This farm shows the possibility of profitable dairying on a small farm with a small amount of capital invested, and on which about all the labor is done by the operator and his family. Here, again, high business efficiency was shown in that operating expenses were but 33 per cent of receipts and the labor income was among the highest of the group. This farmer has to buy more than the usual quantity of feed, which cost him about $25 per cow. The receipts per cow were unusually high. This was due, no doubt, to high quality of cows kept and to the fact that he milked the cows himself. The milk was retailed at 8 to 10 cents per quart and the cream at $1 per gallon. This farmer raised 34 acres of tobacco, which he sold for about $500. He sold 5 cows for $55 per head and bought better ones for $65 per head. Sales from poultry were $80, and a colt was raised which increased in value $115. This farmer has been a farm laborer 7 years, a tenant 10 years, and an owner 8 years. He is now 40 years old. He owns 40 acres and rents 11 acres additional for hay. Twenty-five acres were devoted to permanent bluegrass pasture; the remainder, besides 2 acres counted as waste, were in crops. This farm was only moderately successful. Profits could have been increased greatly if the business had been made larger by increasing the income from cows. If the operator had hired a man he could have increased his herd to 20 or 25 cows and besides could have raised 5 to 6 acres of tobacco instead of 2. There were no receipts from hogs, although there must have been a large quantity of skim milk which should have been fed on the farm. Only $75 worth of skim milk was sold, showing that much of it must have gone practically to waste. This farm was operated by a tenant who had a half interest in the working capital of the farm, which included the investment in machinery, live stock, feed, and supplies, and cash to run the business. Business expenses were shared equally, as were also receipts. The tenant with the help of two year-hands and some extra labor performed the work. There were three work horses. Forty-five acres of the farm were in corn for silage, 33 acres in pasture, 2 acres waste, and 1 acre for garden. Receipts from other sources than dairy cows were mainly from young stock. There were no receipts from crops. THE FARMS THAT FAILED. The three unprofitable farms of the ten were inefficiently organized and operated. Apparently these farmers depended mainly on dairy products for an income; but as they did not stock their farms with enough cows to make it worth while to spend their time at dairying, there could be no other result than failure. This is strikingly true of farm No. 8, which could not be classed as a dairy farm except on the ground that the four cows kept were the main source of income. These farms kept no regular hired laborers and a very small amount of extra labor was hired. About the only comment that can be made upon these farms is that the operators were wasting their opportunities. They had fair-sized farms, but each was operating a small-sized business. The quality of the cows was poor, as shown by receipts, and no doubt much of the milk was wasted. The usual bluegrass farm in this section keeps from two to eight cows to supply milk to the family and laborers. It does not pay a farmer to give special attention to the dairy business unless there are a sufficient number of cows to warrant special equipment and the application of most of his time. He must develop and maintain a profitable market. If cream or butter is sold, the skim milk and buttermilk, if not sold, should be utilized profitably by feeding it to hogs. COMPARISON OF THE SEVEN MORE SUCCESSFUL DAIRY FARMS WITH THE AVERAGE OF TEN. It may be helpful to compare the average of the seven successful dairy farms with the average of the whole group of ten, with respect to the more essential factors, as shown below: 1 per cent net earnings is obtained by dividing the farm income (less the value of operator's labor and management) by the total farm investment. The average of operator's labor and management on the ten farms as estimated by the farmer was $766; on the seven most successful, $866. These comparisons illustrate many of the points discussed in the foregoing pages relative to the successful dairy farms. For instance, the average successful farm had the largest business, as shown by the size of farm, the number of dairy cows, and the working capital. On the average successful farm there were more receipts from crops and miscellaneous sources than were shown for the average of the ten farms. This indicates the greater degree of diversity on the successful farms. The most important comparison is that shown for the receipts per cow. It will be noticed that the average successful farm had much higher receipts per cow-$164, as compared with $126 on the average of the ten. ADDITIONAL COPIES OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM WASHINGTON, D. C. AT 5 CENTS PER COPY WASHINGTON: GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1917 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE BULLETIN No. 549 Contribution from the Forest Service HENRY S. GRAVES, Forester Washington, D. C. May 5, 1917 CROSSTIES PURCHASED AND TREATED IN 1915. By ARTHUR M. MCCREIGHT, Office of Industrial Investigations. Purchases of crossties were smaller in 1915 than in other years. The total number bought by all classes of purchasers was approximately 121,402,611. The inquiry covered steam railroads, electric railways, and light, heat, and power companies. No attempt was made to determine the prices paid for crossties, or the number of ties laid in new track, or to show separately the number of hewed and sawed ties purchased. The information was obtained by the Forest Service entirely by means of correspondence; and the total number of ties reported by the purchasers of all classes who sent the information requested was 97,106,651. The estimated total of all purchases was obtained in the following manner: The actual number reported by steam railroads was 88,498,655. The mileage of roads so reporting amounted to 78.46 per cent of the total mileage of the country. Assuming that the nonreporting roads made purchases in proportion to their mileage, or 24,295,960 ties, the total for all steam railroads amounted to 112,794,615. To this is added the number purchased by electric railways and light, heat, and power companies, or 8,607,996, and the grand total for 1915 is estimated to be 121,402,611. Table 1 shows the number of crossties purchased each year from 1907 to 1911, and for the year 1915, classified according to kinds of wood and arranged in the order of number purchased during 1915. The smallest number of ties reported purchased for any year since 1907 was in 1915. The figures in the table for 1911 and previous years were taken from reports prepared in cooperation with the Bureau of the Census. Statistics were not obtained for the years 1912, 1913, and 1914. 88010°-Bull. 549-17 |