40 
BULLETIN 693, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
per acre pr ton, the contract labor is always given in money values. 
In order to obtain the total man-labor requirement for the three 
districts under consideration, this cash outlay for contract work has 
been changed to its equivalent in man hours by dividing through with 
a rate of 25 cents per hour. The hours of man labor reported in 
Table XXX represent the total man labor necessary in the pro- 
duction of an acre of sugar beets under the conditions that obtained 
in this investigation. 
Table XXX. — Labor required in producing an acre of sugar beets. 
District. 
Number 
of 
records. 
Acreage 
grown. 
Average 
yield 
per acre. 
Hours of 
man 
labor. 
Hours of 
horse 
labor. 
79 
58 
36 
1, 461 
833 
735 
14.85 
14.96 
13.62 
133.3 
130.8 
119.4 
98.5 
117.14 
Idaho Falls 
79.3 
The Provo and Garland districts have essentially the same man- 
labor requirements. Idaho Falls operators produced an acre of 
sugar beets with 11 to 14 less man hours than growers in the com- 
panion districts. It is of interest to note that the contract labor in 
the Provo area was about one-third thatof the other areas. The 
major portion of the hand labor at Provo was performed by the 
farmer and his family and, as has been previously pointed out, was 
accomplished at a lower cost than would have been possible if done 
on a contract basis. This practice is feasible only where the farm 
units are small. In the other districts the farms are larger than at 
Provo. 
The fewest horse hours were necessary at Idaho Falls and the 
most at Provo. This difference was due partly to the difference in 
acreage in beets in the different areas. More efficient use was made 
of horse labor on the larger beet tracts. The average acreage per 
farm in beets was 14.36 at Provo, 17.94 at Garland, and 20.40 at 
Idaho Falls. Larger crews were used in the Garland and Idaho 
Falls regions than at Provo, and this had a tendency to reduce the 
horse-labor requirement per acre. 
VALUE OF TOPS. 
More attention is being given annually to a better utilization of 
beet tops. This by-product is considered quite important by many 
growers. Other men attach very little value to them. In view of 
the fact that there is quite an appreciable waste under certain methods 
of handling beet tops, it is not surprising that opinions on the value 
of this feed should vary widely. 
The field estimates in Utah and Idaho dealing with this subject 
can be divided into three distinct groups. On many farms the tops 
