56 



BULLETIN (r.4, V. S. DKPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 



the larger farms, but the advantage the smaller farms have in labor 

 expense is nearly overeome by proportionately greater expenses for 

 taxes, feed, ami water. 



The distribution of expense on farms of different size is shown in 

 Table XXVIII. 



Table XXVIII. Distribution of expenses on farms of different sizes in the irrigated 

 valleys of southern Arizona. 



Average 



size. 



Hired 

 labor. 



Family 



labor.' 



Thrash- 

 ing and 

 baling. 



Repairs 



on ma- 

 chinery. 



Feed 



pur- 

 chased. 



Taxes. 



Water. 



Miscel- 

 laneous. 



Tola!. 



Acrt s. 





















11 



$92 



$20 



$10 



6 



$140 



$38 



$18 



$58 



' $382 



20 



L38 



21 



16 



8 



116 



61 



33 



88 



483 



30 



152 



39 



.-,'.i 



9 



74 



91 



47 



86 



557 



40 



l'.il 



70 



77 



16 



72 



95 



58 



76 



65S 



62 



465 



115 



105 



16 



63 



129 



85 



67 



1,045 



80 



486 



81 



123 



16 



100 



1 is 



112 



135 



1,201 



101 



652 



161 



177 



21 



63 



194 



126 



63 



1,457 



137 



1,212 



140 



191 



40 



140 



243 



190 



229 



2,385 



160 



1 , 203 



211 



209 



44 



106 



281 



210 



97 



2,361 



244 



l.M 1 



177 



241 



63 



266 



382 



295 



308 



3,546 



530 



3,636 



IIS 



597 



148 



288 



842 



66S 



1,123 



7,420 



While it has been shown that the smaller farms do not furnish as 

 large a farm income as the larger farms, and do not pay as high wages 

 to the operators, it is yet possible to make incomes of considerable 

 size even on the small farms. This is shown in Table XXIX, which 

 presents the maximum and minimum farm incomes made in each 

 size group, and the percentage of farms in each group making a 

 farm income of SI, 500 or more. 



Table XXIX. — Maximum and minimum farm incomes made in the different size groups, 

 and the percentage of farms in each group furnishing an income of $1,500 or more. 



Size-group, acres. 



Number 

 of farms. 



Average 

 area. 



Maxi- 

 mum 

 farm 

 income. 



Minimum 



farm 

 income. 



Percent- 

 age of 

 farms in 

 group 

 furnish- 

 ing 

 incomes 

 of $1,500 

 or more. 



to 19 



54 

 45 

 54 

 84 

 103 

 75 

 47 

 39 

 44 

 50 

 32 



Acres. 

 11 

 20 

 30 

 40 

 62 

 80 

 101 

 137 

 160 

 244 

 530 



$2,621 

 3, 359 

 3,876 

 4,711 

 5,492 

 5,323 

 4,692 

 7,707 

 9,062 

 14,266 

 24,215 



$151 



97 



69 



25 



347 



88 



723 



834 



860 



385 



3,386 



5 6 



20 



15 6 



.■ 



29.6 



40 



27 4 



il in 79 



62 1 



80 



74 7 



81 to 119 



80 9 



1201.1 159 



92 3 





90 9 







20 





Over 320 



100 







Since in all tables hitherto presented the results have been average 

 results of all farms of a class, and therefore have been proportion- 

 ally influenced by the poorer farms as well as the better ones, and 

 since in all communities there are always a few farmers who fail, no 

 maitci- what the circumstances may be, it will perhaps add to the 



