A FIVE-YEAR FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEY IN OHIO. 13 



|(),378. This investment, together with the farmer's own labor, re- 

 turned receipts amounting to $925 per year, $419, or 45 per cent, of 

 which were used for expenses in connection with the farm business. 

 A-fter deducting the expenses from the receipts, the farm income, 

 or the combined earning of the investment and the farmer's own 

 labor, was $506. With money worth 5 per cent, and this was the 

 average rate paid by those in the area who borrowed, the farm in- 

 vestment should have earned $319. This amount deducted from the 

 farm income leaves $187 for the farmer's own labor, or his labor 

 income. On the other hand, if the value of the farmer's labor, which 

 he estimated at $290, be first deducted from the farm income, there 

 is left $216, or 3.4 per cent, for the earning of the farm investment, 

 [f to the farm income be added $87, the value of the unpaid family 

 labor which was included as an expense, and then $14, the amount 

 of interest paid on borrowed mone}^, be deducted, there is left $579, 

 or the amount of money available for the use of the farmer and his 

 family. 



It is well understood that a very significant proportion of the 

 farmer's living is furnished directly by the farm. This may be 

 considered as an addition either to the labor income or to the per 

 cent on investment. Data from 16 farm families in Palmer Town- 

 ship show that the total value of three important items of the farmer's 

 living — food, fuel, and use of a dwelling — was $400 per family. Of 

 this amount $325, or $90 per person, was furnished directly by the 

 farm. The farm furnished in food products $215 per family and in 

 fuel $23, the use of the dwelling being valued at $87. Of the items 

 bought food cost $61 per f amih^ and the fuel $14. The average 

 family in this area consisted of 4 persons, or the equivalent of 3.6 

 adults. 



From this table similar studies of the summary of the farm busi- 

 ness may be made for each of the years over which the survey ex- 

 tended, and comparisons of the summaries, one year with another, 

 will show the main points of difference for the various years. 



The crop acreage did not vary more than an acre per farm from the 

 five-year average except in 1914, when it was 4 acres below the aver- 

 age, and in 1916, when it was 3 acres above the average. 



The number of producti^^e live stock increased 20 per cent during 

 ithe five years, and was accompanied with a change from sheep to 

 3attle, the number of cattle increasing 68 per cent and that of sheep 

 iecreasing 58 per cent. 



The farm investment increased each year until at the close of the 

 period it was $552 more per farm than at the beginning. The in- 

 crease in the amount of stock and the higher live-stock prices account 

 for more than one-half of this higher investment. 



