22, BULLETIN 482, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
the amount of live stock kept. The stock-with-tobacco and the dis- 
tinctly stock types show higher yields than other common types. 
The fact that the dairy farms show a low yield of corn can not be 
explained unless by the fact that the records were few. The crop 
index wouid show that the productiveness of the farm increases with 
increasing importance of live stock and decreases with increasing 
importance of tobacco. 
IMPORTANCE OF RIGHT AMOUNT OF LIVE STOCK ON THE FARM. 
The fact that about half of the area of these farms is kept in blue- 
grass pastures makes the full utilization of such pasture a matter of 
greatimportance. The relation that this bears to efficiency isshown in 
Tables XVI and XVII. 
TABLE XVI.—Relation of utilization of pasture area to efficiency. 
Average 
Average 
Number | as farm | Feed cost! 1.5 
Pasture per animal unit. of asture | 2¢reS per | per ani- eta 
records. | P&sture | animal |mal unit. income. 
per ari- anit 
mal unit. ; 
2 OCTOS OF LESS eee O22 ee a See ee ee 42 es 4 $31 $1,114 
QA Ole ACKES ne oes ee ete ea eon a ine Sees ee eee eee 49 2.5 5 37 960 
SalsbO cA CTOSS Sees Saas Be) ee oy ee 38 3.6 9 38 711 
AWE OWS ACTOS Sa canes te pees sae e a= eee eee Se 17 4.4 8 45 311 
ONCE DACKOS aa Gas se Sock ess eee on Nae ye See 25 | 7.0 10 58 —93 
1 The feed cost here calculated inciuded the value of pasture, which ranged from $2.25 to $5 per acre 
and averaged about $3.50 per acre. 
TABLE XVII.—Relation of farm acres per animal unit to crop index and labor 
income on 121 farms similar in type. : 
| 
| Average 
- | Number | F Value of 
3 : acres per| Size of Crop Labor 
Farm acres per animal unit. . eles animal Boe, Loe inden linea 
2 Acres 
ess than 4a¢res: Ss — 2s) cee) 2223 ae 17 3.1 219 $138 115 $1, 381 
ANUO.D ACEOS Bact a Sarre ee toes oe eee 36 4.8 294 111 108 1, 006 
550 LO) O:9iACEGS C2 = am Saar ee renee 28 5.1 303 106 100 393 
MELQLO: 92 ACTES Pei een ete e Ben EAD eee 26 7.6 305 115 98 256 
O VETO ACTOS Soe oes a es eee eee 29 12.0 304 109 100 —214 
In the first of these tables is shown the relation of acres of pasture 
per animal unit to labor income, in the other the relation of farm 
acres per animal unit to these factors. The group of farms most 
heavily stocked has also the highest priced land and shows the 
highest crop index. This fact may explain why this particular 
group was able to stock most heavily. The other groups, however, 
do not show any marked difference in respect to the quality of 
the land, as shown by the values given and the crop index, and it 
would naturally be expected that each would show about the same effi- 
ciency in the utilization of pasture area. The failure to maintain 
efficiency in this regard has evidently been an important factor in 
