Mav. 1921. 



SCIENTIFIC AGRICULTURE 



201 



that tlie landlords have yet to pay depreciation on 



A COMPARISON OF RENTED AND OWNED DAIRY buildings out of that rent' it would bring their return 



FARMS IN B.C. t ^ i • i j i. <.- ii ..i, a- 



Table No 5 Capital invested to practically the same figure as 



Averages ■ Owners Renters the average owners get by operating their own farms. 



Animal ^ul^s per acre .'.' .'." ;.' '.'. V. ''.49 ^39 '^^^^e No. 6 shows a comparLson of farms according 



Crop area per man 17.3 27. s to Size and also the effect of diversification from dai- 



crop area per horse 12.4 i."i.3 rying on different sized farms. Groups 1. 3 and '> 



Average No. acres 63 82 „„ small, medium and large farms respectively in- 



iJve' stock Index .' .' !^ ! .' '. . !! ^99 104 ''!"^'''' farmers who nave diversified their farm opera- 



.Animai Units per Farm V. 32.3 31.1 tions. (ir in Other words, have received a greater pro- 



1]', Capital Bniidings arui Machinery 28 19 porUon of their faiTu receipts from cash crops than 



Operator's Capital $27.29x.it; $4,622.19 have groups 2, 4 and 6. Groups 2, 4 and 6 inclu.le 



[•"arm Receipts $ 5 192.94 J.^, 110.24 p.. „ ^i iv • i. i? i , • , 



Farm Receipts per acre $ 80.84 $ 63.41 f«™iei-s 0". the three size.s of farms who have spec.al- 



owners Int. on Investment at 7(/; and li^cd In dairying to a greater extent than groups 1, 



Renter's Rent i 1.929.23 $ 980.00 '.\ and 5. 



' ',, of Int. on Farm ('iipit;tl that Kent t • i 



equals 4 28 1" comparing the labor incomes of groups 1, 3 and ■ 



Labor Income $ 231.41 $1,238.93 5, it may be secu that t^e larger tihe farm the greater 



the labor income. This is due to the fact that the 



The owners have a greiiter percentage of capital in men on the larger farms operate at lower cost per 



iniildiiigs and iiiiu'lmicry in that the renters do not acre. Thev conduct a larger bu.sine.ss and redp the 



own huilduioN. The operator's capital is also less in benefit in increased labor income accordin<r to the 



case of the renters as they do not have capital invested ^\^^ of the business. The cash crops that /lave made 



in land. tbis result possible on the large farms are mainly 



A very marked difference is shown when we compare grain and hav. Mo.st of these large farms are located 



the owner's interest on Farm Capital at 7 per cent jj, the Ladner area. Grain and hay sold for hi"h 



and Renter's rent. The owner's interest has been prices during the vcar covered by this survey. Anot;ier 



allowed at ( per cent and the rent the renters pay ^.^.^^ ,„av not show such a marked difference in 



IS e.|iuil to 4-28 p.c. interest on Farm Capital. This favor of cas^h crop farmers. The farmers in that dis- 



accounts for t/ie ditferenee here. The difference in ^riet realize that such a practice deplet<-< the soil of 



labor income of the two jast about balances the dif- jt, fertility. Just to what extent cash crops of hav 



Terence between the < per cent l^he owners are allowed ^nd grain" may be grown without affectin<^ .soil fer- 



on their capital and the 4.28 per cent the renters pay fjiity ^.as not been definitely determined. Such prae- 



in rent. The conclusion one would draw from a study ^^^^^ ^j^^. „ot apply to other districts included in the 



of this table would be that from the standpoint ot survey. "However, other side lines, such as hog.s, sheep, 



financial returns as shown m labor income the renters poultry, or possibly fruit may be incorporated as cash 



have t/ie advantage. ,, . , ^, „ „ , crops to good advantage. The cash crops adopted 



Hate of Interest on Farm tapitalThat l^nrms IMurn. ^,,j,^,,^, ^,^ ^,^^^ j,,^ farmer's experience, the type 



We have found that several tarms ni the survey ^^^ ^^ji^ ^,y^^^^.^^^ .^^^^ ^^.^..^^^ conditions, 

 return a ininiis labor income; other farms show a 



very fair return. These minus labor incomes are the In comparing groups 2, 4 and 6, the groups whic/i 



result of farms not being able to pay interest on bave received a less proportion from cash crops than 



capital at 7 per cent. If t.he farms do not pay 7 groups 1, 3 and 5, it will be seen that the labor in- 



jier cent interest on capital, then what interest on in- ''omes do not increase as does the size of the farm, 



vestment: do tlicv return to the farmer? We jiave The farmers on medium sized farms Avho specialized in 



found that after' allowing wages to the farm operator dairying received a marked increase in labor income 



at the rate of $80 per month on a group of 37 farms "ver the same class on small farms. Those who ^lad 



thati the average rate of interest the farms returned large farms and specialized in dairying over 60 per 



was 3.8 per cent. This is very close to the return the cent made |)ractically the same labor income as did the 



landlords get when they rent tjieir farms, whicb is .same class on medium size<l farms. This would indi- 



4.28 per cent interest on capital. When we consider cate that it would have been a better policy in case 



EFFECT OF DIVERSITY ON SMALL, MEDIUM AND LARGE FARMS. 



Table No. 6. 



Crop Area 



