FARM PRACTICE IN THE CULTIVATION OF COTTON. 3 
have shown that crop yields are far more closely related to and 
influenced by inherent soil fertility and by other farm practices than 
by the tillage methods. 
From such a study as this, therefore, it is not to be expected that 
a best method of tillage for cotton will be determined which would 
be applicable under all conditions and circumstances. This paper 
presents • a broad, general idea of what practices are employed in 
growing cotton under various conditions". It is highly probable 
that some practices found in one area might be employed elsewhere 
to advantage. The object of this publication, however, is not 
to recommend any certain methods for cultivating cotton, but rather 
to give the reader a detailed knowledge of the various practices which 
are employed in the different areas, in order that he may adopt any 
suggestions which might prove advantageous under his conditions. 
Table I. — Number of farms surveyed, with the average sizes of farms, average acreage per 
head of live stock, etc., in nineteen areas in the cotton belt. 
Region surveyed (fig. 1). 
Date of 
survey. 
Record 
taken. 
Land in farms. 
Cultivated 
area per 
head of— 
Land per 
horse. 
Cost of farm 
labor. 
County, State, etc. 
Area 
per 
farm. 
Area 
culti- 
vated. 
Value 
per 
acre. 
Cat- 
tle. 
Hogs. 
Culti- 
vated. 
Inter- 
tilled. 
Per 
day. 
Per 
month. 
A 
B 
C 
D 
E 
F 
Pemiscot, Mo 
Mississippi Delta. . . 
Robeson, N. C 
Mecklenburg, N. C. 
Barnwell, S.C 
Pike, Ga 
1914. 
Aug. 
July 
June 
June 
June 
July 
June 
July 
June 
Aug. 
Sept. 
July 
Sept. 
July 
Aug. 
Sept. 
Sept. 
July 
Oct. 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
25 
Acres. 
159 
1,316 
260 
172 
193 
144 
160 
222 
178 
356 
194 
408 
239 
179 
125 
210 
241 
299 
295 
Acres. 
147 
824 
123 
115 
130 
96 
83 
136 
85 
226 
174 
231 
163 
101 
62 
102 
108 
166 
130 
$108. 00 
55.00 
55.00 
120. 00 
34.50 
44.00 
41.50 
67.50 
54.00 
34.50 
146. 50 
30.00 
34.00 
22.00 
20.50 
85. 50 
26.00 
35.00 
97.00 
Acres. 
34 
16 
37 
12 
31 
22 
13 
8 
7 
19 
46 
18 
10 
12 
10 
7 
13 
7 
14 
Acres. 
7 
8 
7 
16 
9 
17 
4 
5 
3 
16 
12 
17 
5 
4 
8 
7 
15 
8 
16 
Acres. 
19 
19 
22 
24 
28 
27 
28 
17 
25 
20 
24 
26 
25 
34 
20 
15 
19 
23 
19 
Acres. 
16 
17 
19 
14 
24 
21 
21 
12 
22 
18 
22 
22 
19 
29 
17 
12 
17 
17 
19 
$1.15 
.90 
.70 
.70 
.70 
.80 
1.00 
.80 
.95 
.95 
1.30 
.70 
1.15 
.70 
.95 
.95 
1.00 
.75 
1.20 
$22. 50 
16.00 
17.50 
16.50 
15.00 
13.50 
g 
Tift, Ga 
19.50 
H 
T 
J 
K 
Giles, Tenn 
Bulloch, Ga. 
St. Francis, Ark — 
Ellis, Tex 
16.50 
16.50 
17.75 
L 
M 
N 

P 
Q 
R 
s 
Chambers, Ala 
Johnston, Okla 
Jefferson, Fla 
Lincoln Parish, La. 
Lavaca, Tex 
Houston, Tex 
Monroe, Miss 
Bexar, Tex 
15.00 
20.00 
15.50 
14.00 
15.50 
20.00 
16.75 
20.00 
GENERAL STATEMENTS. 
In all the general tables the areas included in this study are ar- 
ranged in order of rank in yield of seed cotton per acre. 
The facts presented in Tables I and II have little direct bearing 
on or relation to tillage other than showing the acreage of cultivated 
land and intertilled crops per horse and the price of farm labor. 
Indirectly these data have a very important relation to tillage, in 
that they show the general farm conditions and practices as found 
in the various regions surveyed, so that the purely tillage data as 
presented in subsequent tables may be better interpreted. The 
data presented in Table II will give some idea regarding the type 
