COST OF USING POWER ON WHEAT FARMS IN OREGON 23 
was somewhat smaller than the tractor farms, and with a group of 
selected nontractor farms which were of approximately the same size 
as the tractor farms. The data collected do not permit comparisons 
of changes which have occurred on the same farms before and after 
the purchase of a tractor, but the type of farming was similar and 
the division of the tillable area between summer fallow and grain 
crops was in about the same proportion on both tractor and non- 
tractor farms. 
On farms where tractors were owned the tillable area per farm 
averaged 173 acres greater than on farms where tractors were not 
owned. On 77 per cent of the nontractor farms the tillable area 
was less than the average for the tractor farms, but on 23 per cent 
it was larger. Since the cost per hour of tractor work depends to 
a large extent on the number of days the tractor is used, the cost 
per hour is higher on small farms than on larger farms, unless 
outside tractor work is done to offset the higher overhead expense. 
It is not always possible to increase the acreage farmed after the 
purchase of a tractor, but in the region under consideration many 
men have increased their_ acreage by renting additional land. Over 
the period 1920-1922, 54 per cent of these tractor owners rented addi- 
tional land which averaged 752 tillable acres per farm. 
The combined months of hired-man labor, family labor, and opera- 
tor’s labor averaged 28.6 months per farm on tractor farms and 26 
months on all nontractor farms, but the nontractor farms were 173 
tillable acres smaller than the tractor farms. On nontractor farms 
of approximately the same tillable acreage per farm as the tractor 
farms, the total months of man labor per farm averaged 29.4. 
Expressed in terms of tillable area per man, each man farmed 41 
acres more on tractor farms than on all nontractor farms, and 19 
acres more than on the group of nontractor farms that were approxi- 
mately the same sizeas the tractorfarms. (See Tables 22, 23, and 24.) 
On tractor farms there was an average of 3.7 less head of work 
stock than on all nontractor farms, and 6 less per farm than on the 
group of nontractor farms that were approximately the same size 
as the tractor farms. The average cost per farm of keeping work 
stock was $1388 less on tractor farms than on all nontractor farms 
and $317 less than on the group of nontractor farms of approxi- 
mately the same size as the tractor farms. On the other hand, the 
net cost of keeping work stock averaged $97 per head on tractor 
farms, as against $85 on all nontractor farms, and $85 on the group 
of nontractor farms that were approximately the same size as the 
tractor farms. On tractor farms the hours worked per head aver- 
aged 131 less than on all nontractor farms and 181 less than on the 
group of nontractor farms of approximately the same size as the 
tractor farms. On tractor farms the cost per hour of horse work 
was 4 cents higher than on all nontractor farms and 5 cents higher 
. than on the nontractor farms which were comparable in size to the 
tractor farms. 
Studies of the cost and utilization of work stock on tractor and 
on nontractor farms in other regions have, in many cases, shown 
a smaller number of hours of horse work per head on tractor farms 
together with a lower cost of maintenance per head. There appear, 
however, to be several reasons why the cost of maintenance of work 
ae .as0liewe ne, * ~~. see pees ene 
— a 
mad) ae +. 2 2. ue le ee eee ee 
OC Be Ore £m eee, er DR eR ee 
— tS ee eae —_— > 
