BULLETIN 963, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGSICULTUEE. 



Lehi district. A fairly large percentage of the crop acreage at Lehi 

 and in the Garland section was under fallow. There was some fallow 

 land on the UTigated farms. This was due to previous crop failure 

 or to weed eradication. It may be assumed that the remainder 

 of the crops grown on the fallow land were produced under dry 

 farming conditions. 



Table III. — Distribution of farm and crop area. 



Items of comparison. 



Number of records , 



Total acres per farm 



Per cent of farm in tillable area. 



Per cent of farm in crops 



Acres in qrops 



Percentage of crop acreage in — 



Alfalfa 



Corn 



Sugar beets 



Potatoes 



Hay 



Wheat 



Oats 



Barley 



Fruit and garden 



Fallow land 



Beans 



Hay and alfalfa seed 



Miscellaneous 



Utah. 



Lehi. 



44 



59. 3.3 

 7.3.5 

 69.9 

 41.49 



21.7 

 .9 



17.1 

 2.3 

 6.9 



30.9 

 7.1 

 2.6 

 1.1 

 9.2 

 .1 



.1 



Garland. 



58 



92.98 

 70.3 

 69.2 

 64. 31 



21.1 



.5 



20.7 



.9 



.3 



29.8 



3.9 



1.6 



2.1 



18.3 



Idaho. 



Idaho 

 Falls and 

 Black- 

 foot. 



74 



79.29 



84.0 



78.0 



61.84 



33.9 



.6 



21.2 



8.4 



.1 



26.8 



4.6 



.4 



2.4 



.2 



Twin 

 FaUs. 



44 



75.33 



92.3 



84.6 



63.74 



21.9 

 1.0 



24.5 

 4.4 

 1.6 



27.0 

 2.0 

 1.7 

 6.9 

 .1 

 5.9 



COMPARISON OF FARM ESTIMATES WITH FACTORY RECORDS. 



Each sugar factory keeps a record of the acres planted to sugar 

 beets and the tonnage harvested on each farm. These figures give 

 not only the yield per acre for each farm, but also the average yield 

 for the total acreage harvested. It is therefore possible to check a 

 majority of the growers' estimates on acreage, yield, and receipts 

 for this crop with the actual acreage, yield, and receipts as shown 

 by the factory books. It has been the practice to discard estimates 

 which obviously contained grave mistakes. In this way reliable 

 figures are made available for comparison.^ 



In the former study it was shown that the average estimated 

 acreage per farm in the Garland district was 1.06 greater than the 

 factory record. There was not much difference in the average yield 

 as shown by the two methods in this district, and the cash returns 

 were not far apart. The Utah county area indicated a very striking 

 correspondence in the acreage and cash returns by the two methods, 

 and the difference in yield per acre was insignificant. The Idaho 

 Falls records included considerable variation in the yield per acre, 

 and this was reflected in the income as reported for this crop. 



1 See Department Bulletin 529, "The Validity of the Survey Method of Research." 



