 

 or $2.98. The average labor income for the group was $2,223, and 61 

 per cent of the operators received labor incomes of $2,000 or more. 



No one need doubt that additional advantages will accrue from set- 

 ting higher standards of attainment. In fact, the adjustment and im- 

 provement of all tlio factors in a farm business, ever cognizant of their 

 dependence on climate and prices, is a job worthy of the best brain and 

 brawn. 



COSTS AND RETURNS OF MILK PRODUCTION 

 Methods of Calculation 



Barn feed and bedding including concentrates, hay and other dry for- 

 age, silage and other succulence, and straw and sawdust were evalu- 

 ated by the farmer. Tlie j^rices used were the values on the farm for 

 home-grown croi)S (local selling pi'iecs less the cost of marketing) and 

 the cash paid for purchased materials. The feed and bedding were dis- 

 tributed to the animals using them in accordance with each farmer's 

 judgment. 



