A FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEY IN BROOKS CO., GA. 
21 
which equal but 80 per cent of the average farmer's earnings secured 
from farms of similar size. On the other groups of farms with in- 
creasing average crop yields, the index of earnings increased regu- 
D O XT %l O O 
Jarly to 110, while the corresponding returns on investment increased 
similarly from 2.9 per cent to 8/2 per cent. 
Table VII. — Relation of crop index to farm return* (Brooks County, Ca.) 
Crop index.a 
Number A ™^ 
Farmer's 
earnings. 
Index of 
earnings. 
Per cent 
return on 
invest- 
ment. 
Less than 0. SO 
13 
43 
21 
20 
69 
92 
104 
120 
$586 
70S 
SI0 
1,061 
80 
87 
108 
116 
2, 9 
0.S0 to 0.99 
5.6 
1.00 to 1.09 
1.10 and over 
8.2 
All farms 
106 100 
816 
100 
6.2 
a See dofinit Eon of crop index on p. 22. 
The close, dependence of profits upon crop yields can be shown 
more concretely by considering for each crop separately the relation 
between costs and yields. This relation is shown by Table VIII. 1 
In the case of every crop, as the yields increased the cost per unit of 
crop decreased regularly, while the profits per acre correspondingly 
increased. Thus, the cotton yields of less than 200 pounds per acre 
of net lint cost 11.0 cents per pound to produce, but this cost de- 
creased to 7.5 cents per pound when the yields exceeded -100 pounds 
per acre. The low yields mentioned show a loss of $1.03 per acre, 
while the high yields returned an acre profit of $18.19. The farms 
that secured the higher yields of cotton were the ones which also 
returned the largest net profits for the year's business. Thus the 
farms that secured cotton yields of less than '200 pounds per acre 
returned farmers' earnings equal to only 47 per cent of the average 
returned by all farms of a similar size, whereas the farms yielding 
more than -100 pounds per acre returned earnings 37 per cent larger 
than the average. 
1 It will bo noticed that the number of records for cotton and corn arc greater than 
the number of farms surveyed. This is duo to the fact that the costs of the wage crops 
have been kept separate from those of the croppers, since the two sets of crops are 
handled by more or less independent systems and are treated differently. Thus, many of 
the farms furnish two separate records of costs of cotton and corn. In this and one or 
two other tabulations these separate records have been treated as though coming from 
different farms. 
