26 MISC. PUBLICATION 7 02, IT. S. DEPT. OF AGRICULTURE 



crops which probably would result from the 3-year rotation. No al- 

 lowance is made, however, for the possible decline in crop yields 

 arising from continued use of the existing cash-grain system. Data 

 shown for the beef -cattle feeding plans also represent results that 

 would be expected after the production systems were established. 

 During the change-over there would be some loss of net cash farm 

 income compared with that realized from the existing cash-grain 

 plan. 



Production plans 2 and 3 may appear more profitable than the ex- 

 isting cash-grain system, when compared on the basis of net cash-farm 

 income than they really are. It depends upon whether the farmer 

 will need to borrow money to make the change, or whether he will 

 use capital reserves that are drawing interest. If the farmer had to 

 borrow 5-percent money to make the new investments in limestone, 

 grass-seeding, hay-making, and silage-making equipment and to buy 

 the cattle, he would have interest costs of $282 for plan 2 and $328 

 for plan 3 under medium prices. These additional costs would reduce 

 the advantage of the beef-cattle feeding systems, particularly that 

 of plan 2. 



Farming systems like these set up under the production plan that 

 involve the feeding of beef cattle are often considered to be extensive 

 in nature compared with the cash-grain system. So far as the work 

 of an individual farmer is concerned this is not true. He would work 

 60 to 75 percent more hours a year in handling the beef-cattle systems 

 than in carrying the cash-grain system along, but for the most part 

 this would represent fuller use of available time. Much of the addi- 

 tional work would be on livestock during the winter, a slack season 

 on most cash-grain farms. Fewer acres of cash grains and more acres 

 of forage crops would reduce power requirements of the farm. They 

 would mean a 10- to 15-percent decrease in tractor hours — not enough 

 to warrant reductions in number of tractors or in the amount or size 

 of associated equipment. 



Sales of cash crops would differ under plans 2 and 3 from those 

 under the present plan. Elimination of soybeans from the cropping 

 system would mean that no soybeans would be sold under either plan 

 2 or plan 3. At present, 2,300 bushels are marketed. In contrast, more 

 corn and oats would be sold. The 2,265 bushels of corn now sold would 

 be increased by 275 to 360 bushels. Sales of oats would jump from 

 550 bushels a year to 2,400 bushels. 



A 1 GO-ACRE CASH-GRAIN FARM OF THE WESTERN CORN BELT 



Half the acreage of some quarter-section farms in the cash-grain 

 area of the western Corn Belt is in corn. The rest of the farm is used 

 for small grains, hay, and pasture. Acreages of crops on a nearly 

 all-tillable, 160-acre cash-grain farm of this part of the Corn Belt 

 are shown under plan 1 of table 7. The livestock system on this farm 

 is meager ; it consists of 5 brood sows from which 26 spring pigs are 

 marketed, 3 cows, and a laying flock of 100 hens. 



The soils of the 160-acre farm present no problems in production of 

 forage crops once the lime and phosphorus deficiencies are corrected. 

 Bromegrass and alfalfa in a mixture should do well. Market outlets 

 for the farm suggest that greater use of forages might be achieved 



