22 BULLETIN 1211, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
The migrations of 936 men in the 1921 harvest, and of 679 of the 
same men in the 1919 and 1920 harvests, are shown in Table 15. 
Eighty-three of the men who did not know what routes they would 
follow during the remainder of the 1921 harvest were not included 
in the table. Added to the 936, these bring the total number of 
men interviewed on this subject to 1,019. Of these, 376 did not 
work in the wheat harvest of the central Wheat Belt in 1919 or 
1920. Of the other 643, 263, or 40.9 per cent, worked only in the 
winter wheat; and 138, or 21.5 per cent, worked in both the winter 
and the spring wheat. One out of five of these transient harvest 
hands “followed the harvest’? northward. In 1921, 192, or over 
20.5 per cent of the groups, worked only in the winter wheat; 477, 
or 51 per cent, worked only in the spring wheat, and 267, or 28.5 
per cent, nearly one in three, made the trip from south to north. 
In considering the figures cited, it must be borne in mind that the 
entire group studied consisted of transient harvest hands. The tens 
of thousands of harvest hands whose homes are in the wheat States 
are entirely omitted from consideration. Of the entire harvest force 
working for wages, but a small percentage work in the harvests of 
several States. Of the group studied in the table, 49.5 per cent 
worked in but a single State in 1919 and 1920 and 42.4 per cent in 
1921. 
CONCLUSIONS. 
The facts presented in this bulletin suggest that advertising for 
harvest labor should be confined to the Wheat Belt and the Missis- 
sippl Valley. The bulk of the harvest-labor supply comes from 
States west of central Ohio. The portion that comes from the East 
is an insignificant fraction of the total harvest-labor supply. <A har- 
vest hand can not come from points farther east than Ohio and earn 
enough in the harvest to pay him for coming. Industrial workers 
in the East, such as factory hands and construction workers, should 
not be attracted to the harvest by official advertising. If they wish 
to come without solicitation, as some will always do, it is their own 
affair. But Federal and State officials should not attract them by 
advertising, in view of the heavy expense for travel to and within 
the harvest territory and the probable loss of half of their working 
time while in the harvest area. 
Special harvest excursions at reduced rates should be provided 
by the railroads, with round-trip rates, tickets to be good for return 
within 90 days of date of sale. In Canada a harvest hand can go 
from Quebec to Saskatchewan for the fare that it costs an American 
harvest hand to go from St. Louis or Chicago to harvest work in 
Kansas. 
A more comprehensive machinery should be provided by co- 
operation of Federal-State employment officials and the State and 
county agricultural officials for the redistribution of harvest hands. 
It is necessary to provide better facilities for helping the men to move 
on from one harvest job to another. The employment offices at 
resent functioning get the men out quickly to their first harvest job. 
3ut when the men complete their first jobs they are far from the 
8 It has been demonstrated that the labor supply available in the Mississippi Valley will care for the 
crop. See ‘‘ Sources of Supply and Conditions of Employment of Harvest Labor in the Wheat Belt,” 
U.S. Dept. of Agri., Dept. Bull. 1230. 
