Farm management

Front matter

Ciass Book.

.Au

{)OiPgllt]s^^_

Contents

CHAPTER PAGE

I What a Farm Is ....... 3

II Types of Farms 25

Chapter I

The common idea of a farm is that of a piece of land devoted to some agricultural use. We think of a farm mostly in terms of area of land, quality of soil, assorted crops and domestic animals, having, generally speaking, little conception of the really vital thing about it, namely, the adaptation, selection and adjustment of these factors which result in farm organisation. Much is heard about small farms, medium-sized farms, and large farms, yet the '^ large'' farm spoken of may be a small business, as compared with the business done on a ** small' ' farm. A potato-and-truck farm about one and one-half miles from Louisville, Kentucky, has an area of fifty-four acres, some of it under glass. Seven men are employed the year around and five work animals. One team is kept busy in hauling stable-manure from the city, while nearly every day some farm-product is hauled to market. On a wheat farm in a western State, two men and twelve horses operate about one thousand acres of land. The fifty-four-acre farm near Louisville, however, is the larger business, in that more capital is required to run it, the expenses are greater, and the gross receipts greater. The farm near Louisville is valued at $700 per acre, while the thousand acres of wheatland is valued at $15 per acre.

How the Census Bureau Defines a Farm. — The Standard Dictionary defines a farm as follows : **A tract of land under one control or forming a single property devoted to agriculture, stock raising, dairy-products, or some allied industry.'' Every ten years the United States Census Bureau, in getting the data relating to farming, has had to define the farm. Since 1850, when the first complete Census was taken, the definitions have varied, and for this reason it is difficult to use census statistics in making accurate comparisons and drawing conclusions relative to number and size of farms. The fundamental consideration, however, in making these definitions seems to have been that of an area organized under one management, the time given to operate it and the size of the income from it. The following definition of a farm was furnished to the Census enumerators of 1910. A farm for Census purposes is all land farmed by one person managing or conducting agricultural operations, either by his own labour alone, or with the assistance of the members of his own household, or by hired employees. The term ** agricultural operations'' is used as a broad term referring to the work of growing crops, producing other agricultural products, raising animals, fowls, and bees.

A farm as thus defined may consist of a single tract of land or of a number of separate and distinct tracts, and these several tracts may be held under different tenures, as when one is owned by the farmer and another hired by him: farther, when a land-owner has one or more tenants, renters, croppers, or managers, the land operated by each one is considered a separate farm. The enumerators were further instructed to list as a farm three or more acres used for agricultural purposes, no matter what the value of the product or amount of labour ; also any tract less than three acres which produced at the time $250 worth or more of products, or required the continuous service of at least one person.

Distribution of Farms According to Size.^ — ^In 1910, 6,361,502 farms were enumerated in the United States, of which 839,166 were under 20 acres in size; about an equal number fell into four groups based on the following area :

50-99 " 1,438,069

100-174 " 1,516,286

175-499 " 978,175

There were found 50,135 farms of 1,000 acres or more, that is, one farm out of every 130. Of every. 9 farms, one was less than 20 acres, four were between 20 and 100 acres, three more between 100 and 500, leaving the rest under 20 acres or above 500. The average small farm in this country may be considered about 30 acres, the medium-sized about 160, and the large farm about 500. In the best farming-regions of the

1 The Census Bureau listed the small areas tilled by croppers or share-tenants as farms. From the farm-management point of view, the cropper or share-tenant should, as a rule, be classed as a labourer rather than as a regular farm-tenant.

United States, the Middle West, including Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylvania and New York, the farms are medium-sized. Large farms are frequent in the semi-arid region, in the Pacific Northwest, in California, and in the Cotton States. Farms from 20 to 40 acres are principally in the South or are truck farms near the large cities.

The Farm a Human Institution. — The farm, however defined, is distinctly a human institution. It is one of the means by which a human being or a family makes a living. When a farm is run as a business, it may be considered a means by which farmers may demand a share in the products of society. Many farms, however, are not so situated that they can be made to produce profitably; those, for instance, on poor soils, or inaccessible to market on account of distance or bad roads, are likely to have small cultivated areas. Really in such cases farming is not, strictly speaking, a business — the main business being the cutting and preparing of lumber and other forest-products for the market, or perhaps grazing or mining. One or another of these factors accounts for the many small farms found in the isolated regions of the United States. In the mountainous parts of Kentucky, West Virginia, and Tennessee the average cost of transportation ranges from 25 to 80 cents per mile. In some districts freight has to be carried on the backs of mules and horses, or even by men, on trails over steep mountains. Being thus disconnected with the mechanism of commerce, and unable to compete for a share in market-products, the farms are relatively small, and the area cultivated is just large enough to produce food for the family and for the few animals kept.

Farms of three to nine acres in the United States develop also near large cities, where stable-manure may be had in large quantities, where there is a market for truck-crops, and where land is high in price. On the other hand, in the plains-region of the West, where the land is fertile and the rainfall low, farms of large area have developed. Where the annual rainfall is from 15 to 20 inches, on the high plateaus east of the Eocky Mountains, farms of less than 320 acres can rarely be made profitable ; those of 640 to 2000 acres, with the larger part of the area in native grass, are more reliable, and in a series of years will produce a larger average income than farms of smaller size with more cultivated area. Where resources for irrigation are available smaller areas are cultivated with profit. In regions where farm-organisation has grown out of the cattle ranch, the farms are often called ^'ranches." In the far West this term is the usual one to designate any agricultural project. Here a small poultry farm, for example, is styled a poultry ranch. The word is derived from the Spanish rancho, meaning primarily a mess-room, but used often in Mexico for a herdsman's hut; and so finally it came to designate a grazing farm as distinguished from a hacienda.

The plantation, a type of farm formerly developed in the Southern States, was large in area. The tobacco plantations in Virginia were from 300 to 400 acres in extent up to several thousand acres. The average size of plantation in the seventeenth century was about 700 acres. The tobacco plantation of that time required a large area of land for profitable operation in order to make new land constantly available. As the practice of keeping up fertility by means of fertilizers was unknown, and crop-rotations and turning under of green manures was not in vogue, when the land became **worn out^^ it was allowed to grow up in forest, and new tracts were cleared. Farther south, in the cottoncountry, plantations were still larger, since the production of cotton requires a more extensive system of agriculture than does tobacco. In 1860, the average farm in the South-Central States had about 321 acres, while in the North- Central States, the average size was but 140 acres.

The plantation as it existed for more than 200 years in the South was a most interesting and important economic and social institution. The spirit of independence and self-reliance developed almost to perfection among the fortunate owners of plantations. There was very little dependence on the towns for the handling and consignment of farm-products, or of goods produced in other parts of the world, and little need of the services of skilled workmen, or even of professional men. Thus the plantation was a sort of miniature principality, and the owner had the authority and the social status among his dependents that would naturally develop under such conditions.

But while the plantation in 1860 was commercially the most important farm-unit, only about six per cent, of the white population in the South were plantation owners, with slaves as labourers. In the hill-country, and in the narrow valleys of the South, some millions of farmers were operating small areas of land, and produced but little of value for the world-market. Many, however, were of the energetic and thrifty Scotch-Irish stock, and kept alive the small family farm — an institution which is winning its way under present conditions.

Cropper and Share-tenant Farms. — In the process of adjustment under free labour there has developed in connection with the plantation the cropper and share-tenant system. The cropper works a small tract of land in tobacco and cotton, and receives as compensation for his labour a share of the crop. As a rule the owner furnishes the equipment besides the land, directs the operations performed, and in many cases the cropper performs a stipulated amount of labour for the owner, such labour especially as is required for the general upkeep of the farm and its equipment. While, under the Census classification, the area farmed by a cropper would be regarded as a farm, in reality the plantation or farm employing croppers is in almost all cases managed by the owner or overseer; in many cases the cropper lives on the plantation. Some years he may labour as a cropper and others as a year-hand — from the standpoint of the cropper it is a matter of amount of wages. The regular farm-tenant, or renter, usually farms a larger area, furnishes a part or all of the equipment, and is not customarily compelled to work on demand for the owner. The land operated in this manner is properly a farm. Plantation farming seems to have developed only in such sections of the country as had an abundance of ignorant and cheap labour, or where slavery was feasible and was allowed. The character of the main crops grown, cotton and tobacco, and the climate to which they were adapted were important factors in its development. The season must be long to provide work through the greater part of the year, and the climate mild so that the housing of labourers may be inexpensive.

The Typical American Farm. — The typical American farm, however, began in New England, developed with the advance of population westward, and is the prevailing kind of farm in the Northern and Western States. It is a family farm, the work being mainly performed by the owner and his family. Any extra labour required is usually recruited from other farmfamilies, and the labourer thus employed becomes a member of the household and does not lower his social status in the community by working for wages. This is no doubt partly owing to the fact that working for wages is only a step to becoming a farm-tenant and possibly an owner. Thus the men who labour on such farms are intelligent, have initiative, take responsibility, learn to be self-reliant, energetic and thrifty. Because democratic institutions and customs prevail in such communities, men trained in this way find opportunity to employ their training in successful leadership along lines of industrial achievement and in the administration of political affairs.

The Real Nature of a Farm. — Having now examined the definitions given by such authorities as the dictionary and the Census Bureau, and having passed in review the main types of American farm, including the ranch, the plantation, and the market-garden, have we any clearer idea of what a farm is? All definitions are made for the purpose of clear thinking, and although in defining terms distinctions are more or less arbitrary there is always some fundamental mark of distinction which the ordinary mind attaches to the thing named. So in a farm there are necessarily two elements: (1) a portion, large or small, of the earth's surface, on which nature will, if properly encouraged, cherish some crop or some animal fitted for the use of man; and (2) a man to assist nature in that operation. The dictionary calls a farm * * a tract of land under one control, etc. ' ' Now it is this human control, this plan, or in other words this organisation, that forms the essential element of a farm as a means of making money or of making a living. Not alone the number of acres, the qualities of the soil, the climate, the place, but the management of all these factors by the farmer in such a way as to bring about desired results, determines the actual value of any given farm.

The same thing is true of other human institutions devised for the same purpose — a bank, for instance, or a shoe-store. The ordinary person's conception of a bank is that of a more or less substantial-looking building, with fire-proof and burglar-proof safes, and well-dressed officials at desks behind bars; the bank always seems to have plenty of money on hand, and on the whole banking appears to be an easy, clean, and generally desirable occupation. The vitally important concern of a bank, however, is the relation of size of loans to profits, the amount of cash to be kept on hand according to the requirements of the season of the year, the placing of its assets where they can earn most, the knowing how much to loan to a given person at a given time. These problems are the vital and significant things about banking.

The uninitiated see in a shoe-store an assortment of various kinds of shoes, and it might appear that to run a shoe-store successfully all that was. required of the manager was the keeping constantly on hand an assortment of goods likely to please customers. Probably this vague idea of this business and others is the reason why so many who undertake them fail at first, if not permanently. Success in the shoe-business depends on the ability of the manager to select goods which will please his customers, and in such quantities as he can dispose of at a profit. The climate is a factor in the shoe business as it is in farming, and a variation from the normal weather of a season subjects the business to danger of loss ; and unless these possible variations have been taken into consideration in fixing prices and selecting stock, the business under present conditions of sharp competition must fail.

In the same way the casual observer when passing by a farm is not likely to be impressed with the idea of organisation. The layout of its fields appears to be rather accidental. A few uncultivated patches appear here and there with no apparent reason. He is likely to think of the wasteful habits of the farmer as he sees implements scattered about, buildings arranged in irregular order, and possibly standing in a somewhat dilapidated condition. The manager of such a farm, however, may see it from an entirely different angle. In his mind the general appearance of the farm is merely incidental to its purpose, the arrangement of the different enterprises, and their equipment. The organisation of the farm does not show from the outside. The general plan, the balance between the proportion of different animals, or kinds of livestock, and the number of acres of each kind of crop he may grow and dispose of to advantage, are more vital than the outside appearance. The location of the farm and arrangement of its buildings may even appear bad from the standpoint of residence and city conveniences, while to the manager their advantages are known, and may have vital significance in determining profits. It is often the case, in fact, that a farm that has on the outside the appearance of being substantial and convenient in arrangement and proportion is not a profitable one. At the same time there is no reason why a farm should not both present a good appearance and be organised on a paying basis, just as well as a bank.

How Farm Organisation has Developed. — Many established enterprises, of whicli the farm is one, may be managed successfully by persons who are not conscious of any organisation or plan in particular. We all know good farmers who take pride in the belief that they follow no system or particular rule, who think they decide without logic or are undetermined in their activities. But when the actual practice of all such farmers in a given locality is studied and analysed, it is found that they carry on similar farm-activities during certain seasons, the limits of which are pretty definitely established, the quantity and kind of work done following a normal standard. This will be readily understood if we remember that the farm as a human institution is very old indeed, older than any form of government, or any kind of marriage now in use in civilised countries; and that its growth has been a continuous process, so that present farming practice is in reality a compound of traditions gathered from the remote past, influenced by local conditions, improved occasionally by bold experimenters, changed unconsciously along with other changing customs. Only recently has it been consciously modified by intelligent, scientific methods. Therefore as long as conditions remain permanent which have allowed a certain system of farming to become established as profitable, the only necessary thing in attaining average success as a farmer is to inherit the ways and customs of one^s father, or to do as the neighbours do.

In point of fact, American farm-practice is largely the result of combining the agricultural traditions of the early settlers with the practical experience of the Indians. In organisation and general management the modern farm has been greatly influenced by English agriculture. The English early brought in hogs, sheep, cattle, horses — all kinds of livestock and poultry, with the exception of the turkey. Most of the common grains, vegetables, grasses, and legumes were introduced from England. Of course all nationalities who helped colonise our wastes or had commercial relations with us contributed something, but English practice both in the details of management and in rural economy seems to be dominant. From England we get the principles of the rotation of crops, and the principles underlying the cultivation of the soil. The laws relative to holding and conveying land, etc., have their origin in the land-laws of England.

In New England the land was usually granted to some group of men who desired to form settlements. These lands were then allotted to individuals who had the religious, moral, and political qualities making them desirable citizens. The farms were small and situated near a town of which the church was the most conspicuous and important institution. Certain areas on the outskirts of the town^s centre were designated as commons. This grouping of agricultural areas around a common centre was necessary as a protection from the attack of Indians.

In Virginia land was more commonly granted to individuals who became proprietors of large estates. One of the best known of these was the Lord Fairfax estate, including the eastern panhandle of West Virginia and parts of Virginia. During the life of Lord Fairfax holders of land on his estate did not possess titles of ownership. Tenure was based on the payment of a small rent designated quit rent. Later, Virginia passed a law making the holders of land in this section legal owners.

Instruction by Indians. — Indian corn and tobacco, together with various garden vegetables, were grown by the Indians when settlers first came to America. The agricultural practice of growing maize was taught New Englander and Virginian alike by the Indians, although the white man did not become a willing learner until convinced that he could not live long on enthusiasm, or on the expectation of finding gold. The corn-land was cleared by ** deadening '' the trees, girdling them before the sap rose in the spring. The trees afterwards rotted, were blown down by the wind, and finally burned. Exactly the same thing may be seen on thousands of acres in the eastern mountains to-day.

The Indians planted their corn in hills, three to four feet apart each way, and were careful that the three or four grains in each hill were separated by half an inch or more, a practice whose full economic value has only recently been demonstrated by scientific agronomists. They planted corn, beans, pumpkins, and squashes in the same field, the cornstalk serving for the beans to climb on. They had devised the underground pit for storing both corn and vegetables, and the corn-crib set up on posts to keep out squirrels and other pests. Many a man now living, who was brought up in the pioneer settlements of the Middle West, remembers very vividly similar practices among white farmers. In fact many of these practices are still to be seen in up-to-date communities; and in the mountainous districts of the East the Indian method of cultivating the corn-crop is followed almost precisely, save that the ^* bull-tongue '^ plough, wooden harrow and corn-knife take the place of the shoulder-blade of the deer and crooked sticks as cultivating implements. The wooden husking-peg used by many boys on farms thirty or forty years ago was invented by the Indians.

Even the paled-in garden, so marked a feature of the farm layout in the eastern mountains today, was of Indian origin ; and the scarecrow, so conspicuous an object in many a small cornfield, undoubtedly developed from the Indian practice of stationing a boy on a platform in the centre of the field, armed with bow and arrows to kill or frighten away crows and other enemies of the crops. Tobacco growing, although later greatly modified, was directly learned from the Indians.

The Future of the Farm. — So the age-old customs on both sides of the world became blended in the common farming methods of the United States. But ancient as the farm is, it is still full of youth and promise. The scientific research that has turned the world topsy-turvy with its inventions and discoveries, and the social research that has begun to perform almost as startling miracles in its way, have only recently turned their attention to the problems of the agriculturist. Yet already, not only on isolated farms here and there, but in whole communities may be seen the changes that come from the free use of the power of steam, electricity, and gasoline, and also from a conservative development of co-operation and social action.

Thus a farm, considered as an outgrowth of the past, conceived in the light of its opportunities and possibilities for the future, is in a sense a living, interesting and complicated institution, worthy the best effort of mind and physical strength. Opportunities for larger profits, and the more general desirability of farming as an occupation, lie along the line of organisation in the light of a comprehensive knowledge of all the resources at hand.

LITERATURE RELATED TO THE SUBJECTS DISCUSSED

Thirteenth Census of the United States.

Economic History of Virginia in the Sixteenth Century — Bruce, 2 vols.

History of Virginia — Kercheval.

Corn Culture by the Indians — New York Bulletin.

Industrial History of the United States — Coman.

Rural Economics — Carver.

Letters from an American Farmer — Crevicoeur.

English Agrarian Problems During the Sixteenth Century — Tawney.

Chapter II Types Of Farms

In the chapter preceding this it was pointed out that the organisation of farms varies according to situation and historical development. In some places the typical farm is large, in others small; some farms derive nearly all their income from a special enterprise, such as wheat, dairy products, fruit, or fat cattle, others are diversified, deriving an income from several sources. We would naturally expect that the most successful farms would be those which had so adjusted their organisation as to secure the advantages of soil, climate and market opportunities.

It is of practical importance for the farmer to understand the conditions that have influenced the development of varying types of farming, and that have enabled such types to be profitable, so that he may have a basis for judgment in readjusting a type already established, or, in case he has occasion to decide on a type in new surroundings, so that he may use his judgment intelligently. Farmers migrating into a new country have, as a rule, tried first the type of farming and the farm-practice with which they have been familiar, with little consideration for soil, climate, or the market-factors that may determine success or failure. Gradually, and at considerable loss, the type of farming must be adjusted to these factors. Those who fail to make this adjustment will of necessity go into some other line of work.

Very few who are managing successful enterprises are conscious of the process by which successful organisation has been secured — of the failures and successes of those who have had a hand in building them. Just so in farming. Men have tried different ways of doing things — some fail, others succeed. In the end, those who happen to be most favourably situated, who have hit upon the right enterprises, and the right proportion in the adjustment of these to market-opportunity, and to the time available for handling them, will win success. Thus the type gradually evolves which is best adapted to any given place.

The farmer is familiar with the dairy type and the beef type of cattle ; with the draft-horse type and the saddle-horse type. The general meaning of ^^type'^ is well understood. When we compare farms from the standpoint of the means by which they are to accomplish results, that is, to produce an income, we naturally classify them in a similar manner. The fruit farm, the truck farm, the wheat farm of the West, the tobacco farm, the cotton farm of the South, the dairy farm of New England, Wisconsin, and Minnesota; the corn-and-cattle-feeding farm of Iowa and Illinois ; — all these are illustrations of various types of farming which have developed in the United States. When these classifications are made there is in mind a dominating or characteristic enterprise which makes one farm different from another. In a general way, livestock farming is characteristic of the northern zone of the United States. Going south, the proportion of income from livestock decreases, and that from products raised directly from the soil increases. It would thus seem that there were certain natural or economic advantages which cause the farmer in the Northern States to seek profits from livestock and in the Southern States from field crops. As will be seen in the further course of this chapter, this difference in the development of farming enterprises is in fact due to such advantages.

Such natural resources and factors as soil and climate would tend to make such differences in development permanent. Economic conditions being an important factor, such natural advantages will not of themselves insure success, yet certain unfavourable natural conditions are often controlled — for instance, the cattle-tick has been controlled in the South to such an extent that in many localities the raising of cattle has become profitable.

In order to understand the principles underlying the development of types of farming, attention is directed to regions where definite types have developed.

Dairying in Wisconsin.— In southern Wisconsin, for instance, the dairy industry has developed to a marked extent, so that to-day Wisconsin ranks first in the production of dairy-products. The industry is pretty well distributed over the southern half of the State, yet more concentrated, however, in certain counties. It is an interesting fact that within this area special kinds of dairy farming, have developed. At the present time the making of Swiss cheese is largely confined to the high, rolling land, rich in lime, found in Green, Dane and LaFayette counties, and the near-by region. The elevation above sea-level here is about 1,000 feet. The mean summer temperature is cooler than in lower surrounding altitudes. The summer rainfall is normally abundant, amounting to nearly four inches per month during the months of May, June, July, and August.

It is said that the same kind of cheese is made in Switzerland on similar soil and in a climate with similar characteristics. Nearly half a century ago the cheese industry started in Jefferson county, Wisconsin, but has shifted eastward to the cool shores of Lake Michigan where most of the American cheese is now made, and westward onto land rougher in topography and higher in altitude, thus having a climate somewhat cooler. On these limestone highlands all the Swiss cheese of the United States is produced. Probably the factor of land-value had something to do with this shifting, when the lower, more level, land became more valuable for a different type of farming. In 1875 Jefferson county produced more cheese than any other county in Wisconsin while to-day it leads the State in butter production and the cheese factories have been almost entirely driven out. Corn and silage encourages winter dairying and butter production while pasturage encourages summer dairying and cheese production. At present, more than two-thirds of the land where the Swiss-cheese industry flourishes is in pasture, showing that rough land, if adapted to pasture-grass, is about as valuable for this purpose as is the more level and rich land. There may be hundreds of localities in the United States as well adapted to this industry, but the facts given illustrate the point that a given farm-enterprise once started will tend to become established where conditions are most favourable for its development. Many localities in the United States might be pointed out where certain types of farming have been