30 MISC. PUBLICATION 7 02, U. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 



butterf at were somewhat less favorable than assumed when based upon 

 historical data, the increase in net cash farm income would be substan- 

 tial. This greater net cash farm income is enough to justify the cash- 

 grain farmer in borrowing all the money necessary to establish plan 3, 

 if need be, providing he is free to change his system of farming and 

 has the ability to handle livestock. Annual interest charges could be 

 handled and the loans paid off within a few years. To accomplish 

 this, however, the farmer would work more hours than under the 

 cash-grain plan. His work hours would be more than doubled. As 

 most of the greater requirements for labor would come from the live- 

 stock enterprises, a large part of which would be winter work, the 

 farmer could carry the additional work load. Power requirements, 

 measured in hours of tractor use, would be about the same under plan 3 

 as under the cash-grain plan. 



About 950 bushels of corn would be sold from the farm under plan 3. 

 This would be 3,000 bushels less than marketed under the present plan. 

 Approximately 850 bushels of oats would be moved to market under 

 plan 3, slightly less than is-' sold from the farm under the present 

 system. 



Under plan 3 net cash farm income would be somewhat higher than 

 under plan 2. The feeding of a much smaller number of calves under 

 plan 3 than under plan 2 would reduce the cash outlay needed for 

 feeders by $2,150 under medium prices. This point deserves attention. 

 Because of this lower cash outlay plan 3 would be more stable at times 

 of serious breaks in farm prices than would plan 2. But the farmer's 

 work load would be greater under plan 3; it would be increased the 

 equivalent of thirty-five 10-hour days. 



Use of forage crops in farm production plans is not limited to sit- 

 uations in which livestock, particularly roughage-consuming livestock, 

 is handled. Legumes may be used as green-manure crops. Plan 4 

 of table 7 gives details of a production plan in which sweetclover is 

 sown in oats as a green-manure crop ahead of corn that follows the 

 next year. 



A 2-year rotation of corn and oats would be established on 125 acres 

 of the farm. In addition, 20 acres of clover-timothy meadow and 10 

 acres of permanent pasture would be available. Each year, 20 acres 

 of the land sown to oats would be seeded to a clover-timothy mixture 

 to be used for hay the following year. The remainder of the acreage 

 in oats would be seeded to biennial sweetclover. The sweetclover 

 would be plowed down the following spring and the land planted to 

 corn. Corn would be planted also on the 20 acres broken out of clover- 

 timothy sod every year. 



New investments necessary to establish the green-manure cropping 

 system would not be great. An initial application of limestone on the 

 145 acres of cropland would involve an investment of about $900 at 

 medium prices. A grass-seeding attachment for the grain drill would 

 be acquired. 



For present purposes allowances are made for 20 percent higher 

 yields of corn and between 25 and 30 percent larger yields of oats 

 under the green-manure system. On this basis, net cash farm income 

 under plan 4 would be a little higher than under the present plan; 

 both are based upon cash grain. Approximately 3,400 bushels of corn 

 and 2,400 bushels of oats would be sold from the farm. Compared 

 with the present plan this would represent a reduction of about 550 



