451 8 B7 py i SOME TYPES OF IRRIGATION FARMING IN UTAH A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MINNESOTA By EDGAR BERNARD BROSSARD, B.S., M. S. | \ : IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY June, 1920 hata +o oe ae a ve te ane Jo) 2 FARMING IN UTAH By BE. B. BROSSARD | : | SOME TYPES OF IRRIGATION BULLE TIN- NON 177 Utah Agricultural College EXPERIMENT STATION Logan, Utah December, 1920 | = eS ee eee UTAH AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION BOARD OF TRUSTEES AL. Wide VEINS x 25ers Ss ce 2 Ne Salt Lake City Ji OURUN: DIR Noo Ni TE ag ne a Salt Lake City LOR BINZOIRING GS TO Ue ose ee eee a mee Se ee Salt Lake City JO HIN Co SRA Beit sero or, 0 a en ee eae) San nn ey ae eam Salt Lake City ANGUS OTs | WORTG Pie eae Oe Serie toe SR Re eee yee ee Ogden GHORGEL 25 OD Bisse oe eae ae tn rene ee Salt Lake City Avs Gis. BARRO RS ee io EN Per eee ERLE bap ene ERD eet Logan LOIS’ GC: ERAS B AT Tie a ee Re Sie Rl Ree ec Sa os Ip On 2 ee Logan ERAGE SEB aS DET NTS oe es eet pein onto ok a eee Pea Salt Lake City J OREN TD). PART RES Gas atlas gee oh te ein Ne Ha ee ee cae eM Brigham City Wes Sic SAINI HOIN ca k ie eat Wk asap eae Ne Ao Nag ee EITC a ee Fielding GRO Gs Wi SEK TDi a rea eae a ee ae aes ee Logan HARDEN BENNION, Secretary of State, (Ex-officio) -........_.. Salt Lake City OFFICERS OF THE BOARD A Wis. VISVATINGS soo 2 eae i ee ne he | Ain ea President JiOQUEUNG DDR NEO Ns eras Ne ae cee Spe Re ens Vice-President JOHINEIG: COB RANG 2h eae se ae, ee ee eee Secretary and Treasurer EXPERIMENT STATION STAFF E. G. PETERSON, Ph. D., President of the College HES) BPACRERAS se Ps VD peas ee ee ey Director and Agronomist WM. PHEERSON? BeSonic eet eee ee ee Geologist Bid EP REDERIGEKG SD ai Meee ae ee ee a eee Veterinarian Bigs WHSae iP nes Dee oo See: se Ee am eee a ae pede Ok Physicist Je GE GRE AN WS ea assoc cos eee ae een eee ae Chemist and Bacteriologist Woh CARR OIE Pn Dis Sere tenes a tet aes Animal Husbandman BYRON -ATDID IR WBE Se | ee aes eet eee Poultryman GHOR GER. bis, URS yb Wem eee nae peaet nse ee ee eee Botanist OPAWESTSFUACH IES UN VE aS s-eeeeee ee e Irrigation and Drainage Hngineer 1) Gee OPP YC DH Se) ea WD rp 2 athe Dye ee on ee eee ome tts Pere | gees Horticulturist DSi JEININEINGS =: Pe) i es termes eee enn eee ee ieee eT Soil Survey BUF Jie 351 CR VAGHU I BS Si 8g eee eee eae aes Se ee wa oe ee nore Range Management GHOR GE) STEIW-AGIRAR,. Mie tena eee Sete cesarean eer, Le ae eee ee Field Crops Ro: EG Pa ee ee i eee a gee, ee ee Human Nutrition | Dien 5 mp 8Y S41 @ hopop- aul Da] eo) ausa1 ©) oe eee gh ae ee ee ee Farm Management GHORGH: Bus€ Ad NIB Mae Ay = 2 eee he ire ee nae et Ee eee Dairying G..Ts ATR SIEGE eS Sete = ee em re, en errand Associate Chemist IG CIOS OY (CVG INO Mss IE IOs oe a I ee Associate Physicist By. as RIGEAR DS ieee ce-2 - seaeeee temas eee ere me eee Associate Botanist BIGANCEHIB COO PB RS sje. cesta eee Becca Associate in Human Nutrition HWZR ACG Sa CASE BOE pV ep ase eae ng eer ee Associate Bacteriologist M: DeTHONAS i BeSee BS Cae ae ee mre ees eee oe tee Associate Agronomist Ds Wi PAD MCAUN ReMi Se. aes ns eetn nL Nie ea eee Assistant Agronomist T. He ABBEES Maes eye eee ree See oe Be Ce Assistant Horticulturist ASE BRACKE SB Sa Oe ee eee Re ees Assistant Agronomist NADP JOUNID).« Wile ae ee ee Assistant in Chemistry and Bacteriology Ta: SES NIU EVERSON Assistant Botanist ARTHUR VIlE? 3B. Ss 2S ee ee Assistant in Irrigation NES EDGERSBEING BS ee ee eee ee ee Assistant Physicist SCOTT TSIWEINGS, Bint S eee See ere ee ee ee ee Poe Dae Assistant Physicist GosE. KINGS BeviSii 2 ee ee ee ee eee Assistant Entomologist A. 1S: WIESON BS ieee eee Superintendent Davis County Farm PHTER CNEESON. Bit See eee eee Farm Superintendent J. oR BITE I VGAING OBE oS ee eee ee Superintendent Panguitch Farm HERBERADSILOPINC Ke PB. iS se ee ee kaa een Assistant Entomologist BLANCHE-CONDIE PITTMAN, A. By.22... 22 Clerk and Librarian K By SAUIES a BeSs Se. ee eee ere eee eens Secretary to the Director IN. CHARGE OF CO-OPERATIVE INVESTIGATIONS WITH U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE lL; MeWINSOR: Ba Spe ees CEST pee, Irrigation Engineer DOGHMENTS U.V.StON Capeiontecon tT ann Pe 2 CONTENTS Page IPD LOIKEY CONE: (QKOTaN eh oh isis a 2 eke oo eee es See 2 TE BGCONS IEW G) CGO os ake IN Ec el a ee a ee 3 Menai eo tern) GO teri cummin Ses ee oe ee ee le 3 AM aay | Wareyey PU barpoyeye Cone. Je creat nyo eR ee ees es Be ee 3 COMMELIMODLOR shy Pes mOmen aE S202 oe Sie oe to ee 3 Purpose of this Investigation..-.............: ert Ue id be Ie, REE AE SE 5 Collection and: Preparation.of Datas-:.--_..-- 22 age Ween fete ter Ad SA 5 fader Parken ACNE mC OUNt ya rane fe et ee es ee. 6 IU GY SRN OEL: 5 eek ee ES a ae ate See eee RR ee: ae 6 EUG ictal ht) ee ea ee ee Po ee ee 8 a ee eee ee 6 (CHHOIDS nccsesccbstecis se tee he eee te ne eens ee a eee 6 PUN LESS Sosa Peace eae ie Bee pa Loe ett eid eee ee 9 MEV taal eV Oa be WSam AGlOVn<.c6.--. ese ea se ke te 9 IF I anaes re ae eee eae tena ere St Rea She ele ee ee es ek ee 9 PMbiihaie sem Olea l= DOC LS sewecenee est nae tee. cee ee) Pe CR oe 10 NO Say Sees Ma VV teens eee oe ee een 10 SR PaDCCLSE Vise OLACOS Sie ace inet sane Soe ees Ek ge SR ee koe te oe cae 10 JUDY SS WROS) ES wc Sahin Ae Cie es Gee Se Lee As SR, Fete ea 12 SRM sr Ole OLODS Ge Ho CO CK ss ees se any dee Ra fps 2 ie 0 ae 15 DIVersivysand, balance..of Harm) (Business: 223. ee ee a Size of Farm Business............... Roe re Lee ee eS EE REE ee Se ee 17 TE TeTeaY INCE Gl WORE ea ee EWES ea A a eR Se Spee ee ee OO ee 18 ESOT CHIT NESS Bate pee eee ten na ee hs Se ee Weta ta ee gs ee a ee U9 CANTER PE EEN ce a RS aN Oa oe A ee nae Oa ee a ae ee AU Majeraeineg alah eco ies Oe ee eee Sl ee eee Seek 20 SOM 2S ee es oa ee es ee ee ee eee 24 NationaleHonrests: and Public Stock Rangees:-... 2-2. --- 2-2 seccateecceeeecce- ook 25 SEE BOLT AUT Oh Th eee ene ee RE ae Bh oo 8 fe, eA ee cass Sas Ie 26 Mog: UP pan SOA valell Koya 2S eae Trey ee Oe eS Se: hoe eed ee ere 29 TMi) TRE OKO ee ee ok aN 8 eS, IES Se A a 2 nae ae oes ee ek Sey le 32 TAY IEEE ON TeSy a A eS el lie) et ep Oe ce 37 Witte Olean AICO mMtOdGS ran Gigktall OAC S:2+.- 225 2 he eee 38 and, Tenure .-...:. ee ee ee Bi a Sw aE ee ae ats Ges Beene 38 1Letiee! W/E IV faye a ep ae ee See ee ee 0S ae ee eee See eee 42 VIS aes MM EVE GT EY, oo AN OO 8 Ce a So ae ee See ee: ee ee > eee ee 45 TRUER enon” |e Neve) ere) aes See SNS Ls ne ee ere 8 oes ee 49 OUanteYs.Ol LPP AtLlOMy Water, GO. UW SCi coco soc ee occ uc edece coon cesccnsn-nevedeaes 50 RUVAEN ES TIE CHI Le) Cee pte ence ts ee ree diene a Fe Se et eee 51 ingirercar (Giesrebie oS oe ie Oe ee ee ee a re ee 52 TRESAED TRURO MES ee Se NS 8 ae a is Rees Sea at ea ee eee mae 55 SPWERY Ca hays SS ees Sat ES Re ee a oD 2B Ay Laan ees Sree ee 63 Beaver oavorsrO Oty. Witaib sess sce see ee 2 ee ee ee 64 Mammo rilete © OUMbY UCA DA... ses ccr a eee ee sa een 68 Sandy, salt wake: County, Utah-..2..--...-2222.22...-.-.- i BAn ls Bs Sr dtd. ie ha 70 IES EOP Mns THT, 9 OG OULINEY 0 UNGE Me aoe sen hoes ce ieee ei ccek a dua eece Soee copconereeuceseentca 73 Naot nonecar Ome COUNT Uae =n. 2. As ee 75 EMR Vem VET TO OHM ye MULAN 0 ae eee Senn a ce meneoptoaenacc> neveceustceutece 76 PENA GGT OV Oat Witchy COUNTY «UGA Merce. coc her oScrSoncds wacas anecewtensncnn-nt-aeba-ncoeecace 78 aie bay Eien ce Rae 3 vee oe ee a Yes eee a a ee a a ae ee ae te ee ee eae 81 oe SHEED DIG CRS STS gps eR a eee RASS oe eee 96 Sy a Pere Yao VG oS oe ee ee OE SL ee 97 JWEL ESE Ss. ht we Oe Fae Eels ial EO a Pe ee se Ce 135 SEN REHT GFE Pony) 2p eed ae Sg Iti gs Oa ae Oe § 1s ee 135 LESTE VS) S) AT get DE ea at EO A Rc eR eee ee ae SE 136 IEEE Coys) EL Bc) 1 CST 1a beh Ses ee ae ee ee Ak ae Pn 138 LEN WDYEe esa Te cn CE A Rone = Been ee Se Ae ee ee ee eo 140 ERRATA Page 16, Table VII, ‘“‘Receipts” from ‘‘Livestock’’ should be $782 in- stead of $798. Page 55, Table XXXVI, ‘‘Expenses” should be $882 instead of $1,882. Page 57, Table XXXVIII, under ‘Farm Capital’, ‘‘Machinery”’ value should be $531 instead of $542. Page 58, Table XXXIX, Miscellaneous receipts on the 10 better- paying farms should be $314 instead of $418. Page 59, Table XL, under ‘‘Farm Capital’, value of buildings on 10 better-paying farms should be $1,448 instead of $1,148, the value of livestock on the average of all 32 farms should be $1,584 instead of $1,534 and the total farm capital on the average of all 32 farms should be $12,057 instead of $12,056. The farm income on the 10 better-pay- ing farms should be $2,855 instead of $2,885 and Labor income should be $1,730 instead of $1,760. Page 98, Table II, ‘“‘Crop Acres per Man’’, on the 10 better-paying farms should be 42 instead of 14. - SOME TYPES OF IRRIGATION FARMING IN UTAH(’*) By E. B. BROSSARD Meaning of Type of Farming.—As ordinarily used ‘“‘type of farm- ing’’ suggests general contrasts in the nature of farm business. The bases used in making these contrasts are: (1) sources of farm income, (2) number of farm enterprises, (3) amount of labor, capital, and management applied to each acre of land, and (4) farm practice with reference to maintenance of soil fertility. When based on sources of farm income, farms are classified as grain farms, hay farms, fruit farms, dairy farms, etc., according to the proportionate magnitude of the in- come from the different sources. When the number of farm enterprises is used as the basis, farms are classified as specialized or diversified. When the amount of labor, capital, and management applied to the acre of land is used as the basis, farming is said to be either extensive or intensive. When the farm practice of fertility maintenance is used as the basis of comparison, farming is either exploitive or conservative. These contrasts, tho arbitrary and general, are valuable in suggesting the extremes of farming types. In this study, not only the extremes are noted, but some small differences and similarities in the combination and inter-relations of the farm enterprises are pointed out. Amounts and kinds of crops and livestock raised, purchased, and sold are im- portant as are also the amounts and combinations of machinery, build- ings, land, water, labor, and management. Therefore, “type of farm- ing’, as used here means kind of farming, and in order to describe the kinds of farming practised in these areas in Utah, more detail is given than is ordinarily suggested by the phrase ‘type of farming.’’ The Ideal Type of Farming.—The ideal type of farming for any community at any one time is that which combines crops, livestock, machinery, buildings, land, water, labor, and management- of such kinds and grades, and in such amounts, numbers and proportions, and in such ways as to yield the highest longtime average net returns for each unit of management or for each manager. It is perfectly obvious that the farmer is not an independent, isolat- ed individual, but a cooperating member of society. The farmer’s business is not an independent one, but in these days of commercial agriculture, is dependent to a great extent upon the nation and society. Each farmer is a member of the present system of ‘Individual Ex- change-Cooperation” (2) and all of the cooperating parties are entitled to consideration as factors in determining the ideal type of farming. There are cases where the immediate interests of the farmer are not in harmony with the best interests of the nation and society generally. The fact that the farmer is a member of our competitive society must not be overlooked. The farmer desires to obtain as much for his wages of labor, wages of management, and pay for risk or responsibil- ity taken, as he can get legitimately. In other words the farmer wishes the largest profits possible. In so far as the acts of the individual farmer, in seeking the largest possible profits from his enterprises, are in harmony with the best interests of the nation and society generally, it is to the advantage of the nation and society to permit him to attain his ambition. Competition of Types. of Farming.—Since so many conflicting factors contribute to the establishment of farming practice that no one (1)Presented as a thesis in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the doctors degree (Ph. D.) at the University of Minnesota. (2) Raylor“E: Me, and Adams, HB. C., Prin. of Econ. (1918), p. 12, Fifth Ed., Ann Arbor, Mich. 4 Bulletin No. 177 can hope to give proper consideration to all of them, it is impossible to tell the best type of farming for a given region without its being tried. In this study only the most conspicuous factors are considered The effects of individual factors and sets of factors are different in dif- ferent districts. The effects of similar factors often vary even for two adjoining farms. It is likely that the types of farming practised in the areas investi- gated are, in general, the best since they are the results of fifty or more years of experience of the farmers of these areas. A half century ago these farmers, or their predecessors, obtained certain definite lands with given natural and economic conditions. As a result of their combined experiences, with the various crop and livestock enterprises, they were. in 1914, 1915, and 1916, following the practices described in this thesis. Perhaps the chief factors in determining the type of farming in any region are the natural factors such as (1) climate, (2) soil, and (3) topography; but the economic factors of (1) demand, (2) supply, and (3) transportation, often established a type of farming in a community in spite of natural advantages and disadvantages. ; The usual condition is not a given farmer seeking a certain sort of farm, but a particular farmer on a given farm desiring to know the proper type of farming. The important thing, therefore, is to learn of as many factors as possible,—if not of all the factors,—that influence particular types in individual areas, and to analyze their effects. The fact that the elements that determine type are subject to fre- quent change makes the proper balancing of them difficult. The suc- cessful farmer must be keen, alert, progressive and use good business judgment if he is to keep up-to-date in his type of farming. New things are constantly being tried by one or more farmers. They should be generally adopted only when it is reasonably sure that their adoption will make the farm enterprise as a unit pay better than it does with present practices. Nothing but experience can prove a type of farming best for a given farmer and a given farm, and even after a successful year with a given type, a farmer is rarely sure that his type is the best. He frequently wonders if he would not have done better had he followed another type, and no individual will be able to give him a_ positive answer either in the negative or affirmative, because of the innumerable variables that affect the solution of the problem. But a study of the apparent factors may be suggestive. Because of these frequent changes in the economic conditions of a community, the type of farming must change and accommodate itself to the new conditions. Present prac- tices have evolved slowly. Often ten, twenty, or thirty years go by before the best type is generally adopted by the farmers of a community. Some of the reasons why this is so are as follows: (1) the farm build- ings are adjusted to the present type and changes are costly, (2) the machinery may require replacement by that more suitable to the new type, (3) city warehouses may be made useless, (4) credit may be hard to get, (5) markets for the products to be abandoned may be well established causing difficulty in changing to the new type, (6) the farmers and the public may lack knowledge concerning the new type, (7) the difficulty of distinguishing a temporary overproduction from conditions that call for the abandonment of a crop or stock enterprise operates against rapid changes, and (8) the natural conservatism of farmers keeps them from making the changes hurriedly. Types of farmers are often more persistent than types of farming. It is evident that the best type of farming for a community this year may not be the best a few years from now. It is likely that before the majority of farmers have adopted the first readjustments they find it necessary to begin a second series. Sometimes a type pays so well or so poorly in a community that it is readily adopted or rejected hy a major- Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 5 ity of farmers. More often, however, there are several or many com- peting types in each community and slight variations in the conditions cause gradual changes in type. It is in the interrelations of all the factors both natural and economic that the type of farming is determined, and as a rule the type practised is not far from what it should be. Purpose of this Investigation.—Technically trained agriculturists have studied carefully many of the natural or physical factors of agri- cultural production. Some of the economic factors have also been analyzed and correlated. But not all of the interrelations of these factors and their effects on type of farming are generally understood. It is for the purpose of showing some of these interrelations and their effects on type of farming that this investigation is undertaken. Collection and Preparation of Data.—Liberal use has been made of publisbed and otherwise available material compiled by others, as is shown thruout the thesis by the numerous references. The data for the original investigation were col- lected by the writer and assistants. during the years 1914, 1915, and 1916, while he was in the employ of the United States Department of Agriculture and the Utah Agricul- tural College. The work was done in cooperation with the County Agri- cultural Agents and the Farm =a = Bureaus of the respective counties in which the areas are located. Ss Ls) ) summit ‘LAK a The areas investigated were chosen because they are representative of various types of irrigation-farming SSS and of varied natural and economic conditions in irrigated areas. in the Rocky Mountain States. Each area is discussed separately. Aver- ages are usually used as the basis of analysis. Fig. 1.——Location of the 8 areas Some farms were dropped from the investigated, Utah. investigation after 1914 and 1915 respectively and other farms were added to the groups after 1914 and 1915 respectively. Only part of the farms have been cooperating the three years. This does not, however, impair the accuracy of the data for this investigation, since it is not its rurpose to show the evolution of agriculture on the individual farms during this period, but rather the types of farming practised on these irrigated farms and the reasons for such types. The data presented here have been calculated from records of farm business which were obtained by the Survey Method(1). The smallest number of records obtained at any one place was at Wellington, Car- bon County, 1914, where only 26 were taken. The most taken was in the Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, 1914, where 72 were obtained. (See Table I.) In the following areas, records were obtained for the three consecu- tive years, 1914, 1915, and 1916, for the farm business year beginning January 1: (1) Beaver, Beaver County; (2) Hyde Park, Cache County; (1)Warren, G. F., Cornell University, Buls. No. 295, (March, 1911), No. 334, No. 344, (April, 1914); Spillman, W. J., U. S. D. A., Professional Paper, Bul. No. 529, (April, 1917); Thompson, E. H., U. S. D. A., Farm- ers’ Bul. No. 661, (April, 1915). 6 Bulletin No. 177 Table I—Number of Farm Records Studied Each Year by Counties, Utah Year |Beaver|Cache Carbon! Emery! Millard|Salt Lake|Sevier|Utah| Total 1914= | | sb0 TS See )* LEG area Senne camer cnn eet eel | 361 £90 Dio rtu a0 | e | | 48 GOP Seats ae aene | | 281 1916 .| 44). 32 | BA dl eee. | ete eee, | 308 Fotal, «(| Tse] = 2A 26 Iie i |S tal Gales Eee oT | 950 (3) Ferron, Emery County; (4) Hinckley, Millard County; (5) Sandy, Salt Lake County; and (6) Monroe, Sevier County. (See Table II). Table II.—Number of Farm Records by Length of Record - for each County, Utah Number of Farm Records for Each County ; Year —s | Beaver|Cache|Carbon|Hmery|Millard|Salt Lake|Sevier|Total 1914 BOT ile Rf26)- Seo now ees 6S I Sel 1914 & 1915 | 30 | 32 (a2 ile Ate aiar ee Sn (nite 1914, 1915 | | | | | | | | | | | and 1916 | 30 For the years 1914 and 1915, the center of the Sandy Area was Sandy, but in 1916 most of the records were taken at Draper, which is the township south of Sandy. The Wellington, Carbon County records were taken for 1914 only, and the Pleasant Grove, Utah County records were taken for 1916 only. A study of the type of farming in any area has the five following phases: (1) enumeration and description of the individual crop and stock enterprises, (2) determination of the magnitude and importance of each separate enterprise, (3) determination of the combinations of tue enterprises, (4) determination of the proportions in which the en- terprises are combined, and (5) analysis of the factors affecting the choice of the enterprises and their combinations. As far as practicable, in this study, the descriptive part is given first and the analytical part subsequently. The Hyde Park area is treated in detail and the other seven areas only briefly. HYDE PARK, CACHE COUNTY, UTAH Location.—Hyde Park town is in Cache County, in the North Cent- ral part of the State of Utah. It is situated on the east side of Cache Valley at the western base of the Bear River Range of mountains. It is five miles north from the center of Logan, which had a population of 7,522 in 1910 (4), and is four miles south from Smithfield, which in 1910 had a population of 1,865. It is four and one-half miles north from the Utah Agricultural College.( See Figure 1). Elevation.—The elevation is about 4,507 feet above mean sea level. Crops.—Table XXX in the appendix shows the total area of the 32 Hyde Park farms and the use to which each acre was put in 1914, 1915, and 1916 respectively. It thus shows the kind and importance of the crops grown based on the acreage harvested. There has been a slight increase during the three year period in the acreage of winter wheat grown, for two reasons: first, the price of wheat has increased more than the price of the other crops; and, second, dry-farming has been extended to land that formerly has been used only as grazing land. Otherwise the changes in land ownership and operation and in the (@)2 90> ULSs, Census: Table IiI].—Tenure and Use of Farm Land, 32 Farms, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914, 1915, and 1916 Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah Farms Reporting Average Acres(1), 32 Farms Average Acres(1), Farms Reporting Items = —— | | 3-year | | 8-year OR a Pel O el 055 1916 1914 1915 1916 Average 1914 1915 1916 | Average | | | | Farm Area.....- es 32 | 32 32 115. | 119 119 118 as 119 fas | 118 Owned by Operator | 32 |, 32 32 927 | 96 93 94 92 96 93 94 Yash rented land.....- ial See ae ai ial 16 15 50 39 45 | 45 Skare rented land.... 3 5 4 6 12 10 9 65 79 31 75 | Crone. see ee | 32 | 32 | 32 59 | 57 51 | 56 59 57 51 | 56 Pas Le. eee ws ee 28 Bala 41 | 39 | 40 (2) 47 42 | oe 44(2 Summer fallow.......... Rar ib le 35 | 17 a 15(2 52 78 | 65(2 Farmstead and waste 32 312 3 6 bat 4(2) 3 6 | saanee lt 4(2) | Diiavaucenian WenayGl aes {fe OEt) I Xt) | thy 34 | Ball ae 36(2) 109 118 a eu 114(2) Winter wheat...._..... 10 0 eles 16 iN 18 iy) 50 54 | 48 | 5 BORIC. oe Soe. 2 Oe =| 7 5 5 3 ih 3 ay, 14 6 | 12 Summer fallow........ fadioee 7 eh 13 ay) fae 15 (2 52 78 are, | 65 (2 | | Irrigated crop land... | 32 32 | 32 38 | 37 32 3 38 37 | 32 | 36 YN Wife Ne ea SS = ee ee 30 PP 30 3 12 14 | is 14 Alia, | alta 16 Timothy and clover | 10 LR} 6 2 + 2 3 8 aller! 8a 9 Wald hay, Cte. ff Bo eo 4 4 5 4 19 24 | 8 | uly Sugar-beets _..........- 29 297 | 29 10 9 9 9 na i OA 10 | 10 Oats ses. a2 ee 7s, a a 4 3 2 3 5 4 | 4 | a Spring wheat.......... 14 Ly Getgean (Me le 3 3 2 3 6 Baal 5. | 5 Alfalfa seed.........--. | | ala 0 0 0 0 0 12 15 | | 14(2) Potatoes) ove Die Ait alee tan 8 il il 0 fl 2 a | i | | | | | (1) Areas are given to the nearest acre. (2) Average for 1914 and 1915 only. No attempt was made to force the figures to check, 8 Bulletin No. 177 acreages of the various crops grown are not marked enough nor regular enough to illustrate anything but a satisfactory and stable condition. No radical changes have taken place in the three-year period of this investigation. It is true that the prices of farm products changed dur- ing the period, but the type of farming has not changed greatly. The prices of most of the farm products grown here have increased normally. The respective crop ratios have not changed much. Table III shows the tenure and use of farm land. The 32 farms have an average area of 118 acres, 94 of which are owned by the oper- ator, 15 cash rented, and 9 share rented. There were 56 acres of crops harvested on the average, 36 of which were irrigated crops and the remaining 20 acres of which were dry-farm crops. The remaining land ‘ was used about as follows: 40 acres for pasture, 15 acres for summer fallow, and 4 acres in farmstead, roads, and waste. The recording of-the pasture, summer fallow, and waste land in 1916 was not done satisfactorily and therefore is omitted. Because of this fact the three-year average area does not check, but it is nevertheless sufficiently accurate for the present purpose. Of the dry-farm land, 17 acres were in winter wheat, 3 acres in barley, and 15 or 16 summer fallowed. The 36 crop acres of irrigated land were cropped as follows: (1) hay, 20 acres divided as follows: alfalfa, 13 acres, timothy and clover, 3 acres, and wild hay and oat hay, 4 acres; (2) sugar-geets, 9 acres; (3) oats, 3 acres; (4) spring wheat, 3 acres; and (5) potatoes, 1 acre. That these crops are grown successfully is shown by the average yields as given in Table IV. Table IV.—Crop Yields on Hyde Park Farms, 1914, 1915, and 1916 EE eee eee Average Acre-Yields 1914 1915 1916 Rs eS S be S S s is 8 < S gE | 3 S Grop Re| B |e /8S|/8 | fe | Be | Ss bo eat MN —- s+ nm — al eer ye cae eocele ne ete ie ay om H a) H lax) tr} (aes 5 5 5 Tons Tons| Tons! Tons| Tons| Tons| Tons| Tons A Palle’ 2.2382 eee 2 4 3.8 3.6 G1 a esi) Mmciec [2a teh | 2.9 Cther say 2.6 2.4 2.4 2.2 2.2 2.82) 2.0 | >is Survar-beets =.= Tea Paes PSIG aloes || waG PASO |) abe 4 |) IGS Isjui, |) Jee Bul | Sue Bu; | Buc) Bur Bu (D iti Sige ee aes oe CO: GE eal 68 64 63 58 | 838 Trrigated Wheat......-- lt 32 241 36 44 36 34 32 Dry-farm Wheat......-- | 271 24 241 21 PL Ti TOP AS 20 Dry-farm Barley..-....- 281| 241; 2381) 11 131 8 | 251| 261 Irrigated Barley..-.---- | 281 241 231 41 ites! 60 | 251| 261 Potatoes) | 178 | 188 | 205 56 52 36 | 172 | 160 The low yield of potatoes in 1915 was due largely to the plant dis- eases, Fusarium Wilt and Rhizoctonia. All yields except that for spring wheat were lower in 1915 than in 1914. The yields for all crops except (1)Includes that grown on both the dry-farm and irrigated land. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 9 oats and barley were lower in 1916 than in either 1915 or 1914. This was due mainly to less favorable climatic conditions(1) and to plant diseases. However, the yields in 1916 are good compared with the average for the State and the country as a whole. The average yield of hay, potatoes, corn, winter wheat, spring wheat, oats, and barley in Utah is 184 per cent of the average yield of the United States and is 174 per cent of the average yield of the State of Iowa. (See Tables XXXVIII, XXXIX and XL in Appendix.) Pasture.—Table III shows that there are about 40 acres of pasture per farm. Almost all of this is permanent pasture. Most of it is on the wet clay-land west of the State road. The greater part of this land west of the State road is used for pasture or meadow. Whether it is pastured or cut for hay is largely a question of need of hay or pasture. Some of this land is cut for hay some years and pastured others. However, much of the land pastured cannot be cut for hay at all until it is drained. It would not pay to cut for hay some of the higher ground in the fields, unless they were leveled and irrigated, as the yield of hay would be too low. Usually, therefore, this land is either in permanent pasture or permanent meadow depending on the soil, topography, possibilities of irrigation, and need of either hay or pasture, on the particular farm. It would not pay to culti- vate this land in its present condition. Some of the permanent pasture land is on the foot-hills and mountains. This land has no other use to which it might be put. If it was not pas- tured or grazed it would have no agricultural value at all. Some of the dry-stock of the dairy herds and most of the meat cattle ure grazed on the Cache National Forest. This reduces the number of acres of farm pasture necessary to furnish summer feed for stock. It is largely on account of these pasture conditions at Hyde Park that the dairy industry has developed to its present importance and that the sales of cattle amount to as much as they do. Dry-farm Wheat vs. Barley.—Two important questions concerning dry- farm wheat and barley are: (1) Why are wheat and barley grown on the dry-farm lands? and, (2) Why does each have its present importance? The answers involve a number of factors, some of which are as follows: (1) wheat and barley are grown because they are the two most successful dry-farm crops(2), (2) wheat is grown as a cash crop, (3) the yields are usually slightly greater for wheat than for barley(%), (4) the price is generally considerably higher for wheat than for barley(4), (5) the cost of production is practically the same for wheat as for barley(5), and (6) barley is more difficult and disagreeable to handle. The question then arises as to why any barley at allis grown. Why is not all the land planted to wheat? There are three good reasons for planting some barley. (1) Barley is used as feed. (2) A better distri- bution of labor is obtained by growing both barley and wheat than by growing only wheat. When the feed or labor situation dictates the plant- ing of barley or some less profitable crop or no crop, barley is chosen. (3) Alternate cropping of wheat and barley may increase the yield, as barley is a more shallow rooted crop than wheat. Hay.—Table III shows that on the 32 farms an average of about 20 -acres of hay are grown, of which 13 acres are alfalfa, 3 acres are timothy (1)U. S. D. A., Weather Bureau Reports. (2) Widtsoe, J. A., Dry Farming—tText, (1911) pp. 234-243, McMillan Company. (3)See Table IV. Crop Yields on Hyde Park Farms, 1914, 1915, and 1916. (4)See Table XXIX. Farm Prices of some Utah Farm Products, Ap- pendix. : i (5)Peck, F. W., Minn. Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 179, (Nov. 1918), pp. 27-29. 10 Bulletin No. 177 end timothy and clover, and 4 acres are wild hay and oat hay. Oat hay is cut only in emergencies and the amount is negligible. Wild hay is grown on land that at present is too low and wet for cultivation. Some of it is wet naturally, but some is made too wet for cultivation by irriga- tion of the higher land nearer the mountains. The timothy and timothy and clover are grown largely for horse feed. As arule it is grown on land that would grow alfalfa but occasionally timothy and clover seed are sown en land that is slightly too wet for alfalfa. Some timothy and clover is also raised in crop rotation instead of alfalfa because sugar-beets are more easily handled on this than on alfalfa sod. Alfalfa is the main hay crop and constitutes about 65 per cent of the total hay acreage. On suitable land so situated as to be irrigable, alfalfa has no near rival when grown for feed for dairy cows or other cattle. Its feeding value and its high yields make it king of the irrigated feed crops. But now the question arises as to why these farmers grow on the average 13-15 acres of alfalfa and 9 or 10 acres of sugar-beets when much of the land that grows alfalfa might be planted to sugar-beets or vice versa. : Alfalfa vs. Sugar-beets.—Sugar-beets are usually grown on the best piece of land on the farm. From 4 to 6 times as much labor is put on each acre of sugar-beets as on an acre of alfalfa. For this reason it would be unwise to plant beets on inferior land. The reasons why 10 acres of beets are grown are given later. But why grow 13 to 15 acres of alfalfa? The farm family wants to make as much as possible out of the farm. To grow alfalfa for livestock that may be pastured in summer, and fed in winter, with a fairly good market for dairy products existing, gives a better labor distribution, makes it possible to do some productive work in winter, and saves paying out an excessive amount for wages for hired help in summer, and therefore nets a greater income, than planting sugar- beets on all of the good arable irrigated land. The present acreage of alfalfa is sufficient, when the other hay is added to it, to feed the stock inventoried and in normal years a small surplus is sold. In abnormally poor hay years, or years when excessive amounts of feed are required, the hay is all fed in the district. Oats vs. Spring Wheat.—Table III shows that on the average 3 to 4 acres of oats and 3 to 5 acres of Spring wheat are grown on the farms at Hyde Park. These crops are non-competing. Growing both gives a better distribution of labor than growing either one to the exclusion of the other. Oats are grown mainly for horse feed. Four acres at 65 bushels to the acre gives a total yield of 260 bushels for an average of 4 work horses or 65 bushels of oats each year for each horse. Not all of these oats are fed to horses, however, as some are also fed to cows in the district, and a few are shipped out of the district. The spring wheat is grown as a cash crop on irrigated land. It is sometimes alternated with cats and sometimes it is seeded on alfalfa sod the year before sugar-beets are planted. Alternating wheat and oats gives greater yields; and the planting of wheat on alfalfa sod allows the alfalfa roots and crowns to largely decompose, which facilitates beet cul- ture the following year. . Sugar-beets vs. Potatoes.—Sugar-beets and potatoes are crops that » compete for capital, labor, management, and irrigated land. The question arises as to why they are grown in the present proportions. Why is it, that on the farms reporting these two crops, 9 to 10 acres of sugar-beets and less than 1 acre of potatoes are grown? ‘The answer divides naturally into several parts. The 10 to 11 acres of sugar-beets and potatoes are grown instead of more acres of these crops largely because the farm family is the basic unit, around which the farm business is organized, and 10 or 11 acres of these comparatively intensive crops are about all that the average farm family can handle without hiring excessive amounts of Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah Ly labor during rush seasons. Some of the reasons why 9 or 10 acres are devoted to sugar-beets and only 1 or less to potatoes are brought out in the following pages. Table V shows that the average acre-value of sugar-beets for the three years, 1914, 1915, and 1916, was $79, and for potatoes $77, or. but $2 higher for sugar-beets than for potatoes, or 3 per cent of the average acre-value of potatoes grown. Table V.—yYieid, Price, and Acre-Value of Sugar-beets and Potatoes, 1914, 1915, and 1916, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah No. Average Average Acre- Farms = ; : r Value of Total Year enact Acre-Yield Unit-Price | _ Product. t ing Sugar- | Pota- | Sugar- | Pota- | Sugar- Pota- | beets | toes beets | toes ; beets toes Pree ene rps bo ha 7 Ss. Bu) $4.50) | S48 $8400) S77 [- OED £8 £635 TEs) a6) Bu.) 4.75 | 50 | com || 28 1916 i> weie a BCS) ed De as Lar Bb 5.50) | fete) Wale ie 27 Mverise or bie. three, years... 252" oe Pe | - $7 | haa Some of the potatoes were stored and sold in the spring while all of the sugar-beets were marketed directly from the fields in the fall. In 1914 the average acre-yield of potatoes was 178 bushels. The “average price of those sold was 43 cents a bushel. The total value of the product of an acre was, therefore, $77.- The average acre-yield of sugar-beets was 18.6 tons. The average price received for a ton was $4.50. Thus the acre-value of the product was $84 or $7 more than for potatoes. Seed potatoes cost about $5 to $8 an acre, or $3 to $5 more for each acre than sugar-beet seed, which cost $2.25 an acre in 1914. In areas somewhat similar to the Hyde Park district, the total cost of producing a ton of beets in 1914 and 1915, where the acre-yield was 16 tons or over, varied from $3.93 to $4.12(1). The net returns, including tops, varied from $6.85 to $9.23 an acre(1). The total water requirements for the two crops are about the same, but the best times for applications differ. The irrigating of sugar-beets is not such a precise task as irrigating potatoes. The labor requirements for potatoes are about 114 man hours and 115 horse hours an acre annually(2). The labor requirements for sugar-beets are about 143 man hours and 142 horse hours an acre annually(2)(%). Sugar-beets require about 26 per cent more man labor and 23 per cent more horse labor than potatoes. From 54.4 to 56.3 per cent of the total cost of producing sugar-beets is labor cost(%). The harvesting of beets requires about the same amount of labor as harvest- ing potatoes and both crops are harvested at-about the same time of the vear. The labor in the other periods is also competitive but more labor is required each period for sugar-beets than for potatoes. (1)Moorhouse, L. A., and others, U. S. D. A. Bul. No. 693, (July, USS); ps 41. (2)Connor, L. G., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 165, (Oct., 1918), Tables 15 and 6, p. 20. (3)Moorhouse, L. A., and others, U. S. D. A. Farm Mgt. Bul. No. 693, (July, 1918), p. 42, gives the annual labor requirements for an ~ acre cf sugar-beets as from 119.4 to 133.3 man hours and 79.3 to 117.14 horse hours. 12 Bulletin No. 177 The $2 excess in acre-value of product of sugar-beets over potatoes is only 6-2/8 cents an hour for the 380 additional man hours required to produce each acre of beets. : These facts seem to indicate that if all labor was hired the potato crop would be much more popular in comparison with sugar-beets. ‘The great amount of unpaid family labor at Hyde Park makes it more profitable to raise sugar-beets than potatoes because in raising beets the annual net returns for this labor is slightly greater. This indicates that the farm family is the basic unit of production and not alone the farmer or head of the family. The rather heavy compact soil at Hyde Park is generally better adapted to sugar-beet than potato culture. Another reason why sugar-beets are grown instead of potatoes is that there is but a limited local market for potatoes. The products must compete in distant markets. Beets are manufactured into sugar. This final product is a much more concentrated (less bulky) product than potatoes and can thus compete more favorably in distant markets than can potatoes. This fact has made it possible for the sugar manufac- turers to pay a price for beets sufficient to induce farmers to grow them instead of growing potatoes. The factories do not necessarily have to pay sufficiently high prices for the beets to make growing them as profitable to the farmer as the potato crop, because by their method of contracting for the beets they relieve the farmers of the risk of loss from low prices. Before the farmer plants his sugar-beet seed he knows what price he will get for each ton of his product marketed in the fall. The farmers contract with the sugar companies to raise a certain acreage of beets; and for each ton marketed in the fall they receive a contract price. This almost assures the farmer a profit from raising beets unless the year is so ab- normal as to cause a crop failure. In raising potatoes the farmer takes the risk of low prices as well as that of crop failure. The sugar manu- facturing companies have had the advantage of all increase in the price of sugar and have borne the risk of a decreased price. These companies, however, are more able to take this risk in speculating than the farmers and the majority of farmers are glad to have them do it, as farming is thus made more stable. Consequently farmers are usually willing to allow the sugar companies a reasonable remuneration for this service. The question that now naturally arises is: why are there any po- tatoes at all grown here. The main reason is that they are grown for home use and it is good business to grow them for this purpose even tho they are not as profitable a commercial crop as sugar-beets. When a very good crop of potatoes is raised there are more than enough for family use and some are sold, but usually this surplus is small. The growing of commercial potatoes in this district is sporadic. After a good potato year a few farmers are tempted to plant potatoes as a com- mercial crop. A few farmers plant them after alfalfa and before sugar- beets in the crop rotation because of the difficulty of growing sugar- beets following alfalfa on account of the undecayed alfalfa roots and crowns. Livestock.—Table VI shows the average number of livestock units(1) on the Hyde Park farms cooperating in this investigation. The units for 1916 are not calculated as the two-year average is sufficient for the purposes of this paper. There were 12 per cent more animal units on farms at Hyde Park (1)An animal unit is 1 cow, 1 bull, 1 grown steer, 2 young stock, 1 horse, 2 colts, 7 sheep, 14 lambs, 5 hogs, 10 pigs, or 100 poultry. The basis for such classification is the amount of feed required and manure produced. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 13 in 1915 than in 1914. There were fewer work horses and more pro- ductive animal units(1) on the farms. There was an increase on the average of 0.7 units of milk cows, 1.6 units of other cattle, and 0.2 units of other horses. There was 0.1 unit fewer hogs, but the same number of poultry in 1915 as in 1914. Of the 52 farms investigated in 1914, 1 had no milk cows, 1 had 1 cow, 6 had 2 each, 14 had less than 5 each, 7 had 10 each, 8 had more than 10 each, 2 had 20 each, and 1 had 24 milk cows. The one tarm that had a man hired by the year was one of the two farms that had 20 milk cows. All of the milking and other work on livestock on the other farm with 20 cows and also on the farm with 24 cows was done by the respective farmers and their families with extra help hired during rush crop-seasons. On the average there were 7.4 units of milk cows on the 32 farms which have cooperated for the three years. The most promising heifers are raised to replace the cows in the dairy herd and usually a few more are raised than are kept on the home farm as cows. In 1914 the net livestock receipts(2) for each $100 worth of feed fed were $107 on the 52 farms and $120 on the 10 better-paying farms. ‘the net livestock receipts for each productive animal unit were $60 on all 52 farms and $60 also on the 10 better-paying farms. The net cattle receipts for each head kept were $22 on the average of the 52 farms and $22 also on the average of the 10 better-paying farms. The milk receipts for each cow were $56 on the average of all farms and $62 on the average of the 10 better-paying farms. In 1915 the net livestock receipts for each $100 worth of feed fed were on the average of all 48 farms, $97, of the 10 least-profitable larms, $52, and of the 10 better-paying farms, $133. The net livestock receipts for each productive animal unit were $25 on the average of all 48 farms, $24 on the 10 least-profitable farms, and $57 on the 10 better- paying farms. (See Tables I and II in Appendix). Why do Hyde Park farmers on the average keep from 7 to 10 milk cows and why does the number of head vary from none to 24 on the individual farms? In general, the available pasture determines the Table VI.—Average number of Units of Livestock on Farms, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 and 1915 Average Number of Units of Livestock on Farms Kind of - 32 Farms es] - | = ili, Livestock 1914 i 52 | 10 Better-pay- and | Farms | ing Farms WG )abisy i] au abe bats Otay || 1914 Total animal units.......... ORS 18.4 20.6 | 18.8 | 29.3 Wonk horses: -.4:5-2.- 3.9 4.0 3.8 | 4.0 5.6 Productive an. units 15.6 144 WeeG.9) | 1458 23.7 IMIG & COWS nts 7.4 {foi 7.8 7.5 HO al Other cattle(3)...... 5.8 5.0 | 6.6 5.1 9.5 Other horses(+#).... Wey eat fs | eA, 2.1 SHIGE aiese ae tas oe | all =i ela 0 yl PORE cece 32.2. 6» | Am si | 6 Teal ROUT eae eee 5 | 5 | 5 | a 8 (1)“Productive animal units” includes all livestock except work stock. (2)The net livestock receipts are found by subtracting the sum of the purchases and what is on hand at the beginning of the year from tne sum of the sales and that on hand at the close of the year. (3)Includes dry dairy-stock and beef cattle. (4) Includes colts, ponies, and stallions. 14 Bulletin No. 177 amount of livestock kept and there are at present about as many units kept on each farm as the pasture, in its present condition, will support. Counting 7.4 units of milk cows and 2.6 units of young dairy-stock as being pastured on the farms, there are 10 animal units to 40 acres of pasture, or 4 acres to each animal unit pastured. The 40 acres of pas- ture includes tillable pasture, low wet-land, unirrigated bottom- land, and mountain pasture. There are about 2.8 acres of pasture for each productive animal unit. However, some of the meat cattle and dry dairy-stock are grazed on the Cache National Forest. From 1 to 3 acres of irrigated pasture is sufficient for an animal unit, but from 10 to 30, or an average of about 17 acres(1) of mountain pasture is neces- sary for each animal unit for the grazing season of 5 to 8 months. That the Cache National Forest is grazed to about its full capacity is shown in the paragraph on the National Forests. From personal in- quiries and observations extending over the period of this investigation, the writer is convinced that unless pastures are improved, but slight increases are possible in the number of cattle kept. The farmers know quite generally that it is to their advantage to keep as many as they have pasture for. The hope of the future is therefore in the improve- ment of the pastures and stock kept. Another factor which sometimes limits the number of cows kept is the number that can be milked by the average farm family, without hindering too much the work on cash and feed crops. This does not seem to be effective here, as the average farm family at home in 1914 consisted of 6 persons. Without neglecting crop work, education, or social duties, undoubtedly more than 7.4 cows can be milked without the aid of the farm women in doing it. The variation in the number of cows kept on the individual farms is also due to the available pasture. But it is also a result of the variations in capacity and efficiency of individual farmers and farm families. Per- sonal factors affect individual cases and thus affect the average of the district. These points are further discussed in the paragraphs on Popu- lation, ‘fhe Farm Fainily, and Farm Labor. The question arises as to why there are any beef cattle kept at all. Why are not sufficient dairy cows kept to utilize all of the farm pasture and available grazing land? As a rule the beef cattle are range cattle. They do well on the range but milk cows give but little milk if turned out on the range each morning. They have to travel too far to get to the range and when they get there, feed is too scarce to produce much milk. Therefore to utilize the range to best advantage range stock are kept on it. The reason that milk cows are kept instead of all range stock is be- cause the farm pastures and farm labor are more profitably utilized with milk cows than with range stock. It is true that the two farmers who have considerable numbers of range cattle have been making good labor incomes. In fact their farms have been classed among the 10 better-pay- ing farms each of the three years. But they have permits to graze their cattle on the Cache National Forest and the other farmers cannot gei such a permit readily and find it necessary therefore to keep dairy cows. This point is further discussed in a later paragraph. Colts are raised both for work and for sale. Hyde Park has somewhat of a reputation among farmers of Cache County for the grade Percheron horses raised there. Horse buyers from Los Angeles and elsewhere recog- nize that at Hyde Park good, sound work horses can be bought. The farmers take pride in good colts. Purebred stallions are maintained in the district. They are usually owned cooperatively. In 1914 on the average of all 52 farms there was 1 work horse to each 14 acres of crops. The same ratio existed in 1915. The ratios on the (1)Barnes, W. C., and Jardine, J. T., U. S. D. A., Office of Sec., Rep. INOS tllOF (Gilly eG pe cule Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 15 averages of the 10 better-paying farms in 1914 and 1915 respectively were 1 horse to 19 acres of crops and 1 horse to 15 acres of crops. (See Tables I and II in Appendix). Farms that have milk cows that are driven down and up the ‘“‘Cow Lane’”’ to and from the pastures, usually have ponies for the children to ride in making this trip. Only 5 farms have any sheep, 1 has but one sheep, 1 has 2, 1 has 10, 1 has 14, and 1 has 19 sheep, making in all a total of 46 sheep including lambs. These few sheep are kept as scavengers. They clean out the weeds along the irrigating ditches and fences and clean up around the farmstead. Hogs are raised mainly for home use. Most of them are bought as pigs, raised, and then butchered. A few farmers keep 1 to 4 brood sows and sell the pigs as little pigs, except enough for their own table use. One reason why more hogs are not kept is because all the farm homes and buildings are in town on town lots. A herd of hogs would be very unde- sirable under these conditions. Hens are kept mainly to supply the farm family with eggs and meat. The surplus eggs are sold at the town store. Unless poultry is fenced in, it may be a nuisance to neighbors where houses are close together, gar- dens not protected with chicken wire, and the garage door not always closed. Only 5 farms report having 100 hens or more, 2 of these have just 100 each, 1 has 130, and 2 have 200 each. All of these farm homes are out of the town proper, except 1 and that one is on the northeast cor- ner of a block and no other house is within a block of it. The hogs and hens are fed largely on table scraps, grain sereenings, skim milk, and other waste-feeds. Bran and shorts are sometimes fed to hogs for a short period before killing. The bran is obtained from grists. The wheat is taken to the mill and flour and bran brought back. Summary of Crops and Livestock.—The details of crop and livestock conditions at Hyde Park have been given in the previous paragraphs. There are three general outstanding features, however, of which special mention should be made. The first distinetive thing to note is that most of the farm land is irrigated and most of the farmers raise sugar-beets on a part of this irrigated land and milk a few cows. But the irrigable land and irrigation water are limited. Suitable pasture for milk cows is also limited. To extend the individual farm business by buying irrigated land means to leave some one else less irrigated land to operate. The same is true with pasture. Therefore to extend the individual farm business in either of these two directions means to eliminate to that extent the compe- tition of one’s neighbors. The second distinctive factor is the dry-farming practised by a few of the farmers. And one should note that there is only a limited amount of dry-farm land and this has already been utilized by farmers desiring to extend their farm business rather than by new men specializing in dry-farming. The third feature which deserves special mention in this summary is the range cattle business. There are only a few men who run range cattle on the Cache National Forest. This is because it is so difficult to obtain grazing permits, as the range is stocked to its present capacity. These three features are important. They are found in varying combinations in many districts of the intermountain region. But they are not found in any other section of the country com- bined in exactly these same proportions. Diversity and Balance of Farm Business«—Why do farmers raise sugar-beets and wheat instead of raising more pasture, barley, oats, and alfalfa as feed for livestock? While sufficient data to prove the point is lacking the obvious answer to the question is that livestock enterprises are not sufficiently profitable to cause the farmers to give up growing these cash crops for the other practice. On the average the combination is more profitable than the specialization. Raising cash crops utilizes the 16 Bulletin No. 177 available summer labor to good advantage. The sugar-beet crop, especial- ly, makes labor for school children. The combination of livestock and these -cash crops makes a more diversified and better balanced farm busi- ness and therefore a safer and more desirable business for the average farmer than the specialized livestock farming. In 1914 the average number of different crops grown on the 52 farms was 4.6. There were 3 sources of income the receipts from each of which amounted to at least 8 per cent of the gross farm receipts. These three ‘'were sugar-beets, $705; milk and its products, $400; and grain, $302. The average incomes from other sources were hay, $44; potatoes, $16; fruit and vegetables, $7; cattle, $227; horses, $87; other livestock, $68; miscellaneous receipts, $238; and increase in inventory, due largely to livestock and feed and supplies and improvements, $416. (See Tables VII in Text and I in Appendix). Table VII.—Farm Receipts and Expenses, Average of 52 Farms, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 WIGSCESUp US) sce eee eee ane $2,510 Crops 420k ee eee $1,074 Sugar=beets!). 222s: eee ee $705 Sinall-grains) {3.23.2 ee eee 302 IIE ase buts Soe a coo, Pei et Cee ee ean ee 44 Potatoes 1s ene se ee 16 Eruitsvand, Viereta ble sess ar eee 0 Ti VCS HOGI sesc- ee ee ko 2s ee eee 798 GUNS Cyovel Tom ke joneoxvoWnius eo seed ene eee sere ee 400 @aittle® 2.6 aR ELS oe eee eee 220 HIOTSES: 25 soeke eles ee oh e Pae ee 87 Other livestock. es eee ee ee 68 Mascelilaime onlsmre Cel Use e ese ee eee 23:8 ~ Increase in inventory (largely livestock and feed) 416 HRP OMS Sieh ee a ae te A ee Cec re cee eee 882 Dj SUS OTE a fos ge NR a ge aes PS 387 2.1) i Felelir> © Glee eal to sre lye 10 DO © ea Cee eee ee ere 183 Winp aidk fara yl ello Ora ees ee eee ere e 204 Taxes (personal and property including water tax) 109 Other Banmpexp CwmsS esi (ee eee 386 Of the total receipts, $1,074 or 43 per cent were from crops, $798 or 52 per cent from livestock and livestock products, $400 or 16 per cent from increase in inventory, and $238 or 9 per cent were from miscellane- ous sources, the main one of which is outside Jabor. Of the $882 of farm expense, $387 or 44 per cent was for labor. Excluding taxes the expense for labor including unpaid family labor amounted to 50 per cent of the total expenses. In 1915 the average of 48 farms shows that 35 per cent of the total farm receipts were from stock and stock products. (See Table II in Appendix). The 10 better-paying farms grew on the average 5.1 different crops and had 4 sources of income each of which was over 8 per cent of the gross farm receipts. The sources of income were sugar-beets $1,075, erain $891, milk and its products $597, and cattle $356. In 1915 on the everage of the 10 better-paying farms the receipts from stock and stock products amounted to 38 per cent of the total farm receipts. (1)Ineludes building, fence, and machinery purchases, repairs, and de- preciation; roughage and concentrates bought for feed; horseshoeing; breeding fees; veterinary bill; medicine; twine; threshing; fees; etc. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 17 The balance between livestock kept and pasture has been discussed in a former paragraph. On the average one work horse is kept to each 14 acres of crops but on the 10 better-paying farms there are 19 crop acres to each work horse. There are about 4.4 acres of crops to each productive animal unit on the 10 better-paying farms and only 3.6 crop acres to each pro- ductive animal unit on the average of 52 farms. This ratio furnishes ample winter feed for stock and allows growing cash crops as well. The question arises as to how soil fertility is maintained on these farms. If we assume that each animal unit produces one ton of manure ~a month we have 234 tons of manure produced (19.5x12—234). If now we assume that half of that is lost to the crop land because the animals are on pasture for-6 months we have left but 117 tons. Be- tween 30 and 50 per cent of this will be lost in handling. Not more than 60 to 85’tons of manure will be put back on the crop land. Since most of the manure is spread from the wagon box with a fork the ap- plications will be about 15 tons to the acre. At this rate 4 to 6 acres might be covered each year or 20 to 30 acres covered once in a five year rotation. But since the general practice at Hyde Park is to apply the manure to the sugar-beet and potato land and garden, each acre will get an application of about 30 tons every five years, or an average of 6 tons a year. With this practice some of the fields have grown beets each year for 8 to 10 years and the yields are as good if not better than when they began to grow the crop. No other fertilizer is used at Hyde Park. Size of Farm Business.—There is no measure that is universally used as a standard in determining the size of farm business. When by size, capacity in contrast with efficiency is intended, the most accurate measure is the total cost of operating the farm business. This includes (1) cash paid out, (2) value of unpaid family labor, (3) value of the operator’s labor, (4) interest on the capital investment, (5) all depre- ciation charges, and (6) any decrease in the inventory of feed and sup- plies(1). This measure of size has not been calculated for these records because in this study other measures serve the purpose better by being more suggestive. For this publication it is not necessary to have size so accurately measured because no attempt is made to determine the most profitable size of farm business. A number of other measures have been used that have considerable significance. In 1914 the aver- age capital investment in the 52 farms was $13,642. The average farm receipts were $2,510. On the average the farms contained 105 acres, 54 of which were in crops. The average size of farm business in 1915 and 1916 did not differ greatly from that in 1914. (See Tables I and II in Appendix). Where the farm business was not sufficiently large some farmers increased the size by renting additional land as shown in Table III. Undoubtedly other farmers increased the size of the farm husiness unit which they operated by purchasing additional land and livestock. As a rule a farmer who has a small business realizes that he might make more money if his business were larger, but often he is incapable of overcoming all the obstacles to enlarging the business. Some reasons for small farms here are revealed by the history of settlement. In the fall of 1859 Wm. Hyde (after whom the town was named), Simpson M. Molen, and Patterson D. Griffith, left Lehi, Utah County, for Cache County, for the purpose of obtaining farms and mak- ing home for their families. They arrived at the present site of Hyde Park, and found there a small creek flowing from the mountains which (1)Spillman, W. J., U. S. D. A., Farm Management Cir. 1., (Jan. DIAG) Dawa. 18 Bulletin No. 177 could be used for irrigating crops and for cullinary purposes. They used their squatters rights and staked out claims. After staking’ out their claims these three men returned to Lehi for tne winter. The exact number of acres first laid out is not known, but Wm. Hyde, son of the pioneer, estimated that not more than 50 acres were included in each farm as originally staked out. One reason for not taking larger farms was the scarcity of water. The little creek would not irrigate more land than was then included in the three claims. Dry-farming was unknown at that time and the possibilities of irrigation water being taken from Logan River were not then anticipated. Another reason is, that with the little machinery then in general use, 50 acres of irrigated land made a good family-sized farm. In the spring of 1860 they returned to their claims to find that another party, of which Robert Daines was a member, had squatted on the same claims that the Lehi party had staked out the fall before. The difficulties which arose over this situation were amicably settled by dividing the land between the parties so that each farmer had from 10 to 25 acres. This was about all that he could take care of under the then existing conditions. After the passage of the Homestead Act (1862) and the possibilities oft obtaining irrigation water from the Logan River were appreciated, tracts of 160 acres were homesteaded. But few of these large units remain intact now. Most of them have been divided and redivided. Some parents desiring children to remain near home when they married and began for themselves gave a portion of the farm to each child. Other farms have been left as estates and consequently divided among the children and later each piece sold as a separate entity. Other reasons why farms are not larger are the inability of the operators to handle a larger business because of old age, ill health, physical infirmities, lack of capital or credit, scarcity of labor, unde- pendableness of farm labor, and inconvenience of having hired labor around the farm home. At present it is common for a farm unit to’ be composed of 5 to 8 separate pieces of land which may be 1 to 8 miles apart from each other. This situation wastes labor but perhaps allowes greater diver- sity of farm enterprises as a partial compensation. The fact that farm families live in town and have the barns and chores in town wastes labor and reduces the acreage that a family can farm. In spite of these handicaps a fairly large farm business is done on the average farm at Hyde Park, and the labor income secured shows that the farmers are prosperous. (See paragraph on Farm Profits and Tables I and II in appendix). , Karm Machinery.—The machines used on the farms in this area are of modern type and construction. Irrigated grain is cut with self- binders and dry-farm grain either with self-binders or headers, and threshed by steam threshers. Mowing machines, self-dump hay-rakes, hay loaders, buck rakes, derricks, hay forks, hay nets, etc., are in gen- eral use. Most of the alfalfa is pitched on the wagon by hand and unloaded at the barn or stack with derrick and fork. No special potato or corn machinery is used, as these crops are not of sufficient importance to justify owning it. Most of the plowing is done with 1 and 2-bottom sulky plows. Some two way gangs and disk plows are used on the dry-farms. Usually three or more horses are used in plowing. How- ever, some plowing on the irrigated farms is done with two horses and the walking plow. Sugar-beet seed is drilled in in the spring. The farmers usually pay the sugar manufacturing company $2.25 an acre for seed and $0.50 an acre for seeding, or $2.75 an acre for seed and seeding. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 19 Table VIII.—Average Value of Farm Machinery, Hyde Park Farms, Cache County, Utah, 1914, 1915, and 1916. Value per Farm Value per 3 Year | | Crop Acre Average| 1914 | 1915 | 1916 1914 | 1915 Average of all 52 farms........ ed $7.81 Averaze of all 48) farms 22. $469 $9.02 Average of all 32 farms........ $421 407 461| $395 Average of 10 best farms.-.. 479 531 489 416 5.06| 7.76 Average of 10 poorest farms 408 444 405 374 | t.94 The beets are cultivated with 1 and 2-horse beet cultivators and are plowed out in the fall with beet plows. Table VIII shows that the average value of machinery in this district is about $420 to the farm and ranges from $141 to $1,622 to the farm. There were $5 to $9 worth of machinery for each acre of crops. The more profitable farms have more machinery on each farm and less for each acre of crops than the average farm. ° The average value of farm machinery on each farm in 7 areas in Utah in 1914 was $449(1). The farms with the larger amount of capi- tal have a greater numerical amount but a less proportionate amount of it invested in machinery than do the farms with less capital. The value of machinery for each crop-acre is less and consequently machinery cost for each acre of crops is less on the large farms than on the small farms. The efficiency of farm machinery increzses with an increase in the acres of crops(2). The perfection of machinery causes great changes in the type of farming. As the cotton gin, threshing machine, and steel plow have made great changes possible, so may Hae perfected sugar-beet thinner and topper when developed. Buildings.—The type of farming followed and the size of the farm business determine the kind and size of farm buildings required. The farm buildings at Hyde Park consist of dwelling house, cow and horse barn, milk house, small pig-pen, hen house, machine shed, and granary. On a few farms the cow barn is separate from the horse barn. Not all the farms have a milk house. The size of the milk house and cooling trough should be correlated directly with the number of cows milked and the care given the milk. The hen houses and machine sheds are usually very ordinary lumber structures. Since but a few hogs are kept a small hog-pen is all that is necessary. Some fairly large and well built granaries are found, some of which were constructed twenty- ‘five or thirty years ago when wheat was raised on the irrigated land as a cash crop. Some of these are little used now but others are used for the dry-farm wheat, spring wheat, and oats. It sometimes happens that the farm buildings determine the farm practice on a given farm at a given time. It has happened at Hyde Park, that because of insufficient storage space, grain and potatoes have - of necessity been sold in the fall’at harvest time when if the storage space had been available they would have been held until winter or spring. (1)Brossard, E. B., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 160, (Sept. 1917), De tA. Taple’ Sci, (2) Ibid., p. 35. FAR Bulletin No. 177 The value of the farm dwelling was estimated by the farmers on the basis of selling value as a home. The homes are not on the farms in this district and the two may easily be valued separately. ‘The other buildings were estimated at sale value for the purpose for which they are being used or for any other use for which they are appropriate. In 1914 only fifty of the fifty-two farms reported dwellings. The average value was $1,335. Dividing the total value of all dwellings reported by 52 gives $1,284. The average value of dwellings on 309 irrigated Utah farms in seven areas in 1914 was $1,056(1). The aver- age value of other buildings on the 309 farms mentioned above was $412. On the 309 farms the average value of buildings was $14 to each acre of land. The cost of livestock shelter is less on the large farms than on the small farms because of the greater number of live- stock units kept. The larger farms have better dwellings and better barns than the smaller farms. Climate.—The climate of Utah is the most important single factor determining the type of farming. Low precipitation makes a desert out of a strip along the western edge of Utah 50 miles wide and running north and south almost the entire length of the State. Lack of suf- ficient rainfall in the crop-growing season makes it necessary to irrigate in most parts of the State. Where irrigation water is scarce or unavailable and precipitation amounts to 12 inches or more, with other conditions favorable, dry-farming may be practised. There are perhaps 20,000,000 acres of land in the State that will never be cultivated because of poor climate. The climate, topography, and soil prevent the cultivation of millions of acres. The type of farming is of necessity adapted to the climatic conditions. Wheat and barley are important dry-farm crops because they are successfully grown with slight precipitation. Alfalfa is well adapted to dry climates where irrigation is practised and is ideally grown where, with other conditions satisfactory, the dry, hot, rainless days make it easy to harvest the hay. At Hyde Park(2) the mean annual precipitation is 16 inches (See Figs. 2 and 3), 7 inches of which fall during the six months from April to September, (See Fig. 4). The lowest and highest annual precipita- tion recorded are 13 inches and 26 inches, respectively. There are 62 days annually with 0.01 inch or more precipitation. The average mean annual temperature is 47.69 F. with a mean difference between night and day of 21.99 F.(3), (See Fig. 5). The average number of days in the growing season, between spring and fall killing frosts, is 151, (See Fig. 6). ‘The dates of the average and absolute last killing frost in the spring and the average and absolute first killing frost in the fall are May 10 and June 17, and October 8 and September 14, respective- ly. The average and absolute hottest days in the summer are 95° F. and 100° F., respectively,’ while the average and absolute coldest days in winter are -119 F. and -19° F., respectively. The mean tempera- ture for January, the coldest month of the year, is 24.49 F., and for July, the warmest month of the year, 71.59 F. The annual rate of evaporation from a free water surface is 45 to 55 inches. The mean humidity during the day is about 50 per cent, (See Figs. 7 to 12, inclusive). Topography.—Farming by irrigation is especially dependent on topography. The Hyde Park farm land slopes gently from the moun- tains west toward the center of the valley. This facilitates irrigation (1) Brossard, E. B.; Utah Exp. Sta. Bul. No: 160; (Sept, 1917); p: 14: (2)There is no weather station at Hyde Park. The data given here are recorded by the U. S. Weather Bureau for Logan, which is 4% miles south. (3) West, F. L. and Edlefsen, N. E. Utah Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 166, (March, 1919), p. 9. Some Types of Irrigation Farming tn Utah 21 Scale of Shades - In Inches- — Lee than S to 10 10 to 75 15 to 20 More Map Showing Annual Precipitation. Fig. 2.—Average Annual Precipi- Fig. 3.—Average Annual Precipi- tation, Utah. tation in inches in areas (Clea tS yl Bees Weather Bureau) investigated, Utah. Fig. 4.—Average Precipitation in Fig. 5.—Mean Annual Tem- Crop Growing Season, Utah. perature, Utah. on most of the land, but on some farms the slope is excessive for the pest irrigation. The meadows and pastures on the west side of the State road are level and wet where low lying, but dry where the land is slightly elevated or rolling. The arable land is easily worked with the improved machinery. The farmers of Hyde Park who have dry- 2 Bulletin No. 177 Fig 6.—Average Days in Crop .Fig. 7—Average Date of Last Growing Season, Utah. Killing Frost in Spring, Utah. Fig. 8—Average Date of First Fig. 9.—Latest Date of Killing Killing Frost in Autumn, Utah. Frost in Spring, Utah. stock or beef cattie, usually graze them east of town on the range afforded by the Cache National Forest. Some, however, who have an abundance of meadow-pasture that is too wet or too dry for other uses, keep the dry-stock at home on these pastures. In a general way topography determines the type of farming prac- tised thruout a very large part of the State of Utah. The topographical Some Types of Irrigation Farming tn Utah 23 Fig. 10.—Earliest Date of Killing Fig. 11.—Highest Temperatures Frost in Autumn, Utah. Recorded, Utah. Fig. 12.—Lowest Temperatures Fig. 13.—Mountains, Valleys, Recorded, Utah. Lakes, and Streams, Utah. (Dept. of Geology, U. A. C.) map, Figure 13, shows the mountains and the vallevs of the State. The mountains are not likely ever to be cultivated. This eliminates approximately 40 per cent of the entire State from cultivation. The only agricultural use for this vast area of about 20,000,000 acres is grazing livestock. On farms conveniently situated this tends to establish a type of farming based upon the grazing of livestock and makes the 24 Bulletin No. 177 agricultural value of the ranges dependent upon their productivity as grazing lands. It is probable, because of these and other conditions that the livestock enterprises will be of greater importance in the future than in the past(1). Especially will this be true on farms conveniently situated. Soil.—Table IX gives a description of the Hyde Park soil types and the number of farms reporting each type. _The descriptions are those given by the farmers themselves and are therefore not technical. Table IX.—Soil Types and Farms Reporting, 52 Hyde Park Farms, Cache County, Utah. Description Farms Reporting pec OWEN io ateel oy 60 a ee ye oe een ene ea nce eee 21 Oe Black vO amit: 2 ey eee TERS oss ae soe sce wepsceatean aes 10 Bu pS aliGiye WO ates et eee eee GUYS: Wee eth Dee SRE eeeTe anes 10 Art siGenavie diy, wile © au: 2eo 2 ee oe ae et SL ase sab a eS en 10 By i OMENS SR Ut TN Od I ea eee ce an Se aoe ema 5 GaeBla ck Clavig 170 aise eee ee ee ee 3 ATs). LEO UMA oo? SBC Nad iat ee Se SoS ne ee OE 2 ipommore WoO aida Os te lhigdal Byfo yeti ode ene eis Sel ee iach nee ter es ON are 2 9. Clay. and (Gravelly loam eee hee ee a 2 iOsyGravelly.7Claya doo alma. 52.5. ae Se eee 2 dL SnGravelilivan © lava Sabri Civ: lO ais eee meena Les 2 A237, GEReV'el (ae A cob OPE Tee a Lense ee ee a paw rare il There is a great variety of soil types as described by the farmers. The soil on any one farm may vary from heavy clay to coarse gravel. These conditions are typical of the entire Cache Valley. All of the farming lands of Cache County are in the Bonneville beds(2). (See Figures 14, 15, and 16). . The soils were formed from sediments deposited from this ancient lake. Since its subsidence they have been considerably modified by inflowing streams and by weather- ing. The soils vary from gravel, small gravel and light sand thru all grades to the heaviest and most tenacious clays. The upper benches of the deltas around the mouths of the canyons, and also the shore benches of Lake Bonneville, are covered with gravelly soils grading down into coarse gravel. These soils are well underdrained and therefore free from an excess of salts, but owing to the thinness of the soil proper, and to the difficulty of applying water and cultivating the soil, they were but little farmed until about 20 years ago. Since that time these soils have proved very productive both under irrigation and with dry- farm methods. The soils of the lower benches contain less gravel, but are sandy and of light texture. Upon the lower and more level parts of the valley there are great variations in the soils. In those parts farthest from the inflowing streams, where the water movement was slow, the soils are heavy and often contain as high as 50 per cent of clay. Nearer the mouths of streams, where the water movement was more rapid, the soils are noticeaply lighter, grading thru loam, sandy loam, sandy, or gravelly. Irrigation on the loose soils results in the transportation of consider- able salt to the lower and heavier soils, where it is most difficult to get rid of. In Cache Valley there is a large area of wet clay-land which is (1) Barnes, W. C., and Jardine, J. T., U. S. D. A., Office of Secretary, Dt INOw eavOR (Gil yl OnG asp pleomtoOn lias (2)Means, Thomas H., U. S. D. A., Bur. of Soils, Field Operations. (1899). Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 25 LEGEND — GREAT INTERIOR BASITY PROVITME ttt WESTERN MOUNTAIN REGIONS ROCKY MOUNTAIN VALLEYS it PLATEAUS -~ PLAINS oy : oy alana S| Fig. 14.—Extent of Old Lake Bonne- ville in Utah, where Soils. of the Provinces in Utah. Great Interior Basin Originated. (after Milton Whitney) (after J. A. Widtsoe) used for raeadow and grazing, the value of which could be much en- hanced by drainage and cultivation. Both black and white alkali are present in limited spots in the west-central part of the valley. ‘The : Ss black alkali is always associated LEe6END with the white alkali. Irrigation and | = @ aacnowmesremeD seepage waters are the sources of SF MMM) pevaicep sow surveys Sas a ES ercomorssance these alkali spots. metal Osta ele National Forests and Public Stock Ranges.—The control of grazing on the national forests by the Federal Government has been a benefit to the livestock business and farming in general and thus to the country as a whole. But when the act was --—- passed creating the National Forests, it was not known that it would, (1) eliminate free competition in the use of grazing lands, (2) establish a oe privileged class of farmers, and (3) determine the type of farming on many farms adjacent to the reser- vations. Yet this is what has hap- pened. This situation is admitted but at present no good solution of the problem is advanced. ae : : The Cache National Forest bord- nha Se aiveys ee ers the dry-farm land east of Hyde Park and includes the mountains. (See Figure 17). In 1916 there were 833,898 acres of land within its boundaries, 319,581 acres of which were ‘jn Utah and 514,317 acres in Idaho(1). Of the 319,581 acres in Utah, L (1)Kneipp, L. F., Third Annual Rpt. Utah Bu. Immigration, Labor, and Statistics, (1916), pp. 184-5, ‘‘Utah’s Forest Resources.” 26 Bulletin No. 177 52,515 were private lands within the forest and 267,066 acres were the net national forest lands. The average grazing season is 5 to 8 months long. On the average, for the three years 1914, 1915, and 1916, there were 21,750 head of cattle and horses, and 132,467 sheep and goats grazed on: the 833,898 acres less the privately owned land in both Utah and Idaho. In other words there are 40,674 animal units grazed here, or 1 animal unit to about 17 acres. This is the estimated grazing capacity of the forest(‘). This shows that the Cache National Forest is now grazed to its capacity. Farmers who had stock to put on the ranges at the beginning of regulation have the prior right today. They are desirous of increasing the number allowed them under their permits. New farmers want to get stock on the ranges. This is difficult. In order to do so they must get a permit from the Federal Government. There are three ways of obtaining permits: (1) buy one from some farmer at the same time as you buy his farm; (2) wait your TE RMU os : Ne turn until some one goes out of the REGION rit business, or so reduces his herd as to allow other animals on the range; or (3) await the improvement of the range, by the regulations of the Federal Government, so that its capacity is increased. By either the second or third method, but few stock may be added at a time, and in most cases it is poor economy to have so few head on the range. The deciding who shall have stock on the ranges, and how many each shall have, is a function of the Dis- trict Forester, who is an official of the Federal Government. This may or may not be a good thing. In the Wig. 17.—National Forests of past it has undoubtedly been a Intermountain Region. benefit. But all that it is necessary (after L. F. Kneipp) to point out here is that the Federal Government thus becomes a_ very important factor in determining the type of farming on the farms of the Intermountain States. This is particularly true in Utah and especially in Cache County and Hyde Park. Table X shows the value of all domestic animals on farms and ranges by counties in Utah, April 15, 1910. A comparison of Table X and Figure 17, giving the location of the National Forests, shows that more livestock are kept in the districts where the ranges are located. Population.—From the early settlement at Salt Lake City (1847) others soon developed both north and south wherever irrigation water was available and the soil and climate made agriculture possible. (See Figure 18). The settlement of Hyde Park began in 1860 or about 60 years ago. The climate of Hyde Park is delightful because of the light and infrequent rains, the clear and sunshiny days, the dry ground underfoot, the dry air, and the mild wind with a velocity of but five miles an hour. While these factors contribute to a pleasant and agree- able habitat for man, at the same time they make it necessary to irrigate most of the crops of Cache County and the State and make vegetation light where irrigation is impossible. (1) Barnes, Will C., and Jardine, J. T., U. S. D. A., Office of Sec., Rpt. No. 110, (July, 1916), p. 87. NATIONAL FORESTS e Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah Pal Table X.—vValue of all Domestic Animals on Farms and Ranges, by Counties, Utah, April 15, 1910(4) Area Value Area Value State $28,330,215 State $28,300,215 County , County eta ter ee Ete Pas By isa | Tis, Soave ee $ 886,029 2). panpete:.-.....-. 2,281,140 Mee (Chas Lele eee 864,538 Bo bOxelder2 =. 2,230,539 iN (terd Desire Se ee 817,654 ae Caches) 2293). OS ee a eere sa wee 804,834 DRDO aE bakes f=". 1,639,631 19. Washington.... 794,334 GwvWiasatchies 2: 1,388,374 Did Mamie ees 724,925 i@esevierse 2: We) De HME T yee ee 698,236 Saeronre ss 2 063.7 DO ToOoele ee 592,914 SreGraminel de 1,033,687 28. Wiakyless as 521,722 KOM PEMT Gee. 22 oes 992,966 A IR CAVCTe eee. | 516,365 ile wWiebers. st: 950,804 Os. (GBM el oxenal ee 429,188 TL tbe we ee 934,760 265 IMorzamesse 357,546 iy Stil Aiennle s 910,517 DUP he mee ee 263,460 eae mW Nae eee 894,898 : . Hyde Park had a population of 699 according to the 1910 census. The character of its population is assumed to be about the same as of Cache County as given by the 1910 United States census. LESEND MEME Siaec 35,\79 —37942 Fig. 18.—Distribution of Popula- Fig. 19.—Density of Population tion by Counties, Utah. (Persons per sq. mi.) by Counties, (1910 U. S. Census) Utah. (1910 U. S. Census). The population for Cache County was 23,062 in 1910; 18,139 in 1900; 15,509 in 1890; 12,562 in 1880; 8,229 in 1870; and 2,605 in 1860. In 1910 there were 11,458 males and 11,604 females in the (1)1910 U. S. Census. 28 Bulletin No. 177 county. There were 19.8 persons per square mile. But the density of the rural population was 13.4 persons per square mile. (See Figure 19). Of the total population 46.3 per cent was urban and 53.7 per cent was rural. There were only 64 colored people in the county, 7 of whom were negroes, 5 males and 2 females, and 57 indians, chinese, japanese, and all others. There were 5,230 males of voting age, 64 of whom. were illiterate, or 1.2 per cent. Of all persons 10 years old and over, 215, or 1.3 per cent were illiterate. There were 8,399 persons, 6 to 20 years old in- elusive, 5,982 of whom, or 71.2 per cent were attending school. There were 9,800 native whites of native parentage, 9,421 native whites of foreign or mixed parentage, and 3,777 foreign-born whites. Of the 3,777 foreign-born whites in the county, 979 came from England, 825 from Denmark, 651 from Sweden, 405 from Switzerland, 272 from Norway, 201 from Germany, 149 from Scotland, 127 from Wales, 42 from Canada, 32 from Italy, 18 from Ireland, 14 from Australia, 9 from Greece, 9 from Mexico, 8 from Russia, 5 from Austria, 4 from Finland, 2 from France, 2 from Holland, 1 from Hungary, and 22 from other foreign countries such as Japan, China, India, ete. There were 4,125 native whites both of whose parents were born in the same foreign country. The parents of 1,463 of these native whites came from England, 1,019 from Denmark, 556 from Sweden, 325 from Switzerland, 225 from Norway, 221 from Scotland, 148 from Wales, 111 from Germany, 23 from Italy, 11 from Canada, 11 from Ireland, 6 from Russia, 3 from France, and 3 from Holland. It should be noted that most of the foreign-born whites and also the parents of the native-born whites of foreign parentage came from Great Britain and the countries of northwestern Hurope. The people of these countries are usually industrious and thrifty. The type of farming practised in these foreign countries is similar in many ways to that practised at Hyde Park. The root crops, especially sugar-beets, were no doubt familiar to these persons before they came to this country. These persons were also undoubtedly familiar in some degree with the small-grains and hay. They also knew something about machine meth- ods in general farming. These conditions had some influence on their settling at Hyde Park and the type of farming followed there. Between 15 and 20 per cent of the rural male population of the Table XI.—Size of Family, Acres Sugar-Beets Raised, and Cows Milked, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 U a Smite 2 i Ly wn | Soe yoee = o ie oq H Oe ro) ge 2 HE Qe as} 2 ow ol cae ae) 3 ca =) = 80 eo n & P=s) aS Size of Farm tH oO ie oe ty 2 ht oH ate of 2 8 a= ou o4 on 78 Ramin) | ie Ss eee te he aes ee ates =F [me lpr = Rea [eat oo 8, aa SS Boy i teee dl cane ge | ¢ ps | SE 3 o 2 > & = ® SB cS) > > AUTRES MSH EOD 6 $126 | $1,066 | $1,192 Medium .. | Bo) | 50) jf, 5G) V4, Saraiai6 1,833 | 2,076 Margene) | 48 | Ue 897 12 414 | “A898 ve agonee (1)Labor income was obtained by subtracting from the farm receipts, the farm expenses and interest on the average capital investment. Interest in this case was figured at 5 per cent but should have been figured at 8 per cent. (See paragraph on Farm Profits). The value of hired labor was counted as an expense but no personal or living expenses were counted. If the farmer’s sons or other members of the family did farm work without pay, their labor was counted as an expense and rated at what they would have received had they worked for their neighbors, or what it would have cost to have hired the work they did. Any increase in stock, feed, or other inventory items was counted as a receipt; a decrease was counted as an expense. Any increase in the value of land which might be thought of as unearned increment was not included as a receipt, but increases in land values due to improvements have been counted as receipts and the amount of the increase allowed was the same as the ex- pense of the improvement. No credit has been allowed for the farm products that were used in the farm home. The farm house has been considered as part of the farm capital investment. (2)The value of unpaid family labor was estimated on the basis of wages paid by neighbors for similar work and workmen and also on the basis of what it would cost to hire the same work done on the farm in cuestion. The child labor employed doing chores was not included when the tasks they performed would have been done by their father or some other member of the family, had they not been performed by the smaller children. No charge in farm expenses was made for child labor that just relieved the father or older brother from some menial task which they would have done themselves rather than hire it done. No charge for child labor should be made unless there is an actual opportunity value for the labor and then the charge should be made on the basis of the opportunity value. But sometimes it is difficult to estimate this opportunity value. Such cases arose at Hyde Park and the unpaid family labor was valued on the basis of what it would cost the individual farmer to hire such work done. It is evident that in either case the information rests on estimates. In the one case one estimates the amount of labor each child or grown boy or girl does, and in the other case he estimates the opportunity value of the labor at the given time. (3)Farm income was obtained by subtracting the farm expenses from the farm receipts. It is labor income plus interest. (4)Family income is the sum of the farm income and the value of unpaid family labor. It does not include the farm produce used in the house, house rent, or unearned increase in land value. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 31 sequently his own personal productivity affects his home. Table XIII shows the great variation in the value of the dwellings of the Hyde Park farmers. Two-thirds of these farm dwellings are valued at $1000 and over and one-third of them are worth less than $1,000. Table XIII.—Value of Farm Dwellings, 50 Farms, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 Range of Value of Farmhouse | Number of Farms $100 to $4,000 IKe 50 ; 500 or less. 10 501 to $ 999 | a 1,000 to 1,499 | iil 1,500 to 1,999 nea 8 2,000 to 2.499 9 2,500 or over 5 Table XIV.—-Relation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 Group of Farms Number Average : F According to of Farms Value maces agora Value of Farm in of Farm £ Home Group Home moe ee =I TENET cafe eee | 49 | $1321 | $863 | $1537 $100 to $1000... | 17 | RIGS Fl Sia. 1462 $1000 to $2000-. 19 | 1274 | 806 | 1455 $2000 and over.. | 3 | 2492 | 880 | L753 Table XV.—Relation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 Group of Farms .| Number Average : | According to of Farms Value Piece poe Value of Farm in of Farm Tacone eves aes Home Group Home : AU Paris 22.2.5. 49 el Saez $863 | $1537 $100 to $800...:.. | 14 | 410 | 961 | 1446 $800 to $1500-. 14 1000 | 796 | 1498 $1500 and over | 21 2029 | 848 | 1623 Tatie XVi.-Kelation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 N.S Group of Farms | Number | Average ’ According to of Farms | Value ee a. Value of Farm in of Farm Tmhenkhe Tksind Home Group Home All Farms............ 49 eee es a $863 | $1637 $100 to $1200-.... | 25 646 | 909 1510 91200 to $2000.. | 11 1473 739 1249 $2000 and over.. | 13 | 2492 | 880 | 1753 32 Bulletin No. 177 Altho it may seem reasonable to expect that farmers who make the largest labor incomes should have the more expensive homes, or that the farmers who have the more expensive homes should make the largest labor incomes, yet Tables XIV, XV, and XVI show that there is in reality no correlation between the value of the farm dwelling and the farmer’s l:bor income. This illustrates how easily one may be mistaken in judging the prosperity of a farmer by the size and elegance of his dwelling louse. Farm Labor.—It has been shown how family labor affects type of farming. Hired labor is also a determining element. At Hyde Park, in 1914, the average amount of labor employed on each farm was equivalent to 1.6 men, including the farm operator. This is equivalent to 1 man, the operator, twelve months (1 year), and 7 months and 6 days of additional man labor. In 1915 the average number of men on the 48 Hyde Park farms was 1.6 and on the 10 better-paying farms 1.5. In 1914 there were 11 farmers who hired help by the month. Only 1 of these farms hired a man by the year. On the average, annual wages for month-help on each farm amounted to $230. Nine farms boarded help at least part of the time, the estimated average cost of which amounted to $55. ‘Thirty-three farmers hired extra help (paid by month, day, or piece) during the rush season, usually thinning beets, hoeing or harvesting beets, or harvesting grain or hay, the cost of which averaged $128 for each farm. Thirty-two farms had, on the average, $286 worth of unpaid family labor. Including all farms of the area, the average value for each farm, of regular hired labor, extra labor, board of hired labor, and unpaid family labor, was $387. The farmers’ estimates(1) of the value of their own labor for.the year varied from $200 to $1,000, and averaged $600. Therefore, the average value of all labor on each farm, in 1914, was $600 plus $387, or $987. The average amount paid for hired labor in 1916 on the 32 farms at Hyde Park was $127. Unpaid family labor averaged $87. The total value of labor other than the operator’s, was, therefore, $214 as compared with $387 in 1914. The hoeing and cultivating of beets begins about two or three weeks after thinning. Beets are hoed from three to seven times during the season. They are irrigated from two to seven times a season, altho if done at» the proper season, three to four times are sufficient(2). The hoeing and cultivating is usually done just after irrigation. The plow- ing on dry-farms is usually done as early in the fall as possible after the grain is taken off. : The critical labor periods in the type of farming practised at Hyde Park are during beet thinning, fall plowing, fall planting, and beet pulling. The summer care of beets and potatoes conflicts as does also the planting of the commercial potatoes and the thinning of sugar-beets in the spring. This is one reason why more potatoes are not grown here. When alfalfa or other hay is ready to cut the beet work stops and haying begins. The beet work is resumed as soon as the hay is up. As nearly as possible the irrigating is done when the crops need water. Sometimes both the beets and the alfalfa need it at the same time and thus a critical labor situation may arise in irrigating. As a general rule, the labor on these crops is not conflicting as to time that it should be done. (See Table XVII). The labor on the livestock and the crops (1)Based upon what he could hire out for to some one else. Some had had offers of positions and others estimated according to wages paid for labor they were able to perform. (2) Harris; F>S:) Utah Agr. xp) Stay Bull Now weer (June soniye Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 33 Table XVII.—Order of Crop Work at Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah(1) iy WANT ones Maio). MC) ee eee Planting sugar-beets PAS of Noe WRAP UO CAVES oe ames em ee RE EE Planting spring wheat Re Noe ay ito): dhe ee Sees ene Planting early potatoes Ae PAT Le et Ola0 eae ano ae ee Planting spring oats ee. SONOMA) At 0)a ON eee se seer e a eee nee: Planting corn Gem Mia ve Ont Ono ereee geen net oe Planting commercial potatoes Ts ANE ae ) cto )poc 1 I eerere. 4 eee ce pene fee Thinning sugar-beets Che oe Fv trae Us fae ee SO eee pepe ea ee Irrigating sugar-beets begins OE Gita tee semen cerce ens cue eae ee Cutting first crop of alfalfa LEC ve ced UO In eel Le SE eS ae eee Cutting timothy and clover begins ThA e gel iv by a Rane scales eee ere ene pas ee Digging early potatoes (grown for home use only) ThA OMY aed Us eae nee need ok ge er mre Harvesting winter wheat begins Seely wld) Ol Olen ee arvesting winter wheat general eae PAMIENISt +L. tO NORE sae 2 eee Cutting second crop of alfalfa Ue wameast 5itO 580s. ee oe aoe. Harvesting spring oats Mone aul Oto. Sept... Louse Harvesting spring wheat ET Ue el passt eee. see ee eee _Seeding winter wheat begins ites ESE) OL ERA ee eer ae ele NEE RR Se a Pulling sugar-beets begins Mee) Gi Ore ee cos ee ee Digging commercial potatoes begins is largely non-competitive. The crop and stock enterprises are compli- mentary (2) to a considerable extent. It is not at all necessary that the farming business be so organized as to have the same labor requirements for each month of the year. In winter, children are in school, high school, and college, but in summer they are at home and available for farm work. Growing sugar-beets at Hyde Park supplies profitable employment for this seasonal supply of farm labor. The school children of Logan and the smaller towns of the county do much of the labor on the sugar-beet crop of Cache County. Man labor efficiency is indicated by the ratio of men to crop-acres and units of livestock. In 1914 the ratio of men to crop-acres was 1 to 33 on the average of all 52 farms and 1 to 52 on the 10 better- paying farms. In 1915 the ratio was 1 to 33 on the average of all 48 farms, 1 to 31 on the average of the 10 least-profitable farms, and 1 to 42 on the average of the 10 better-paying farms. It must be remem- bered in this connection that the men who cared for the greater number of acres of crops were operating farms larger than the average. The ratio of men to productive animal units was 1 to 9 on the average of all 52 farms in 1914 and 1 to 12 on the average of the 10 better-paying farms. In 1915 this ratio was 1 to 10 on the average of all 48 farms, 1 to 10 on the average of the 10 least-profitable farms, and 1 to 14 on the average of the 10 better-paying farms. (See Tables I and II in Appendix). The paragraphs immediately preceding have shown the amount of hired labor used, the average cost of hired labor, the seasonal require- ments of labor, the critical labor periods, the labor conflicts on crop and stock enterprises, the immediately available supply of labor, and the efficiency of man labor with crops and stock on the Hyde Park farms. In Tables XVIII, XIX and XX, which follow, some of these factors are given for the State as a whole and for the individual counties in order (1)Baker, O. E., and others, U. S. D. A. Yearbook, (1917), pp. 537 to 591, or Yearbook Separate No. 758. (2)Connor, L. G., Utah Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 165, (Oct., 1918), p. 21, Table XVII. 34 Bulletin No. 177 to indicate roughly the general farm labor situation: Table XVIII shows the number and occupation of all males and females 10 years of age or over engaged in agriculture in Utah in 1910. In the order of numbers employed in agriculture the occupation classes rank as follows: (1) Farmers and Dairy Farmers, males 7,606, females 479; (2) Farm and Dairy Farm Laborers working out, males 7,807, females 255; °* (3) Farm Laborers, home farm, 5,827; (4) Stock Herders, Drovers, and é Feeders, 2,207; (5) Stock Raisers, 1,350; (6) Gardeners, 398; COE. Table XVIII.—Persons 10 Years of Age or Over, Engaged in Agriculture in Utah, 1910(4) | Occupation (2) | Total | 10-13 | 14-15 | 16-20 | 21-44 | 45 and | | Years | Years | Years | Years | Over INTE EGS Ran eee Set Soak [85,876 914, 1,183] 5,490| 18,443] 9,837 farmers and Dairy | | | | | 1 aBEYy igh 00 er) tS eens ee er eA SOOOI) eebkae nes See 207). 956807 lan Catee Farm and Dairy Farm | | | | Laborers( Working out) | 7,807 147 304| 2,065| 4,383) 908 Farm Laborers | . | | (GHlomic eh aim) eae BG Z40/ 743| 826| 2,675| 1,499] 84 Stock Herders, Drovers, | | ] and! Weediers:2-2222--5- = | 2,207 iY 36 458] 1,560 136 SS MOKGlie MIRWISFeTAS eo ee aD SIO |e eae eee peo 24 861 465 Gardeners: i... ey res ck EMA Beene ep eens ; 5 140 244 Fruit Growers and Nur- | SOP yIMeMt ssn es ele | azar Mies |e meee 1 145 167 Garden Laborers........--.- 228 5 a2 25 82 103 Grchard and Nursery | | | | MaAbDOners: Vee. 2 ee eee | 140 1 5 30 86 18 Meme Sie sae ee ee | 734) 34 29 66 202| 403 Farm and Dairy Farm | AD ORGTSt ae. ee eee 255 34 29 61 72| 59 Farmers and Dairy | | INATINGTS ise ee eee CE eM axe Sek to aaa Sera 5| 130| 3844 (1)1910 U. S. Census, Vol. IV., Population-Occupation Statistics, Table VII, p. 523. (2) Ibid. (a) A Farmer—A person who is in charge of a farm whether he owns it or operates it as a tenant, renter, or cropper. (b) A Farm Manager—A person who manages a farm for some one else for wages or salary. (c) A Farm Laborer—A person who works on a farm for someone else but not as a manager, tenant, or cropper. (d) A Woman Farmer—A woman who herself operates or runs a farm. (e) A Woman Farm Laborer—A woman working regularly at out- door farm work, even though she works on the home farm for her husband, son, or other relatives, and does not receive money wages. Women farm laborers are separated into two classes: (1) those working on the ‘home farm’, and (2) those ‘working out’. (f) Children on Farms—Children who work for their own parents on a farm are classed as Farm Laborers on Home farm; but children who work on a farm for others are classed as Farm Laborers. working out. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 515) Fruit Growers, and Nurserymen, 3138; (8) Garden Laborers, 228; and (9) Orchard and Nursery Laborers, 140. A total of 35,876 males and 734 females or a grand total of 36,610 persons 10 years old or over were gainfully employed in agriculture in Utah in 1910, which is 1 for each 10.2 persons in the State. Table XIX.—Average Cost of Hired Labor on Farms, by Counties, Utah, 19201) a Cash Rent and Board| Cash, Rent, and Expended Furnished BoardFurnished per Farm per Farm per Farm Wey Statemcenes AEE $242.58 $ 25.94 $268.52 Beaver. 1.0223 179.94 33.60 213.54 Boxelders =.222 220 22 413.73 » 40.75 454.48 ENGINE erecta coe ot es NO ores 20.16 217.48 Wap Oly eee eee 309.97 58.92 368.89 DAVIS ene ee he ed Dalal 24.40 235.62 [DI gaKSi Gh eee eee eee aes 270.15 82.84 352.99 Garticld 2" ees 191.65 2.56 194.21 Grandi. kee. ce 645.46 218.385 863.81 LIVE(O'i ghee Se Oe aoe Ree 400.47 33.08 433.55 A 1 ee ee ee Di senis 14.44 267.67 PREG Beste ett 507.29 Hen 513.06 iE WIE W gto UT Te are aoe ee Doerce 0 Zecca 246.51 Moneany2 93's pee LP SieiS 19.31 206.56 UGE oe on 5 | 227.09 Sahel 261.20 JRT CS) ale ee Ra A, wena ava | 774.00 _ 206.11 980.11 SEMI EWU es wale a th Dae 228.87 15.24 244.11 SHAM) «GUE aT eRe Petes 553.84 157.08 710.92 SMS Lh ese sce ec 7 3e63 13.20 186.83 SENG GY gy NR Set ates oe Wiles 165.56 21.66 187.22 SSUUTIAIT ests eae ee ere AM TS 68.96 490.74 Mooeles sete te 324.02 54.30 378.32 ante te 212.16 48.15 260.31 teitraliesta tee see ere 187.93 10.91 198.84 Wrasateh ot. 2) 2. 182.06 | Poa haters) 203.94 Washington ..:.....- 193.82 16.23 210.05 CEN ae ae 168.66 38.91 207.57 WYiGEI fern pe 2 222.70 ie 14.74 247.44 ee ________ Table XIX shows the average amount expended on each farm for hired labor, for each county in Utah, 1910(1). In Cache county an average of $217.48 was expended as wages, rent, and board for hired help. This is about the same amount as was expended at Hyde Park in 1916. Table XX shows the monthly and daily wages of farm labor, with and without board, in Utah from 1866 to 1918. By comparing the wages given in this table for farm labor and the wages of farm laborers . for the United States as a whole one finds that on the average they are higher in Utah(2). (1)1910 U. S. Census. (2)U. S. D. A. Monthly Crop Report, (Dec., 1918), p. 146. 36 Bulletin No. 177 Table XX.—Wages of Farm Labor in Utah(1), 1866-1918 Average Monthly| Average Daily Average Daily Wages for Year Wages in Wages Other Meat or Season Harvest Than Harvest Without; With |Without| With | Without] With Board Board Board | Board Board Board | IS GR Ts $44.71 $26.32 | $ 3.42 | $ 2.49 | $ 2.27 | $ 1.63 SS Pacey ok RD 35.50 Pays) 2.20 WS 1.80 1.40 BSS EAS Yaar 28.87 20.50 1.82 | 1.43 1.46 | a2 DS ieee Se lines als ecard |G emo [Rind tere bide | Leno SIS aie een eens 30.00 21.00 2.00 | 1.56 1.52 1.14 SSS aa eee 3D Ome Ze 0 Led 5: | 1.36 1.42 1.10 S'S Opes ee eos 32.30 21.00 1.72 SIO 1bsS%3) i 1.05 SH ey eee ee 33.50 22230 er WPA 1.40 | 1.08 ca sje )ege 2 tae see cee 33.29 24.65 1.80 1.43 aera) | 1.06 S94 eoeent she ee 29.98 21.16 1.48 1.22 1.14 .92 EUS OI epee ee eae ee 29.81 PAL OW) 1.32 ON abeabss) .90 LS OLS ie ee cee BAe I Goa 1.34 1.05 Loo || AG) 178190) eee ee SASL on le eZiDmle WH 7 1.29 1.48 | 1.22 O02 ee eee es 37.99 29.45 1.64 1.36 Uo @al 1.28 UDO (2) sosseose 56.2 40.77 1.92 IEG CARR Vee cee iol IIL), cesses 47.50 35.00 2.20 1.78 2.00 1.55 EO eb AUS) IN eee ese 68.00 50.00 Sea 2.13 3.00 2.42 QS (3) esses 84.00 64.00 3.80 Bye IL 3.50 2.60 In 1909 ten per cent of the male outdoor laborers on farms, hired at a monthly rate, were hired by the year(2). Table XXI shows the ratio of agricultural workers to the improved area in farms(2), 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910. Table XXI.—Ratio of Agricultural Workers to Improved Area of Farms 1880, 1890, 1900 and 1910, Utah Persons 10 Years Average Old and Over, Acres of Improved Land Improved Gainfully En- per Person 10 Years Old Year | Acres gaged in Agri-| and Over, Gainfully En- (Per Farm) culture gaged in Agriculture | (Per Farm) SO 44 | 1.6 | 28.6 18/910) eee | 52 | 9 27.4 LOOO nae | 53 1.6 | 35u0 TOOIG2) ea 63 st | 37.4 It should be noted that there are on the average about the same number of men on each Hyde Park farm, as there are persons 10 years old and over gainfully engaged in agriculture in the State. There are about the same number of crop-acres to the man on the Hyde Park (1)U. 8. D. A., Bureau of Statistics, Misc. Series, Bul. No. 26, (1908), pp. 14-22. (2)U. S. D. A., Bureau of Statistics, Misc. Series, Bul. No. 94, (Nov., IG aba) A (3)U. S. D. A., Monthly Crop Report, (Dec., (4)1910, U. S: Census. 1918). Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 37 farms as there are acres of improved land to each person 10 years old and over gainfully engaged in agriculture in the State. Markets.—Markets for farm products affect the type of farming. tah is not advantageously situated with respect to world markets. It is a great distance to the central farm produce markets of the United States. Comparison of Utah farm prices with the average farm prices of the United States(1) as a whole, for the three ten-year periods, 1880-1889, 1890-1899, and 1900-1909, shows that hay, wheat, barley, sugar-beets, and potatoes are lower in price in Utah; and that the prices of corn, oats, and rye are higher in Utah. The prices varied as follows: hay, $1.50 to $2.25 per ton less, wheat 2 to 6 cents per bushel less, barley 0 to 5 cents per bushel less, sugar-beets 5 cents to $2.50 per ton less, and potatoes 6 to 8 cents per bushel less, in Utah than in the United States as a whole; and corn 16 to 30 cents per bushel higher, oats, 10 to 15 cents per bushel higher, and rye 0 to 2 cents per bushel higher in Utah than the average for the entire country (See Table XXIX in Appendix). In general, the farm price is low for those products exported and high for those products imported; or, prices are low for products that are abundant and high for products that are scarce in relation to the local demand. Where the market cannot be adapted to the type of farming other- wise best for an area, the type of farming must be adapted to the market. Most of the very perishable products such as fruits and vegetables must be consumed near home and therefore have a limited market(?2). Not only is our fruit-haul to market a long one but Utah peaches come on the market in competition with those of southern Michigan. The Michigan peaches have a decided advantage because they do not have to stand the costs-of long transportation. In recent years the canning of many of these perishables has widened the market for them. This is especially true of tomatoes and neas. As a result of this wider market more tomatoes and peas are grown on Utah farms. The milk market has been widened as a result of the development of condensed milk factories, creameries, and cheese factories. Because of this wider market more dairy cows are kept on farms. The surplus milk from Hyde Park farms is usually marketed at one of three places: (1) the branch factory of the Utah Condensed Milk Company, at Smith- field, (2) Borden’s Condensed Milk Factory, at Logan, or (3) the Utah Agricultural College Creamery, at Logan. Early each morning large milk wagons gather the milk cans from the homes about town. They deliver the milk to the factories and return with the cans, butter, and, if the milk is sent to a creamery, skim milk. These are left at the homes about 2:00 p.m. Some farmers have cream separators and usually send only cream to the creamery. After the cans are emptied at the factories they are washed and steamed before they are put back on the wagons. A regular rate for each hundred pounds or for each can of milk is charged for hauling. This cost is usually de- ducted from the farmers’ milk checks at the factories and paid directly to the milk haulers. In the past the meat animals have been shipped to the great meat- packing centers. At present most of the hogs and some sheep and cat- tle are marketed to advantage at Salt Lake City and Ogden, where pack- ing plants are now in operation. Hay, a very bulky product, has been shipped as far as Omaha and Kansas City, and often as far as Butte, Montana. There is not much (1), IS: Di vA. Yearbook, 1917, Dec. 1, Farm Prices from 1880 to LOL WSs Aaa. of Stat. Bul. No. 94, “Nov., 1912): (2)Connor, L. G., U. S. D. A. Bul. No. 582 (1918), pp. 35-36. 38 Bulletin No. 177 shipped out of the State at present and because of the limited agricul- tural area of the State it is probable that hay as well as some other agricultural products will be imported in considerable quantities in the near future. Most of the Hyde Park hay is consumed at Hyde Park, Logan and Smithfield. . The sugar-beets are unloaded from the farmers’ wagons onto Cars or at the beet-dump at Hyde Park spur. From here they are shipped to the sugar factory at Logan, the erection of which made it possible. for the farmers of this area to grow sugar-beets as a cash crop. The farm- ers are thus dependent upon the factory for a cash market, and in turn the factory is dependent upon the farmers for the beets. Potatoes are usually not grown in large commercial quantities at Hyde Park. Most of them are marketed either at Hyde Park or hauled to Logan or Smithfield. Small-grains are easily shipped great distances to central markets and the Hyde Park grain is hauled to the Logan mills, to the Smithfield mills, or to the Hyde Park Spur and shipped to other markets. Hach farmer’s convenience and bargaining determine his methods of marketing. Wagon and Auto Roads and Rail- == Somes roads.—The State Road, which is the SS Fee main auto road running north and ee J s—wromurens south, passes thru the western part et OS SA @) ces ermreo of Hyde Park Township and in gen- wy eral divides the meadow and pasture land on the west from the sugar-beet and ,potato land on the east. The center of the town of Hyde Park is situated about % mile east of this State Road. The Utah-Idaho Central Electric Railroad passes thru the cen- ter of town. The Hyde Park Spur is 1% miles west from town on the Cache Valley Branch of the Oregon Short Line Railroad. Such -markets as are available, are accessible’ to Hyde Park farmers by good wagon ~ and auto roads and railroads. The fact that Hyde Park is on a branch line of the Oregon Short Line Rail- Fig. 20.—Railroads, Auto Roads, road is a handicap in shipping to and National Forests, Utah. distant markets. (See Figure 20.) (after Clayson’s Guide Map) Land Tenure.—By land tenure is meant the relationship of the farmers to the land which they operate. Land tenure is inseparably connected with type of farming(1). At Hyde Park most of the land which is now irrigated has been under cultivation for from 40 to 60 years. During the last 20 years the bench land east of town has been developed by dry-farming methods. The farm buildings are all in town where the farm families live. The farms in this area include, (1) dry-farm land on the bench, (2) irrigated land for cultivated crops west of the bench land, and (3) still farther west towards the center of the valley, meadow and pasture land. Most of the farms include some of each of these three distinct types of land. This condition makes possible a greater diversity of farm business on these farms and is one of the factors con- tributing to the prosperity of the area. None of the 52 farms of which records were obtained in 1914 were é Ne: q OG a Wey | ~ (1) Hibbard, B. H., ‘“‘Tenancy in the United States’, in Carver’s “Readings in Rural Economics’, pp. 498 to 546; and Holmes, G. K., Ibid pp. 487 to 497, ‘‘Téenancy in the United States’’. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 39 cenant farms, but 23 of the 52 owners rented additional land, 18 pay- ing cash rent for it, 3 renting on shares, and 2 paying cash for pasture and hay land and a share of the crop for the cultivated land. his is unusual because in Cache County generally share tenancy is most com- mon. It must be remembered, however, that these farmers are not tenants but owners renting additional pieces of land. Since they have money to pay the cash for rent it is to their advantage to do so, for thus they get all of the produce. There were 184.5 acres rented for cash, for which $1,685 was paid, or an average of $9.13 per acre. Pas- ture rent was about $2 to $3 per acre and cultivated crop land ranged from $7 to $21 per acre, the latter being paid for an unusually good piece of sugar-beet land. Twenty-one acres was the largest piece of this irrigated land rented for cash. One piece of 360 acres of dry-farm land was rented for $860 cash. Two other pieces’ of dry-farm land amounting to 258 acres were rented on shares, the tenants getting six- tenths of the wheat crop. One piece of 128 acres of irrigated land was rented on shares. The tenant received one-half the hay and oats raised on the piece. Two other pieces were rented and the tenant received a irifle more than half the wheat in the one case and five-ninths of the alfalfa in the other. One young man had the use of 5 -acres of his father’s land and had all the crop. Another farmer, in addition to his own land, managed the family estate. He kept his aged mother and father and had all that he made from the estate. (See Tables III in Text and XXX in Appendix). In 1914 the personal and property taxes amount:to about 0.6 per cent and the water taxes amounted to about 0.2 per cent of the total farm capital investment. As a general rule the landlord or owner of the rented land or water pays the taxes. Land and water may be rented separately or together. (See Table XXX in Appendix). On the average the 52 Hyde Park farmers have been owners of farms 20.7 years, and owners of the farms which they now operate 18.5 years. Those who have rented land at all have been tenants on the average for 4.7 years, and on the average they have been tenants of the land which they now rent in addition to their own land for 3.6 years. The land is rented for the purpose of increasing the size of the business and no doubt here as elsewhere is an intermediate step in the process of becoming owners of the land operated. , The small percentage of tenancy here is due to a number of cir- cumstances and conditions. The country is new and it has been easy to become a farm owner without tenancy, by (1) homesteading or (2) purchasing. The farms are comparatively small and therefore the total capital necessary to purchase a farm is not so great as to make pur- chasing prohibitive to those who are moderately well-to-do. The type of farming followed is one that is conducive to ownership and compared with the farming of the North Central States is less attractive to tenants and less adaptable to tenant farming. Land has increased enormously in value. This has been a great incentive to farmers to own their own farms. These facts largely account for the present low per- centage of tenant farmers at Hyde Park as well as in Cache County and the State. In 1910(1) the approximate total land area of Cache County was 744,960 acres, 294,160 acres in farms, 181,348 acres improved land in farms, 5,779 acres of woodland in farms, 107,033 acres of other un- improved land in farms, and 450,800 acres of land not in farms. Thus 40 per cent of the land was in farms in 1910 and 62 per cent of this farm land was improved. There were 1,907 farms in the county with an average of 154.3 acres per farm, of which 95.1 acres were improved. (1)1910 U. S. Census. AO Bulletin No. 177 ° As late as July 1, 1918, there were still 239,918 acres of land in the county unappropriated and unreserved, of which 12,381 acres were surveyed and 227,537 acres were unsurveyed (1). Of the 52,597,760 acres of land in Utah(2), 31,475,919 acres, or 60 per cent, were unappropriated and unreserved on July 1, 1918(1)? This land is described as “generally arid, agricultural, mineral, graz- ing, and mountainous.’’ Of this amount, 14,010,343 acres were sur- veyed and 17,465,576 acres were unsurveyed. In the 9 years from 1909 to July 1, 1918, there were in Utah 5,175,143 acres of public land entered for settlement. This is an average of 575,016 acres each year. In 1910(2) there were only 3,397,699 acres in farms in the State and 1,368,211 acres of farm land improved. In the 9 years, 1910 to July 1, 1918(1) there was 69 per cent more land entered for settlement than there was land in farms, and more than four times as many acres as there was improved land in farms, April 15, 1910. Of the 284,028,210 acres of unappropriated and unreserved lands of the 11 far Western Range States, July 1, 1914, it is estimated that only 12 per cent, or 34,080,000 acres were suitable for agricultural settle- ment under the then existing laws(*). Since July -1, 1914, three amendments to the Desert Land Laws(+) have been passed and the Stock-Raising Homesteads-Act of December 29, 1916(5) has become operative. Undoubtedly these laws have made it practicable to settle more of this land than it was wise to settle before their enactment. Table XXII shows the number of farms, the average size of farm, and the relationship of the farmers to the land which they operate Cache County, Utah, 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910. Table XXII.—Tenure of Farms, Cache County, Utah, 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910(2) | Number Farms Operated by | Percentage of | Number | Average] ear oh) TS Farms Op- Moar of Size Part (|. 608) |e erated by Farms (Aeres)| Owners | Own- |/ and. |-. 3... |) see "ers Ten- | °2 Own-| Ten- ants ers | ants WSO L | 998 85 eae Beas ae pee 94>» Paes US 90% OG eo DTI aie Soo ee 2-4) SOLO cea LIOO 2 (> tise eeu nGed 1,446 236 6 16 8056/0 sbed 1910 107 154.3 SCSI | Neeser: =a 12 92:1 Slee Over 92 per cent of the farms were operated by the owners in 1910 and only 7.3 per cent by tenants. Tenancy does not seem to be in- creasing in tie County. The figures show a smaller percentage of the farms operated by owners in 1910 than in 1880, but a greater percent- age of them operated by tenants in 1890 than in 1910. Share tenancy always has been and is now the most common form. (See Table XXIII.) GQ) US Dal enG. Oe CiraNom 60/8. i (anilyaueonesae (2)1910 U. S. Census. (2) Die SS DsTA, Off; or Sec." Rpt. No. dO}, Rantala (ntliys sem at OneGy ie pp. 17-18. GUL SVD Gaul On CirasNone 44 Gl Galvaal Semone Ee GUS Se DF La Ge Os Cire sNow 5:23 aa anameriemelto nieve) = Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 41 Table XXIII.—Number and Kinds of Tenants, Cache County, Utah, 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910(1) | Number and Kinds of Tenants Bh |" Total | Share | Cash |Share and Cash| Not Specified US SOR | 55 | son lee. || ron WS 910 Wee... 525-222 86 55 ae ©] Popo pene 1. 91 76 py t'| | AGO 525. 822.242. TOM |) 59 35 | ial | 34 The explanation of conditions as found in Table XXIII is the same as that given for the conditions at Hyde Park. Table XXIV shows the total area, area in farms, and the area of farm land improved in the State, and in each county, arranged accord- ing to the acres of improved farm land, 1909. Cache ‘County had the greatest and Grand County the smallest area improved. Table XXIV.—Total Land Area, Land in Farms, and Improved Land in Farms, by Counties, Utah, 1909(4) Acres Improved lang; All land in Total in farms farms area Staten ese es ee. | 1,868,211 3,397,699 | 52,597,760 County | | | ipidl,2 (CEG IY eee eae caer | 181,348 294,160 | 744,960 Dim OX CIC 2 esse sce | 142,922 343,185 3,484,160 PU Gate Crise tees Fen | 124,496 234,717 = | 1,301,760 Are aCe laciiG 2: eee ee ees | 121,221 169,262 | 483,840 HORT StC, ese hey: 2 | 105,807 261,771 1,000,960 GerEvic ides tee re eee | 81,779 149,509 657,280 Tick AWAG| oy oR e eee eae le Bees | 59,781 148,359 346,240 SRO OVLOTON en cocoate s ecco ne | 56,338 | 122,332 | 1,265,920 Ws SIDE tS epee ee ae ee See nt | 55,376 127,257 | 176,000 TUG rare IVI err ligreecsee= eee eS | 54,540 | 166,627 4,226,560 TL, PLAY Oa ee ee ee | 53,466 | 108,564 | 2,182,400 VES LCD coos oes ees. ee 43,220 154,083 2,786,560 ESRD ENIMIOISY? p2eeoe sree eee cat 39,386 96,708 2,849,920 The ES MU ae ge ak ees a eee 35,748 82,072 3,350,400 Hie MOOGLG, Jo... bes-cccss ences 34,23 88,332 | 4,383,360 lhe, SLUR CEN C0) 6A Rae eae een eae 32,645 261,056 1,191,680 Us wL BYE In Cr eae See ET Sees | 19,354 35,986 | 1,702,400 MS GaTneldy 22-22 0s ssc. <0 19,109 59,973 3,349,760 11 Js pel Gr eon an 17,934 88,027 2,083,840 CASK a 8 Ab I= aie eas a Re | 16,964 | 25,869 488,320 pile WCE oxen alae a kame ae | 13,824 | 56,653 | 951,680 Saw Vid Din StOn) «2.2.2.2-.2..-. | 13,632 | 50,273 | 1,577,600 PARE SIN oy of fey 01 aes SN ee 11,691. | 95,648 | 400,640 PIC MeN AE: ig oC ail ie Oe aan | 11,538 | 31,617. | 1,584,000 ALTE ESE OV a) oR bs ea fa ee | 8,685 | 24,773 | 2,697,600 POON S Eo a) 2 VD 0 eo A a aia 6,698 | 48,797 | 4,967,040 PC Cenak Cie: aio lies Saar ea ee a a | 6,470 | 62,089 | 2,362,880 (2) LOO MUS. “Census. 42 Bulletin No. 177 Table XXV shows the percentage of all farms operated by the own- ers, part owners, and tenants in Utah, 1880, 1890, 1900, and 1910 as given by the U. S. Census Reports. Table XXV.—Percentage of Tenancy, Utah, 1880-1910 -- Per cent of all Farms Operated by eal SREY SAY Gece od (U : : Managers| Owners and Part Owners | Tenants TIS SE SH (i SERGI Rett ete Bee | 95.4 | 4.6 MISO cee es DE WEL CA pay 94.8 | 5.2 TING) pete el ie ce art ri eG | 89.6 | 8.8 ci bt ees rae hea Aa a8 | Heed || 91.2 | 7.9 The explanation of the tenancy conditions of the State as shown in Table XXV is the same as that of the conditions at Hyde Park. (See Tables XXXI to XXXVI in Appendix). Land Values.—Land values are largely determined by type of farming. The agricultural value of a piece of land is the capitalized agricultural income of that land with all future increases discounted to date; and the income of the land is obviously a result of the type of farming practised(‘). The individual farmer must follow a type of farming that is profit- able on land of a given value. Land which can be rented profitably for $20 an acre for producing sugar-beets will not be rented for $3 an acre and used for pasture, except in unusual and rare cases. The value of the land will be based upon the $20 and not the $3. And as long as there are men who want the land for sugar-beets and can afford to pay $20 an acre for it, other men as a rule will not be so unwise, for any length of time, as to pay $20 for such land and use it as pasture when such use will not be profitable for any rent above $3. The factors affecting land values are too numerous to mention here. Only a general analysis is given. Before 1847 land in Utah had little Table XXVI.—Total Value of Land and Buildings, and Value of Land and Buildings per Farm and per Acre, 52 Farms, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 TotalsAcres in allah" War mise so eae See es ee ee 5,434 Average mMImMpbenr acres mper wares oe eee eee ee eee 105 TotalMVial wero flan wall ey I GNSS (2) ee ee ee eee $577,815 Valuerote Wand amcor Slam esSiip Cre blair ree seen ce eS ibaes aba. Valuevor land yang 6 unl dime sie er ACT ens eee eee 106 Total aVialwer fs Marie eee ee ee Re cecatee Oe ee 478,500 Valuevo£-Wandiperk arm: 222.5 8 oY we ee Ee oe 9,202 Value vot: and) per vACre: 2222 8 es ead a ee 88 Totals Values OL + 3 wil diam eg eee ee es Le 99,315 Value of all Buildings) per Harm’ (in) own) eee 1,910 Value of all) (Buildings per) VAC else st. ee eee ee 18 Valuero£t Dwelling sip en) Hi rein (2) eee oe a 1,284 Valuevor others Build ines permbya terres ao eeeen es enneen omnes 626 (1)Taylor, H. C.—Agricultural Economics, (1914), ch. 10, pp. 197, Macmillan Co., N. Y. (2)Reports on the value of dwellings were obtained from 50 farms enly. The average value of dwellings for the 50 farms reporting was $1,335. 185 Some.Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 43 or no agricultural value. Such as it might have had was based upon its prospective future use. As the State became populated, land came to have a value based upon its productivity. This value increased as population became more dense and the land more developed and improved. Comparison of Hyde Park vaiues as given in Table XXVI with those for Cache County and the State, given in Tables XXVIII, XXIX and XXX shows this area to be much better than the average. It has been settled longer and is more developed than many sections of the state. It is impossible to show from the records obtained the changes in land values at Hyde Park. The 1915 and 1916 farm values were raised or lowered by the farmers as determined more by the accuracy of their 1914 estimate than by the actual changes in the market value of the land. Table XXVII was made in order to determine the correlation between distance to market and the value of farm land per acre in each of the 7 districts in which farm business records were taken in 1914. Table XXVII.—Distance from Market and Land Values per Acre in 7 Areas, Utah, 1914 Distance from Market in Miles On| 0 to) 2 tol/2 to| 3 to| 4 to} 5 to| 6 &|Aver- Place| .9 | 1.9 | 2.9 | 3.9 | 4.9| 5.9 |Over|- age Value of land per | | | Acre at Beaver.... |$41 |$ 58 |$ 45 |$ 66 |$ 37/$ 76|$ ....|$104]$ —.. Value of land per | Acre at Hyde Park | 65 150 | 32 92 | SS UGS SO ezO Soe Value of land per | Acre at Wellington ee 47 37 55 | 40 Value of land per | | | ‘Acre at Ferron.... | 32 ivf. 62 SMR nci ely i eees| tN ae lbs ita Wk Value of land per | Acre at Hinckley.. 35 64 63 Sd | WC ee 44) 41 Value of land per Acre at Sandy...... 76 1400) 197.| 196 |: 111] 88| 108). 126 Value of land per | Acre at Monroe..... an 9G)) 141 | 235.) Sb) B98) 88) 0/74 There seems to be no correlation between distance to market and value of land per acre as given in Table XXVII. The difficulty is that other factors are more important, and therefore the correlation which undoubtedly exists is not visible. Those farms nearest to market have an advantage in marketing. Land values are certain to be high there because of this advantage. The average value of land per acre at Hyde Park in 1914 was $88. This is $50 higher than the average value for Cache County and $59 higher than the average value of land in the State in 1910. At Hyde Park farm products are readily marketed as explained in a previous paragraph. Consequently better soil may offset easily the advantage of nearness to market. The fact that there are too few farms in the groups makes Table XXVII of little value except in indicating the method of observation. Table XXVIII shows the percentage of land in farms and farm land improved and land value per acre, by counties, for Utah on April 15, 1910. The counties are arranged according to the percentage of farm land improved. 44 Table XXVIII.—Percentage of Land Bulletin No. 177 in Farms and Farm Land Improved and Land Value per Acre, by Counties, Utah, 1910(*) Percentage of Land Value Farm Land Land Area per Acre Improved in Farms States | See ee 40.3 6.5 $29.28 County | imsSaltwialkes 2s see 71.6 35.0 | 78.34 DAE! TBAT DT Oey ee keer a 65.6 5.3 23.51 Sieg CaChiey es. ce cee ses 61.6 39.5 BH Llmtshay > ALR I Cina eeoe eee sake ee 54.7 22.7 9.32 bee OEMs se eee re oe 53.0 18.0 58.27 Gaui aD eee eres 49.3 5.0 18.95 Weak SOWMCT seer nese 46.1 Sot 32.67 Sea Wim taly rissc cates ee eee 43.6 | 2.4 25.89 SMD AAS Wrest eee eacee 43.5 | 72.3 | 61.41 Oe (Beaver :2 222i e2 42.1 Poll | 25.33 Le Boxeldiens ees. 41.6 9.8 28.25 AUDEN Id OY Vaee soe oes: oe eoeeee ee 40.7 3.4 26.75 Se Sanpete we eee 40.4 26.2 19.91 LAW DET) see ee! 40.3 | 42.8 50.55 Hj Mooelen ess. se ee 38.8 2.0 24.80 IGE IWialynielt. Seeee nena S55) 2.0 | 12.91 NE (ot ISCEDTNN Gr eee ee cee cee 35.1 0.9 | 11.45 See MEd Meir Gur eee ee 32.7 | 3.9 | 18.51 Oe (Garteldy = 39 | 1.8 | 11.87 iO RAVWiclS ail @ llpieeenes sees 28.1 eo | 17.86 rll, \ Wes outa OPN S- eee Patt eit 3.2 | USs39 2iZiom Car OM epee eeee 24.4 6.0 | 15.05 2S SMU OM eesti ar Ne Whee 20.4 | 4.2 13.37 Zaire ASW WM oe eee Iaset | 1.0 | 10.99 ADs gswoaouonis se es 12.5 | 21.9 | Coil PGs, WMiWoeeseal “Lose ae 12.2 | 23.9 | 12.32 Zs (Grand Mees sok Sat 10.4 2.6 | 18.42 In constructing Table XXIX the 27 counties of tne State were di- vided in four groups according to the percentage of farm land improved. This table shows that there is a correlation as expected between the use Table XXIX.—Relation of Improved Farm Land to Value of All Farm Land Per Acre, Utah, 1910(+) Now Percentage of Percentage of Value of all Gr »)| Coun- Farm Land Land Area Land yroup (2) Heke Improved in Farms Per Acre | (Average) (Average) (Average) Pia ee a 57.4 1S Aa} | $36.99 De St leewn | 41.7 22.8 | 34.01 Bib eee eek 7 31.5 2.8 | 16.54 Ate rk Rae 6 | 15.6 | 9:9 | 12.98 (1) Adapted from 1910 U. S. Census, Supplement for Utah, Table 1, pp. 612-614. F in Table 25. (2)Groups are based upon percentage of farm land improved as shown Group. 1 has the 7 counties with the greatest percentage and Group 4 the least percentage of farm land improved. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 45 of land and its value. In general, the value of farm land is highest in those counties where the population is most dense and the _ greatest percentage of farm land is improved. (See Figure 19). Table XXX shows the average values per acre of farm land, build- ings, machinery, and livestock, by counties, Utah, April 15, 1910(*). This table is useful in connection with this study in comparing the counties with each other and the average of the State. Table XXI shows the average value of land and buildings per acre by counties, Utah, Census Years, 1860 to 1910. Table XXX.—Average Values per Acre of Farm Land, Buildings, Machinery, and Livestock, by Counties, Utah(1), 1909 | Implements | Domestic | Land | Builaings and Animals, Poultry | | Machinery and Bees The State........ [$29.28 | $5.32 | $1.32 | $8.46 County | | | 1. Salt Lake......| 78.34 iH sIB} 1.92 | oe PAs va DEN alsiae Soe eee | 61.41 13.24 1.72 | 6.62 Bis: JUNC tp eee eee | 58.27 | 9.72 2.33 | HORI 4 Weber <::::.-.--:- | 50.55 iQ) sfpal 1.89 6.72 Hee ACNG a... <.2-2-.2 | 37.85 6.83 1.387 | 6.82 Gos SCVICT A. .205-c:-22. 32.67 | 4.28 1.86 | 10.82 7. Boxelder ........ | 28.25 4.23 | 1.28 | 6.59 Sea emery: ell oc | 26.75 | 4:05 | 1.66 | 7.44 On Urbain. 2b. 4) | 25.89 Ao | 2.06 | 11.12 LO. Beaver -....:-- | 25.33 | AS00) ~| 1.72 | 11.33 IE TOOCIE ©: 4..-222 | 24.80 | 6.32 | 0D 6.81 ELE) ees. -2_ 2: | 23.51 4.41 Ite 10.32 13: Sanpete, ~-.-._.- | 19.91 3.81 iE ital | 8.84: dich, (eID 0 peas ae eee |» 18.95 | 179 | 1.16 | 7.50 Diseevinilar gd) 77-22. [ els t | 3.24 | a5 | 5.69 Gre Granidie == 222-22 | 18.42 | 4 Sa | .96 | 13.97 17. Washington .. | 18.39 | 4.74 eis | 15.95 See Wasatch) = | Leese | 3.19 1.08 | 9.12 Om Carbon sss) | 15.05 | 2:11 -91 | 7.65 PUB TOR. 2. 2v.sc.2-- | 13.37 -| .76 .89 | 13.79 ZS VViEly Me! 24/5. 2 | i290 | 2202" 4 32 16.61 Dane WORE Aan i222 5 | 12.32) | 2.91 | .62 3.79 Pio Grannel «22.2 jottes7 2.88, | .90 | 17.28 7jt We oal 55 1\ 2 ee | 11.45 | 5.45 | il ajal | 29.34 25. San Juan...... | 10.99 | ea .78 | 18.67 PAG ce: LENG) Mh = 5 Se a ea | 9.32 | foi ae | . | 6.67 ulin LEMON yee ce eo Meg! ar 3.42 Selecteer el eS et ds | ee | In general the value of land and buildings per acre has increased each successive census period. The value in 1900 shows a decrease be- cause much grazing land of low value was included as farm land in the census of 1900 and this lowered greatly the average value of farm land per acre. As population increases or the relative prices of farm products rise or interest rates become lower the land is more thoroughly and intensively utilized and land values become greater. Land values also rise when the relative value of the dollar decreases. Water Tenure.—At Hyde Park about two-thirds of the crop land is irrigated and the other one-third is dry-farm land. Most of the Hyde (1)1910 U. S. Census A6 Bulletin No. 177 Park land that can be irrigated is now irrigated. Hither the water supply or the location of the land Jimits extension of the area. Above the Logan, Hyde Park, and Smithfield canal there is some bench land for which there is no water. This is now dry-farmed to good advantage. Three canal systems from Logan River supply the irrigation water for Hyde Park: (1) Logan and Hyde Park Canal, (2) Logan and Rich- mond Canal, and (3) the Logan, Hyde Park and Smithfield Canal. (See Tepes, ale Table XXXI.—Average Value of Land and Buildings per Acre, by Counties, Utah, Census Years 1910 1900 1890 1880 1870 1860 State sara | $34.60 | $12.83 | $21.46 | $21.38 | $15.49 | $14.82 Counties | Beaviel) ss. l) ZOE ORs | ae [) 222.98). 5) + aOR a 7.54 Boxelder ..--.--. 32.48 5.52 | 5.53 Iyer a svabalss) 0 lO CGachiewee sas 44.68 15.61 20.29 ey? 9.75 15.99 @arpongees == UAL SrA S| aes ie Pee ce 2h 9 | ae ee Davis | 74.65 Boral 35.44 20.20 40.45 28.02 WDOOVSTENY teat no ens Wo BOsSO 14.36 12.83 1.50. Nee Garheld = ATED 13.09 py ee er (Grands 20.69 | 20.68 V4 4b of tee ae i soe imonnes sees salt elee 13.95 14.45 24.28 8.08 (B00) aimee ees | 20.74 12.06 15517 Bla) 10.15 TATE Gare pea Nee eee eee 16.90 14.95 19.57 28.33 3:06: 623s Viale eee Pals 15.81 8.12 15.66 7:94. |; oe Mon gams eee seees S733} AV iy i AG AU 20.51 20.39 aes Pinte ree 27.92 E22 10.55 Dit; || Spal [io ecebeme Rachie ee eee 10.79 Groin |e OnZiG 8.37 Wil gs . ues Sallit alualkienee 93.47 | | 30°80: | (820k 37.66 35.24 Ot Sant ila 13.46 5.64 13.48 3.9400 te Sanpete eee 20.02 20.56 21.42 PAIL) ALLS felis: Sau Sevier BGs I 2s) 15:49 | 9.42 | 8542.5) pene Simm ee 9.45) | 5.06 20.36 11.02 4/23) (on gee Mo oelempe ts ec 31.12 ORO 23.02 24.19 42.35 | 210.28 Wfrirators ete Age oR ae 80.86 Biome al | | LG ERs 2:23: i) (ee | ees Wit aii Se ae 67.99 29.79 41.83 | 24.81 12.85 | 8.28 Wasatch _......... 21205 9.35 18.66 15.83 ASV A SS gee Washington _.. Zomlee 34.36 Se e374 44.34 BAN cal 28.52 Wialyne eee. 16.93 | Deb 6 i pe eee tee ee ee lla es cee | Wieber 2. 252") 61.26 21.89 6.18 | 2.38 15.29 17.94 Irrigation from the Logan River began in 1860. Soon afterward the Logan and Hyde Park canal was begun. In 1864 the Logan and Rich- mond Canal was begun. This latter canal now supplies water for land above or east of the Logan and Hyde Park Canal. The Logan and Rich- mond Canal was not completed until 1877 (1). Twice since then it has been enlarged. The Logan, Hyde Park, and Smithfield Canal made its first appropriation of water in 1882 (2). The first 7,000 feet of this canal is constructed on a steep mountain side necessitating considerable rock work, and its course is very much higher in. elevation than either of the other canals. It shall therefore be referred to hereafter as the High Line Canal in contrast with the Upper and Lower Canals. (1)Swenson, G. L.—uU. S. D. A. Bul. No. 86 (1900), pp. 197-218. (2)Swenson, G. L.—U. S. D. A. Bul. No. 104 (1902), pp. 179-194. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah AT The Logan and Richmond Canal, or Upper Canal, supplies sufficient water on the average to irrigate about 3,186 acres and the Logan, Hyde Park, and Smithfield Canal, or High Line Canal, about 3,200 acres. The Upper Canal system is owned and managed by the farmers organized as an irrigation company under the law passed in 1865, and the High Line Canal system is owned and operated by the farmers organized as a stock company. In both canals water-rights were obtained in payment for services in constructing them or bought from the original owners. In the Upper Canal a water-right entitles one to sufficient water to irrigate a certain number of acres, a very variable and uncertain quantity; but in the High Line Canal a water-right entitles one to only his proportion of the available irrigation water, a more variable and uncertain amount; and the division is made on the basis of shares of stock held in the company. In neither case does the right specify an exact quantity of water. This lack of specification has advantages and disadvantages. However, it is impossible to discuss them here. | A claim to sufficient water to . irrigate one acre cost the original owners of the Upper Canal $18 to $20 and about 50 cents annually per acre irrigated for operation and maintenance of the canal system. Only one-third of the 50 cents per acre charge is required in cash. The other two-thirds may be paid in labor. The original shares in the High Line Canal cost $5 each and the annual maintenance and opera- tion of the canal system cost about 50 cents per share. ; The best way to express the duty Fig. 21.—Three Canals that Supply of water is in inches or cubic feet Irrigation Water for Hyde Park per second when the water is not Farms, Cache County, Utah. stored, but when the water is stored (after G. L. Swenson) it is best expressed in acre-feet. It is better to express it in acre-feet per acre and not in a fraction of an acre per acre-foot. When a stream is discharging one cubic foot of water every second of time there is a second-foot flow. A second-foot stream discharges approximately one acre-inch per hour, one acre-foot in twelve hours, two acre-feet in twenty-four hours (one day), and two hundred forty acre-feet in the four months, May 1 to August 31, inclusive(‘). The duty of water under the High Line Canal was about sixty acres per cubic foot per second in 1900, and the duty under the Upper Canal was about sixty-two acres per cubic foot per second including loss from seepage and evaporation from the canal and forty-seven acres not in- cluding this loss. The duty may be greatly increased by the time (1) Winsor, L. M.—Utah Exp. Sta. Cir. No. 6 (1912); and Israelsen, O. W.—Utah Exp. Sta. Cir. No. 36 CLSL9))- ee A8 Bulletin No. 177 method of distribution under which each acre-right entitles the person to the use of an “‘irrigating stream’’ for a specified number of hours. Water masters are elected by the owners of each system. These water masters have complete supervision over the water distribution. There are but few gauges or measuring devices, and headagate boxes are of variable sizes. Tho “‘irrigating streams’’ are supposed to be equal, they are not. The equivalent of an ‘“‘irrigating stream,’’ as measured, ranged from 0.85 to 3.12 cubic feet per second(1). The splendid success of these canals has been due to (1) the general spirit of cooperation among the water users, and (2) the type of men who have managed the distribution of the water. A good irrigating stream for the average man under average: condi- tions is from 2 to 5 second-feet(2). Three to five acre-inches is enough for a good irrigation. Two and one-half acre-feet is the maximum needed in Utah, in addition to the precipitation to produce a crop, if it is applied at the proper season between May 1 and August 31, inclusive. One second-foot will irrigate 70 to 160 acres in the four months of the irrigating season. In Cache County, as in all parts of the State, water tenure, water- rights, and the operation and management of the canal systems are of prime importance. In 1910(%) there were 1,907 farms in Cache County, 1,501(4) or 79 per cent of which were irrigated. The approximate land area of the county was 744,960 acres. There were 294,160 acres in farms, 181,348 acres—not including wild grass land—improved, and 77,330 acres—including wild grass land—irrigated. The land irrigated was 10.4 per cent of the total land area, 26.3 per cent of the land in farms, and 42.6 per cent of the improved land in farms. In 1910 the irrigation enterprises were capable of irrigating only 82,503 acres, but 119,304 acres were included in the projects. There were 62,230 acres irrigated by cooperative enterprises(5). These same enterprises were capable of irrigating 63,767 acres and included 97,521 acres. The re- mainder of the land was irrigated under the following projects: (1) irrigation ‘districts(%), 8,455 acres; (2) individual and partnership en- terprises(7), 5,623 acres; and (3) commercial enterprises(8), 1,022 (1)Swenson, G. L.—U. S. D. A. Bul. No. 104 (1902), pp. 179-218. (2) Winsor, L. M.—Utah Exp. Sta. Cir. No. 6 (1912). (3)U. S. Census (1910) (4) Ibid.—‘‘The number of ‘farms irrigated’ is the number of farms on which irrigation is practised, and is equivalent to the term ‘number of irrigators’ which was used in previous census reports.’’ (5) Ibid.—‘‘Cooperative enterprises are those which are controlled by the water users under some organized form of cooperation. The most common form of organization is the stock company, the stock of which is owned by the water users.’’ (6)U. S. Census (1910)—‘‘Irrigation districts are public corporations that operate under state laws providing for their organization and man- agement, and empowering them to issue bonds and levy and collect taxes with the object of obtaining funds for the purchase or construction, and for the operation and maintenance of irrigation works.’’ (7) Ibid.—‘“‘Individual partnership enterprises belong to individual farmers or to neighboring farmers, who control them without formal organization. It is not always possible to distinguish between’ partner- ship and cooperative enterprises, but as the difference is slight this is unimportant.” (8) Ibid.—‘*‘Commercial enterprises supply water for compensation to parties who own no interest in the works. Persons obtaining water from such enterprises are usually required to pay for the right to receive water, and to pay, in addition, annual charges based in some instances on the acreage irrigated and in others on the quantity of water received.” Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 49 acres. The source of the water supply for irrigation was as follows: (1) streams, by gravity, 73,369 acres; (2) springs, 3,916 acres; and (3) flowing wells, 45 acres. There were 137 independent irrigation enterprises having 139 main ditches, with a combined length of 324 miles and a combined capacity of 1,393 cubic feet per second. There were 153 laterals with a combined length of 142 miles. Other sources of water are: one reservoir, filled by collecting storm water or by a water course that is ordinarily dry, of 1,566 acre-feet capacity; and thirty-three flowing-wells of 734 gallons per minute capacity. The cost of all irrigation enterprises reporting costs, as reported by the 1910 census, up to July 1, 1910, was $304,285. The average cost of con- struction per acre that enterprises were capable of irrigating in 1910 was $3.69. The estimated final cost of existing enterprises was $304,285, or an average of $2.55 per acre included in the projects. The cost of: operation and maintenance was reported for 63,507 acres and amounted to $26,974, or an average of 42 cents per acre. Water was formerly personal property in Utah(1) and rights were sold, exchanged, and leased with little regard for formalities—and often without making any official record of the transactions. Whe. a farmer found that his water-right furnished him more water than he needed, he sold a part of it outright, or rented a part of it by the year to some neighbor, or he bought another piece of land and transferred a part of his water-right to it. A ditch company could rent or sell a part of its rights to some other ditch company.. And even now not all the irrigators of Utah have definite, undisputed, legally defined titles to water. Often the seller does not know what he is selling, nor the buyer what he is buying. The water transferred is supposed to irrigate a certain number of acres. It may irrigate more or less, depending upon the available supply in the streams and upon how the water master divides it. : Only recently has any attempt been made to measure out any certain quantity of water. The water of but few of the streams is divided ac- curately. The records of water-rights are now entered in the office of the State Engineer who also issues all permits to appropriate water. The rights of appropriations now issued by the State Engineer state speci- fically in feet and inches the amount of water included, but it is a diffi- cult task to determine how much water to allow permits for in the various streams. because the volume of water in the streams varies greatly from year to year and from season to season. However, inves- tigations and experience have given a body of quite accurate informa- tion for the most important streams of the State. The foregoing discussion shows clearly how water tenure affects the type of irrigation farming. Water is almost as important in determin- ing type of farming as land. While perhaps not more than 10 per cent of the land in Utah will ever be cultivated, yet if even this area is farmed profitably it will be possible only by irrigation. Irrigation Practice.—On the farm lands at Hyde Park the custom is to use the water whenever and wherever it may be needed up to the limit of the supply. The average irrigating season is 110 to 120 days in May, June, July, August, and September. . There are two methods of applying the water: (1) flooding the whole surface, used in irrigating (a) wheat, (b) oats, (c) alfalfa, (d) hay, (e) corn, and (f) orchards; and (2) the furrow method which is used in irrigating (a) sugar-beets, (b potatoes, (c) gardens, (d) orchards, and (e) corn. Wheat, oats, corn, and hay are usually irrigated twice; sugar-beets, potatoes, alfalfa, and the other crops three or more times. The depth of (1)Gemmell, R. C.—U. S. D. A. Bul. No. 104 (1902), pp. 159-163. 50 Bulletin No. 177 irrigation water used varies greatly with crop and soil. In 1899 the average was about 3.59 feet(1). The total water received by the land was 3.59 feet by irrigation and 0.16 feet by rainfall, a total of 3.75 feet. ‘The average depth applied at each irrigation in 1899 was 1.2 feet. In 1899 the greatest demand for water was for wheat and alfalfa and therefore came first in July and second in June. The demand in Au- gust and September was due to the late irrigations of alfalfa. At pres- ent little wheat is raised at Hyde Park by irrigation. The irrigation of alfalfa is about the same now as twenty years ago, but sugar-beets have taken the place of wheat as a cash crop on the irrigated land. The heavy irrigating seasons are now, as they were in 1899, in July and June. Table XXXII shows the crops grown, the period of irrigation, the num- ber of irrigations, and the days between irrigations, Hyde Park, Cache ~County, Utah, 1900. Table XXXII.—Crops Grown, Period of Irrigation, Number of Irrigations, Days Between Irrigations, Logan and Richmond Canal, 1900(1) Crop Grown Period of Irrigation eae Bees Wheat 2 Laine inte Angus 1b eee 2 21 Oats:4e eee June 15 to August 20..... 2 2 ANNs June 6 to September 10_.. By yoy 5) 2 RoravOeste-eee= July 10 to August 29.....:. 4 to 6 | 20 Sugar-beets_...|June 15 to September 20- Dabo 1065) Gardens.....--.-- June 1 to September 15. WO Wb) Ul Onchand sees. June 1 to September 15. (e oeoy ILS) Ui The wheat and oats were irrigated twice. Twice as many irrigations were necessary for alfalfa as for the small-grains and about twice the amount of water was also applied, 2.90 feet as compared to 1.25 feet on oats where no waste occurs(!). Quantity of Irrigation Water to Use(2).—Wheat requires relatively little water. On deep, well-tilled soils 7% inches of water in two irri- gations should be sufficient; on shallow, gravelly soils as high as 18 inches may be used in 4 or 5 irrigations. An average of one acre-foot should be ample for the production of wheat on fertile, well-tilled soils. Oats should not receive less water than wheat; barley about the same amount as wheat; but rye may be grown with less water than the other small-grains. Corn should .seldom receive more than from 12 to 18 inches of water. Alfalfa can make use of more water than the grains and should re- ceive from 12 to 24 inches of water according to the age of the crop and the depth of the soil. Ordinarily, 18 inches should be enough. The other hay-making crops like timothy and orchard grass need even less water than a crop of wheat. They are cut only once, while alfalfa is cut three times or more. Clover requires probably from 12 to 15 inches of water. Pastures and meadows should receive according to location from 12 to 24 inches of water. ‘ Under present practice sugar-beets receive from 15 to 24 inches of water, but the tendency is for somewhat less to be used. Carrots and other root crops should receive about the same. The more seed is planted the more water is required. Potatoes need a good supply of water in (1)Swenson, G. L.—U. S. D. A. Bul. No. 104 (1902), pp. 179-218. (2) Widtsoe, J. A., Stewart, Geo.—‘‘Western Agriculture’ (1918) p. 138. Web: Pub: Co., St) Paul, Minn. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah | 51 the soil at planting time. The total quantity should be about the same as that for sugar-beets. As a rule cultivated crops on irrigated land require less water than uncultivated crops. Alfalfa requires more than potatoes and oats more than corn. It has been aptly said that “‘the limit of profitable economy (in irrigating) is to use the least quantity of water necessary to secure the best yield’(1). This is true if by ‘‘best yield’’ we mean the most profitable yield. The most profitable yield is not necessarily the highest vield. It is fairly safe to say that all ordinary crops, including trees and shrubs, should receive from 12 to 24 inches of water. This amount is considerably less than is now applied to crops. As better cultural meth- ods are employed the duty of water becomes higher, that is, less is used per acre. When to Irrigate.—Investigations at Greenville, the township ad- joining Hyde Park on the South, with conditions very similar in most respects to the Hyde Park area, show that about 20 inches of water may be recommended for use for the growing of corn for grain(2) and about 30 inches for growing corn stover(?). With sugar-beets, 1 inch of water weekly gives higher yields than more than this amount. If only one irrigation is given the best time to apply it is when the beets are about 2 inches in diameter as this results in a higher percentage of sugar in the beet than when watered at any other time(‘). The highest yield of potatoes is produced where small regular irri- gations are given. One inch weekly or 12.8 inches during the season gives a higher yield than any other treatment(5). This involves a labor problem which complicates the irrigation practice. When as much as 96 inches of water are applied the yield is less than where no water is applied. Where but one irrigation is applied, it gives best results if applied when the potatoes are in full bloom. The second best stage is just as tubers begin to form. Discontinuing irrigation during the rapid growing season, after it is once begun, decreases the yield. Excessive moisture, or that applied late in the life of the plant, increases the rela- tive production of vines. The relative number of tubers per hill is in- creased by early irrigation, while the relative size of the tubers is in- fluenced more by late water. It is very important to have an even supply of moisture during the middle portion of the life of the potato after the tubers begin to form, and before they begin to ripen. Irrigation experiments with oats show that plats receiving 5 inches of water each week for 6 weeks (total 30 inches) gave the highest yield, 79.9 bushels. The next highest yield was 79 bushels an acre and was produced with 15 acre-inches of water (3 five-inch irrigations) (¢). If water was the only limiting factor here, it is evident that it would be unwise to apply the additional 15 inches to obtain a yield of only one additional bushel, because the same 15 inches if applied to another acre of land might produce the same yield as the first 15 inches or 79 bushels. Land as land is not a limiting factor here, but land of a particular farm so situated as to be readily irrigated and thus to utilize to best advantage the 15 inches of water is a limiting factor. Where the location of land (1)Meade, Elwood—‘‘Irrigation Institutions’ (1910), pp. 116-117. Macmillian Co., New York. (2)Harris, F. S., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 138, (May, 1914), (3)Harris, F. S., and Pittman, D. W., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. boa CApril, 1917), p. 22. (4) Harris, F. 8., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 156, (June, 1917), p. 22. (5) Harris, F. S., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 157, (June, 1917), p. 17. (6)Harris, F. S., and Pittman, D. W., Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. Lod, \eMarens 919) cep tT. Rye Bulletin No. 177 limits its use and labor is not a preventing factor, it may be profitable to an individual farmer to apply the additional 15 inches of water in order to obtain the additional yield of one ‘bushel of oats per acre. While this condition may make this practice profitable to an individual farmer, it certainly would be uneconomical from the standpoint of society as a whole, because some farmer in any irrigated area can use 15 inches of water more economically than producing just one bushel of oats. It is apparent then that three five inch irrigations, (1) at the five- leaf stage, (2) at the early-boot stage, and (3) in the bloom stage, with an average yield per acre of 79 bushels give the most satisfactory re- sults generally. Where only one irrigation is given the best time is at the five-leaf stage. Where two irrigations are given, (1) the five-leaf, and (2) the boot stages are best. In the case of alfalfa the first irrigation should occur just before the time of bud formation, and another just before or after each cutting. Four or five inches of water form a fairly large single application. Us- ually a smaller quantity is sufficient to maintain the crop in good con- dition(1). Farm Credit.—That the farmers’ ability to get money may affect the type of farming practised in a region has been well demonstrated in the tenant system of single-crop cotton-farming in the Southern States. Table XXXIII—Farm Mortgages, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 INGO HAT SSI PL COVe “TEA Boats, IRSoKove Moe I a 52 NLM ber Of farms monte Cee eee eee 18 Amount of mortgaged debt: (average) -..-.............-_.-. See Sila: Value of land and buildings per farm mortgage (CAMO ©) EA ae 0 ee a See a ea ee eee eee ee 9,559 Ratio of mortgage debt to value of land and buildings 12 per cent Number of farms on which rate of interest paid was: 6° per cent +. see See tae Se ee i Number of farms on which rate of interest paid Was 6: sper Cente <'s Etna Nene esr ee ae ee ee 14 Number of farms on which rate of interest paid was (836 ‘per Canteen eee ee ee rere ies ee i Number of farms on which rate of interest paid was; 9" per ‘Cemitis aise se a ees ee ee 2 Average rate of interest paid by 18 farmers... 8.03 per cent Again many farmers of the Intermountain States claim that they would like to go into livestock farming but that they lack the money necessary to get into the business in good shape. The funds a farmer operates with are in tne form of capital goods, cash, or credit. Credit is obtained from banks or other institutions or persons loaning money to farmers, on the basis of the applicants character, capacity, and collateral. The mortgage debt of farmers may therefore be important in determining type of farming. Farmers often obtain funds for construction, develop- ment, and operation by mortgaging the farm. At Hyde Park in 1914, 18 farms out of 52 were mortgaged. The average value of land and buildings per farm mortgaged was $9,559 and the average mortgage debt $1,151, or 12 per cent. of the value of the land and buildings. The rate of interest most common was 8 per cent. Fourteen farmers paid 8 per cent, 1 paid 8% per cent, 2 paid 9 per cent, (1)Widtsoe, J. A., and Stewart, George, ‘Western Agriculture’’, (ALS)LS)) 4 30... 1UALR Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 53 Table XXXIV.—Mortgage Debt of Farms by Counties, Utah, 1910(1) For all Farms Op-| For Martgaged Farms Consisting of erated by Owners Owned Land Only Ses = oe x ee =e Ear Genie pea hina, | REO Area 2 & 2 bo ae ne actos 2k 2S s er) ur ui sal fe) = sro S Ow rt eee eee ete aes | ss fe ee ee | ce | eee. | ae~ | |S2 8 a aS.| 2. Ss = i Se ‘ Ee 325 as 2 State .......|15,131| 4,492] 139 | 3,526/21,319,580|4,564,175| 21.4 nto 263] 21 1 te ee Teaed 16.2 Busidem.. 869| 502| 11 369| 2,767,325| 601,590| 21.7 a 1,126| 621 9 449| 3,606,494] 672,922) 18.7 Peet DSO et God 2 19 97,700} 14,520) 14.9 fe ee 937) 261 | 7 HINO el-s6eueh| »2b4 Tt ee a alae Oy Ar) 1 166| 957,867| 206,575| 21.6 Gaeaid. oe 318) 3 4 30} 101,885 30,065| 29.5 pr te 129; 26 1 21| 154,295 15,198 9.9 eee ; 303 23 7 14 85,600 AG BSOl. Dice 5 ee eee 408 68 | 19 64 327,315 93,992| 28.7 Hane #45 2: 152! LDg eats 10) 37,980 9,180| 24.2 Mallard 585 75 10 56| 220,33 46,560} 21.1 Morgan ...... 167 46 -, 31; 189,040| 24,495| 13.0 Bintan. 132| 41| i} 33] 109,250! 28,667] 26.2 Reb: = 8.2. 142) Bib) .* i 2: 46| 382,455| 122,426] 32.0 Bete ako il ees 454 4 366| 1,911,295| 396,625| 20.8 San Juan eats 142 9 ‘oh 7| 26,018 8,300 31.9 Sanpete ...... 1,307 319 2 256| 1,177,698|- 287,972] 20.2 Sevier ........ 633] 315] 3 274| 1,312,515| 266,324] 20.3 Summit _..... 355 | 51 1 42} 305,313 64,585| 21.2 Tooele .......- 245 44 53 S41 72,065]. bb 2b0| 14:8 Winta’ <<... 457 115 29 105| 463,975] 99,819] 21.5 Toi rs OTL e468). - 22 489| 2,675,370| 650,040| 24.3 Wasatch __.-. 790 98 2 81} 491,062] 118,745] 24.2 Washington 553) 30 em 21| 46,558 7.125] 15.3 Wayne wea 208 | 23] 2 18| 58,200 a la Pa WA 19.2 Weber .......- 942| 369] 1 286| 1,622,612) 381,014] 23.5 ———————————————————— and 1 paid only 6 per cent interest on the farm mortgage. The average rate therefore, was 8.03 per cent including commissions, when paid. (See Table XXXIII.) From investigations that have been made here and elsewhere in the State 1c seems that these farmers might make more money by extend- ing their operations by increasing the number of acres cropped and the number of productive livestock units handled(2). With the operation of the Federal Land Bank at San Francisco and a Local Farm Loan Asso- ciation in Cache County these farmers should be able to extend their (2) 4910 U. S: Census. (2) Brossard, E. B., Utah Agr. College Cir. No. 23, and also Utah Agr. Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 160. 54 Bulletin No. 177 operations considerably by using funds obtained by credit based on the farm mortgage. Under the Federal Farm Loan Act farmers are able to borrow as much as 50 per cent of the value of the land for agricultural purposes and 20 per cent of the value of the permanent insured improvements> At present the interest rate is 54% per cent. The loan may be obtained for a period of 40 years if desired with the privilege of paying it or any part of it any time after 5 years. Regular payments on the amortization plan are required each year. i In Cache County in 1910(4), 621 farms were mortgaged, 449 of which consisted of owned land only. The total value of the land and buildings mortgaged was $3,606,494, and the mortgage debt $672,922, or 18.7 per cent of the value of land and buildings. (See Table XXXIV). Table XXXV.—Farm Mortgages, Utah and the United States, 1910 (4) Utah Usas: Total oPharms sReporting=) eee 19,762 3,948,722 Harms Eree strom Wontga gers alsyalay 2,588,596 Rarnms'>)Montgaee ds ese eis ee ee eee 4,492 1,312,034 VoL oa NS) TaONE, SNOKeOMITeYGl aa ee acct 139 48,092 Morgtaged Farms owned wholly by the | OPEravOr Pease el le Eee meres 3,526 1,006,511 Value of Land and Buildings on Mort- FeaPeEeReY Wel ee GIO OYSS, Beene AOR os Cos eg Mika) Soret $21,319,580 $6,3830,236,951 Amount of Mortgaged Debt.....................- 4,564,175 bY OA yep a 4st Mortgaged Farms owned wholly by the Land and Buildings (per cent) -.--....-. 21.4 Ailiees Average Value of Land and Buildings per WMarmiy:) Bisse ee a ae ee 6,046 6,289 Average Mortgage Debt per Farm.......- 1,294 OS WNoyerctyexey ID olbhiteny joer? IME W RANE 4,752 4,574 In Utah in 1910(4), of 19,762 farms reporting, 15,131 were free from mortgage, 4,492 were mortgaged, and 139 did not specify. There were 3,526 mortgaged farms wholly owned by the operators. The value of land and buildings on these farms was $21,319,580 and the mortgage debt was $4,564,175, or 21.4 per cent of the value of land and build- ings. This ratio for the United States as a whole was 27.3 per cent. The average value of land and buildings per farm in Utah, 1910, was $6,046 and the average mortgage debt per farm was $1,294 thus leaving an average equity of $4,752 per farm. For the United States as a whole the average value of land and buildings per farm was $6,289, the average mortgage debt $1,715, and the average equity $4,574 per farm. (See Table XXXV). A fairly accurate estimate(2) of the farm mortgage debt of all Utah farmers in 1914 places it at $6,818,000, of which $6,000,000 or 88 per cent was held by banks, $862,000, or 12.6 per cent, held by life insur- ance companies, and $340,000 negotiated by banks and bank officials as agents or correspondents for other investors. These figures do not check exactly because they have been arrived at separately and no attempt has been made to force them. It is also estimated that 67 per cent of the farm mortgage business of Utah, pays no commission and 33 per cent of the business pays an average commission of .4 per cent. Of the (1)1910 U. S. Census, Vol. 5, Tables 9, 11, and 12. (2) Thompson, C. W., U. S. Dt A., Office of Markets and Rural Organ- ization, Bul. No. 384, (July, 1916), pp. 2, 8, and 10 respectively. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 55 total mortgage business 18.3 per cent pays a commission in advance and 14.7 per cent pays it on the installment plan. The average mortgage rate of interest paid was 8.6 per cent, which makes 9 per cent with the commission. The estimated average interest rate for farm loans on personal security in Utah, 1914 (1), was 8.8 per cent and the estimated average other costs of the loans, 1.6 per cent, making the average esti- mated total cost, including discounts, bonuses, commissions and any other extra charges, 10.4 per cent. -Only in unusual cases can farmers pay this high rate and make a profit in farming. Farm Profits —Farm profits are largely determined by the type of farming practised. The type of farming most profitable depends upon the circumstances of the individual farmer and farm. Two of the first guestions that arise in one’s mind are: (1) Is farming profitable? and (2) How profitable is it? Table XXXVI shows the average labor income of 52 Hyde Park farm- ers in 1914. The value of the farm house is included as a part of the capital investment, the increase in the value of land is omitted, and the interest rate used is 8 perecent. Table XXXVI.—Avyerage Labor Income, 52 Farms, Hyde Park, 1914 CaO tale MVC SUM CGE eo noes eee ge cease se ee Ue $138,642 RCE TOES), SE tO Sa ae ee sa ee a eee ener e-poe at) WEDS OVS OSES ie I a oe a ee eee Ae ees 1,882 Farm Income (Receipts less expenses) --._..-......- $1,628 Interest on Capital Investment (at 8 per cent) -__. ADSL LLEEEH) OKO) GY ae br at(CCO) 0 SI ee 9 ee ee ee $537 At 5 per cent(2), interest is $682 and labor income, $946; at 5% per cent(%), interest is $750 and labor income $878; at 8 per cent(4), interest is $1,091 and labor income $537; at 8.6 per cent(5), interest is $1,173 and labor income $455; and at 9 per cent (¢), interest is $1,228 and labor income $400. Table XXXVII shows the farmer’s pay for management and risk or responsibility taken, 52 farms, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914. Table XXXVIII shows the labor income of the 10 better-paying farms of Hyde Park in 1914. At 5 per cent, interest is $991 and labor income, $1,997; at 5% per cent, interest is $1,090 and labor income, $1,899; at 8 per cent, interest is $1,585 and labor income, $1,403; at 8.6 per cent, interest is $1,704 and labor income, $1,285; and at 9 per cent, in- terest is $1,783 and labor income, $1,206. (1)Thompson, C. W., U. S. D. A., Office of Markets and Rural Or- ganization, Bul. No. 409, (August, 1916), p. 6. (2)The investigators of the Office of Farm Management, U. S. D. A. use 5 per cent interest for all districts in the United States in calculating Jabor income. (a) Thompson, E. H., and others, U. S. D. A., B. P. I., Bul. No. 41, (Jan., 1914); (b) Thompson, E. H., and others, U. S. D. A., B. P. I., Bul. No. 117, (July, 1914); (c) Spillman, W. J., and others, U. S. D. A., Farm Mgt. Bul. No. 341, (Jan., 1916); and (d) Connor, L. G., U.S. D: A., Farm Met. Bul. No. 582, (Jan., 1918), Note, p. 2. (8)The Federal Farm Loan Act of July 17, 1916, provides that in- terest rate on farm mortgage loans shall not exceed 6 per cent, nor be more than 1 per cen: greater than the rate on the last issue of farm loan bonds. ‘The present rate on farm mortgages under this act is 51% per cent. (4)The most common rate of interest at Hyde Park and in the State. (5)The estimated average mortgage rate without commission for Utah. (*)The estimated average mortgage rate including commissions, Utah. 56 Bulletin No. 177 Table XXXVII.—The Farmer’s Pay for Management and Risk or Responsibility Taken, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 Number’ Ok iyMalrmmigt sae oa eee ee eee 52 Capital Investment (1). 23 ee ee eee $12,307 Total: Tr CO re ye Fo ate ce ee ala ey ee cee $3,183 Farm sales and increase in inventory other than land. 2,510 Value of farm products, food and fuel, used in home(2) 411 Increase in value of land (105 A. at $2.50 per A.) (3) 262 "LOGE: — Sra CEO TS ae eee a ae ere ree eee ee ee ee 2,467 Unpaid: family la Dio ry peas ae re ee ee eee 204 Help m hired by mon thie Or syed ese eee eee 56 Help_hbired) by- day Ors piece te ee 116 Cashmexpense for board om nure denies emere eee eens lt Other ‘cash® farm “expenses ee eee ase ee 495 Opportunity value of farmer’s labor(#) -_-._.__....... ied ee 600 Imterest, on capital sat Ss Per ace mi (Oso eee 985 Farmer’s Pay for Management and Risk or Responsibility ; taken (Total income minus total subtractions) _____. 716 i Table XXXIX shows the farm capital, receipts, expenses, farm in- come, interest on investment, and labor income of farms of the Hyde Park area, Cache County, Utah, 1915. At 5 per cent, interest on the average capital invested in the 48 farms is $599 and labor income $589; at 5% per cent, interest is $569 and labor income $529; at 8 per cent, interest is $959 and labor income $229; at 8.6 per cent, interest is »1,031 and labor income $157; and at 9 per cent, interest is $1,076 and labor income $112. The average of the 10 better-paying farms has a labor income of $1,446 with interest at 5 per cent, $1,374 with interest at 5% per cent, $1,015 with interest at 8 per cent, $920 when interest is 8.6 per cent, and $872 with interest at 9 per cent. The average of the 10 poorer-paying farms had a labor income of minus $93 with in- terest figured at 5 per cent. Table XL shows the labor income of farmers of the Hyde Park area, Cache County, Utah, 1916. The labor incomes of the farmers of this (1) Average capital investment, 52 farms, $13,642; minus $1,335, average value of dwelling, 50 farms. (2) Punk, W. C2.) SD. Aj -harmers, Bull No. bob) eG Decent oueaaye p. 5, gives $64.19 as the average value per person of food and fuel pro- duced on the farm and consumed in the farm home on 483 farms in 10 representative districts of the United States. At Hyde Park the farmers use about the average amount of fuel and food items mentioned in this Hulletin and in addition get their year’s supply of wheat for flour which is taken as grist to the mills. The average consumption per person of wheat for flour in the United States in 1914 was about 5 bushels. The average price of wheat in Utah Dec. 1, 1914, was $0.86. The value of wheat used for flour per person was, therefore, 5x$0.86, or $4.30. $4.30 plus $64.19 equals $68.49 per person in the farm family. There were, on the average, 6 persons per family on the farms at Hyde Park, 1914, and 6x$68.49 equals $410.84 per family, or in whole numbers, $411. (3)1910 U. S. Census shows that in the ten years ending April 15, 1910, land in Cache County, increased in value $24.93 per acre, from $12.92 in 1900 to $37.85 in 1910. This amounts to $2.50 an acre each year. It is assumed that land at Hyde Park increased at this same rate. (+)Estimated by the farmers. The estimates varied from $200 to $1,000. (°)The most common rate of interest paid at Hyde Park and else- where in Utah. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 57 Table XXXVIII.—Business Statement of the Average of 10 Better- Paying Farms of the Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming and Labor Income Farm Capital No.., Value Hints ienicroemiitotnie =) ween a Pe ee 226) | $16,162 WO eee CHING Tae STINT IoC OMWIS)) aac Sees eee ee sees ee 1,225 REL OT SO Rerelia Clit COMES meee te eee ee ee ae ee eek 10 - 1,204 SH NGO. Soe cae ele eS ee An ee ee ee ee 1 4 TELCO YERS WSS ee he So Sa pe eR se ee 6 72 TE Cras vas eee eee eek Ne ee i ee 8 OR ee dal 35 NV Frere ETN Tepe ee. ed CL ES AE Es Bo ee nee te 542 HEU TCe SIND DIGS = 22 ne ete ee ee ee ee ee ee 542 ‘CRNSTD: Lae he Ag 2 Se ee 5 ee a eta eae ee ee Oe 51 MO tal H AI aC Ub adler ee ee. ee a8 ee eee oe ae $19,816 Farm Receipts Crops hs DIST) CS) OX EVEN WSs eae ae ees oe fe ae Sek Sn ee a ik ee See i $ 1,070 RARE UOL 25-2 Soe are pee Rer i 9 nS, Ser eR ee Wid Aa POs foe ee Aaa ae 908 1 PAG UIE CCOYENS). Be Capa. SF LE ache AR ea RRS See Re ee a 190 Milagre Mes eer ee ae eee ee Jo ee Es Ss 59 EET UUGS cn Ge WiGReCADNGS:. 2222s. choses a ee 16 Livestock , DWaiieyeeDROMUCES, 2-2-2052 — 4 ye ee eee ever een ee eee : 623 Char atc Sa (28) ap eee a SR SR ae re ees ae ae a nee ea ene lS ce 399 LBIO TASES Loren sae ee a ENR PS inet Sun el a Oo Re ne ae | 194 TEE 351) eee eee ee a ee ee Sst oh uate Obit Some a Ne de De 116 Poultry (2) and eggs.-.-..- 1 SS Bee yas eee TRE es AD See oe 64 MascellamecOusnrecelpus ses. eee ee eR 348 iniereascunsteedcandssuppliess = Sk i el ee 146 POA nee ENC COLD tse ea wei Se ee he $ 4,133 Farm Expenses TRNTASYGL gE OX opr ey (2) eet Sages SN tae nae RE See ed eee ee $ 288 WalitewoL sramulyilalp Omnis) eet 82 eee em el ee 2702 Cash@ rent and forest, reserve. fees. _2.-<.. 2 -.2eceeecoet ences nen 127 (UEISECEIS) stat ces See a Ee 2 et SORE ae ere he a eee a ae LLG Machinery repairs sand ‘depreciation..-.......c...............4...-. 33 Building and fence repairs and depreciation... 12 Reed. 3... onc hagda® ah OL SW IN Seg I ce Re ee 50 Flornseshoeing and jveterinary fees.....-2-35..-5.9. st. 3 BRGCMINe BLOGS AMO eNGCUss 29 te ee 58 whreshingsand twine (excludes toll) ...............- 72 DlaACHIMNGy WORK: Mme ete eee Se ei 6 EMR RmaeR TS one Oe ee ry ee ee A oy eg ae eke 24 MICCUAaneOUs s EX PONS) oH ee a oe tT 56 SRG cH aN, AUR OURO ces. eee ee ees os ile el oe gree $ 1,145 Farm Income (receipts minus expenses) ............................ 2,988 Interest on total farm capital (at 8 per cent).................... : 1,585 ROUT Tg AS) LS Sos ete A Re Oe ee ee, et 1,403 a ree SEN 2 ee ee ee (1)The receipts from stock are found by subtracting the sum of the purchases and what is on hand at the beginning of the year from the sum of the sales and that on hand at the close of the year. (2)Includes cash expense of boarding hired labor. (3)Except that of the operator of the farm. 58 Bulletin No. 177 Table XXXIX.—Business Statement of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming Average of Average of Average 10 better- 10 least- of all paying profitable 48 ‘ farms farms farms FKarm Capital FUG aM SS tele ls) ee eee $11,396 $10,438 $ 9,471 ThiVeStiO Cis 8 332 2 ea Be Cee a ee ee 2,062 1,410 1,629 Machinery and) toolss= aus 489 405 469 MGedwamdsseedseeeaeeee ee ee eee 376 AD Die 344 Casta short 2s Se a a ee ee nn BH) 13 74 Total arma apitall ese ee ee eer $14,358 $12,688 $11,987 Farm Receipts CROPS ih 5 a ern e $ 1,569 $ 958 $ 1,049 Thivest0 ck cee eee ee tees Sees oS 1,074 336 692 Miscellaneous receipts__-.---.- See 9 Bh eae ASE 413 92 233 Increase in feed and seeds inventory....... 84 0 34 DYoyuaILL Venema 1ROCSM ONS eee sere cee sees $ 3,041 $ 1,386 $ 159/87 Farm Expenses Current sftarmmexpenses= eee ee $ 789 $ 604 $ 693 Depreciation in mach., bldgs., fences..-... 88 rAd 106 Decrease in inventory of feed and seeds.. 0 120 0 Total armies Wp CNS CS see eee re ee $ 877 $ 845 $ 799 Harm income (receipts-expenses) __.-......-. $ 2,164 $ 541 $ 1,188 Interest on total farm capital CAE S BD CrenCe nit) me oo ee es eres $ 1,149 Slee Oylesy $ "959 Labor? Mn COMIC. 2s oes. a ee See Sal (Oa fs) $ —474 $ 229 area are better than the average of the State and perhaps some better than the average of the country as a whole. The business is about the same each year and tho there are always a few who make very little if anything, the profits of the majority are normal. Table XLI shows the average, total, and yearly labor income of each of 32 Hyde Park farmers who cooperated for each of the three years, 1914, 1915, and 1916. They are separated into three groups, the 10 better- paying farms, the 12 medium-profitable farms, and the 10 least-profitable farms. It should be noted that in general the farms which have a high- average labor income have also a large one for each of the three years and those having a low-average have also a small labor income each year. There are, however, some farmers whose labor income has _ varied greatly. In these cases special conditions and circumstances have been the cause. The following facts from two farm statements illustrate this point. Farm 2, L-6, was less successful in 1915 because of failure of dry- farm wheat. Farm 4, L-2, was not so suecessful in 1915 on account of having only $42 worth of potatoes to sell instead of the $250 worth as in 1914, as but one instead of two and a half acres was planted. His livestock was not nearly so profitable in 1915 because of misfortune with calves, colts, and pigs. And his expenses were $500 greater. The increase in expenses was due to a grown son’s help on the farm for a longer period, thus lightening the labor of the operator, but increasing (1)Real estate includes all land, buildings, fences, drains, ete., at their market value at the beginning of the farm year, or January 1, 1915. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 59 Table XL.—Business Statement of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming a ——— Average of Average of Average 10 better- 10 least- of all paying profitable 32 farms farms farms Farm Capital Real estate TsfelaNG |) te Bessie ea ee eR Se ee eee Per ee $ 9,362 $ 7,114 $ 8,185 Binildine sis. 2->: Sato Bey. 508 2.22 la ts ee Se 1,148 1,433 1,516 Tis TQSCES TOG ee ones Sa eee See Se eee ee 2,324 1,149 1,534 i WIAWOL AVES FD Se Se eee 5 ae Se see eer 416 374 395 irvererol) weet ni(o bate i to} 0) zt: eee en ee 509 338 Sarr TNO INE eT aiid WL CY ol re) [eee eae ee Se See ee $14,059 $10,408 $12,056 Farm Receipts Crops RoLtatoesie oa eee es Ree eae $ 3 $ 4 $ 228 (Qiainihy Mes! Ses Ee eee eae 761 197 368 SUSE OLEYS ep ee ee eae ee ee 1,013 557 793 TEI Oc SRS oS eee es eee ee ee 12 1 —= O Phetas CRO Sate eee ne ee ee — — 9 Livestock Tee res/-%y oy glove Lb IO) es) ee eae ec ae ee 642 294 453 Poultry and. ese, Salesi-e 2-27 --2--------- 33 34 35 Gattle> Sales... = 2-22 aes ee eee 299 ad 204 ET OR SG eS AVC Si eee cee reese eee tence 121 60 129 Shee Drsaile So 2 tn eee eee een eee — 3 i SS TLOD SNe eee oe we ae ee aes 49 20 24 WUE MOCCLPUS esse cee oe ee sews eee 331 104 214 Increase in livestock inventory...-.-.....--.-.--- 287 —- — Increase in feed and supplies....----. pes S Ps 224 _—- 38 ENO tal arte hveC@lDUN-12-5.2 0. 2---e2cctennee asa e= So uo Sal $ 2,291 Farm Expenses Blacksmith and machine work............------ $ 57 $ 55 $ 51 RUNG! Eon oe ae ee es Dee ee ae 118 110 a bey Mach., bldg., and fence material-..... Sil 46 43 MOG e at GdueSGPUS) 22... co 2. od eee cee 132 31 85 Mees arena ald GAXGS 2.22... -3:.22_ 22 cee 181 151 153 OphiGuwexpCusesy 2 )-sess:-2-- <= -t 22 === --2 ee ee ee 128 55 "iz IiVieStOC km MpUNCHASCO feo o.oo eb acces 68 46 55 Decrease in livestock inventory...............- — ., 187 46 Decrease in machinery inventory....-.-....- 46 uf i ea b Decrease in feed and supplies----..........---- — 42 — Decrease in land and buildings.............. 44 26 35 Wale ROL mrammly? la DOT eas:-2- sec ep sense cee 115 130 87 4 Moy aH SINE N ecke Op-g ole) ch (2): lee eee nee eee $ 920 $ 880 $ 765 Farm income (Receipts-Expenses) -......... 2,885 531 1,526 Interest on Total Farm Capital (Giese Der CONG) Ss. 225-3. Ser ce ee 1,125 833 964 Lhyplivige lgate(c a0): pee i ean he me eneree 1,760 —302 562 the expense for unpaid family labor, and to the fact that $272 worth of hay was purchased because of the unusually cold winter making more feed necessary, the drought in July and August “burning up” the ranges, 60 Bulletin No. 177 Table XLI.—Labor Incomes(!) of 32 Farmers, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914, 1915, and 1916 Farm Labor Income Order Number Average Total 1914 1915 1916 >» ile B-3 $3,419 $10,257 $1,949 $2,435 $5,873 2p L-6 DSi! 8,494 4,277 345 Binet 2 3 P-2 LSE 1 5,570 Ont 1,629 2,640 4, L-2 1,559 4,678 2,226 950 1,502 5. Ww-2 1,487 4,462 1,306 1,703 1,453 6. H-2 ents 3,827 1,840 aban leer 815 tee L-1 1267 3,801 1,395 1,185 1,220 8. C-1 1,169 Oy DUG 1,004 iealPig} 1,379 9. L-3 1,084 3,21 1,644 1,043 564 10. S-3 1,083 3,248 SAE Ib Aly 794 Total 702 51,094 18,229 125752 20,113 Average 1,703 5 09 1,823 2D 2,011 note A-1 1,027 3,080 Tete 154 1,154 dD W-1 988 2,963 ON eSEZAG 301 13. N-1 942 2,826 947 1,022 857 14. J-1 928 2,783 928 251 1,504 152 S-4 841 2,524 850 659 1,015 16. R-1 787 2,360 1,425 643 292 fe S-5 Tutros De oleg 889 468 962 18. K-2 732 2,196 1,065 399 732 19. K-1 681 2,043 1,166 883 —6 2 D-1 622 1,865 768 698 399 Zale G-1 613 1,839 654 437 748 ee B-2 aT Ghee 1,039 296 Bron Total 9,491 28,470 13,040 7,036 8,395 Average mou 2,372 1,087 586 700 Be W-5 514 1,543 (75 738 30 24 R-2 492 1,476 708 299 469 25. H-3 419 1,257 843 210 204 26. H-1 418 te 2ibiS 484 57 tels2; Dif C-3 207 620 483 104 33 28. L-4 153 459 - 58 Boi 190 29. P-1 67 202 63 - 50 189 302 C-4 - 40 =o sibel 86 -153 - 54 pile S-2 - 105 = Bul5) 156 -130 -341 By F-1 - 222 - 666 2 -237 -431 Total 1,903 5,708 38,542 1,165 1,001 Average 190 yal 354 116 100 Grand Total 28,426 85,202 34,811 20,953 29,509 Grand Average 888 2,665 1,088 655 922 ee ee eee ea eee Se Lea een ee Uae eh DE ON er and to the fact that he raised but 46 tons of hay instead of 54 as in 1914, due to fewer acres planted. The variations in labor income from year to year on an individual (1)5 per cent interest on investment was subtracted in calculating labor income. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 61 farm result from the various causes which affect farm profits on differ- ent farms, because each year, in a measure, presents an entirely new set or combination of conditions which the farmer has to meet and over a great many of these factors he has no control whatever. The landlords, who rented out their land to farmers that wanted it to work with their own farms, received on the average between 6 and 7 per cent net return on the investment. The owner usually pays the taxes on rented land, which average about 0.8 per cent at Hyde Park for both land and water, and these with all other expenses have been deducted. The percentage which the net rent forms of the total invest- ment varied from 3 to 18. With land values increasing as they have in the past, at the rate of about $2.50 per acre annually, and an annual income of 6 to 7 per cent on the investment, owning Hyde Park farm land has been profitable. Men would buy farm land in preference to loaning their money on farm mortgages if interest rates were considerably higher than 8 per cent because of the rise in land value and the rent they are able to get from its use in farming. Table XLII shows tthe labor income(!) of Utah farmers for the year 1909 as calculated from the 1910 U. 8. Census. Using 0.5 per cent. as the tax rate and 5 per cent interest the labor income was $322. Using 0.6 per cent as the tax rate and 5 per cent interest the labor income was $313. Using 0.8(2) per cent tax rate and 8 per cent interest labor income was $88, With interest at 8.6 per cent, labor income was $47, and with interest at 9 per cent, labor income was $19. In calculating this labor income no credit or debit was made for in- crease or decrease in the value of farm land. This increase or decrease is an important factor in the farmer’s income. The 1910 U. S. Census shows that in the decade 1900 to 1910 farm land in Utah increased in value at the rate of 11.625 per cent compounded annually on the 1900 value(?). In Minnesota farm land increased at the rate of 5.6 per cent compounded annually on the 1900 value(4). In the United States as a whole, it increased at the rate of 5.621 per cent compounded annually. The average increase in the value of an acre of land each year for the decade 1900 to 1910 was in Utah, $1.95; in Minnesota, $1.55; and in the United States as a whole, $1.68. The average labor income of farm- ers of the United States as a whole for the year 1909 was $318(5). Taxes were figured at 0.6 per cent and interest at 5 per cent. Using 9.5 per cent as tax rate and 5 per cent interest the average labor income of Minnesota farmers for the same year was $330(6). (1)Method of calculation is that used by W. J. Spillman in U.S. D. A. Bb. P..1., Cir. No. 132, (July, 1913); and by F. W. Peck in Minn. Farm Management Service Notes, Cir. No. 2, (March, 1914). Includes unpaid family labor and all the farm furnishes towards the family living except milk. Does not include income from outside sources; and the amount paid for livestock bought must be deducted. (2) Third An. Rpt., Utah Bur. Immig. Lab. and Stat., (1917), p. 350, shows that the State and State School tax levy was 8 mills in 1909. The average taxes paid by the 10 better-paying farms in each of 6 areas in 1914 was 8.2 mills on each dollar invested in the farm business. (3) Brossard, BE. B., Utah Exp. Sta. Bul. No. 160, (Sept., 1917). (4) Boss, A., and Benton, A. H., and Cavert, W. M., Minn. Exp. Sta. Bull No. 70. (Oct,, 2917). (Sh Spilman. Wed. Oso. OD. Ag. Bo PL. Cir: No: 132¢° (July, .19133.. (¢)Peck, F. W., Minn. Farm Mgt. Service Notes, Cir. No. 2, (March, 41914). 62 Bulletin No. 177 Table XLII.—Labor Income of Utah Farmers, 1909 (1910 Census Report) Item Total Per farm Nim berion farniss = ee ee eee 21,676 156.7 (4) Improve di lancer (ACG S)) ease eee ae eeeeee: IA es aits}474 UAL Grom Totals hare maed aay striae mn ees en eee $150,795,201 $6,957 Tang! 2s. eo ee ee eee 99,482,164 4,590 Bualdinge soe ae eee ee eee 18,063,168 833 Macvhine ty: 22. Set eee See 4,468,178 206 Tai VEStOGKE tesa. es ee ee eee 28,781,691 1,328 Receipts Dairy products (excluding milk and cream used at home on the farm) -___-.. o - 2,067,504 $ 35 Poultry sand seses— producedas= =a ca 1,259,267 58 Honey and wax. producedes == ee 79,763 4 Wool and mohair produced Inte )al ara aL 87 AMAMAIS WS Olds sates eee sto is et Rane ee 5,899,382 272 Animals Sslaehwened: esses = sere a eee 756,854 a Total value of all crops........ $18,484,615 $853 Cornweeeness= $ 134,396 8 Oats tee ee Ie Guile OlGI5: Oe Barley = 472,816 Do Elaiy? et ee 7,429,901 343 Total value of feed crops__....-. $ 9,708,178 $448 Receipts from sale of feed Chops 2252-455 See eee 1,336,199 62 Wet value of crops fed........-. Be tegen ab) 7() $386 ING tr valierOL iGrOp Sassen 10,112,636 467 Total gross farm income $22,066,658 $1,018 Expenses TaD OR ace ee ee ee ee $ 2,863,709 Gaels 2 Rent andsboard ehurni shied seen 306,208 14 MertiliZeies 2}. vores. (etre 2 ern ae it ae 20,037 1 DSM 2) 0 eee ae eee AEG cRNA Reg barr, aS ree oe 727,409 34 Maintenance of buildings (at 5% per cent : Of Value). eee ere ee ac Se 993,474 46 Maintenance of machinery and imple- ments (20 per cent of value)........._.- 893,636 41 Taxes -(OsSmiper= cent )j22s-sees see aes ee ee 1,206,362 56 To tallcoe. hier eos! OSs, Ve ee a Ree ee $ 7,040,805 $ 324 Miscellaneous expenses (15 per cent of Othenvexpenses) =.) ee eee 1,056,121 49 Total Karm Expenses...) ee eee $ 8,096,926 6S Be Summary AMON SAOYSIS) TOL TAO NOT eee ee eee $22,066,658 $1,018 Total farm, jJexpensess. <3 eee 8,096,926 373 IN@ie Nea, ThA NOES epee eee qeosece ne $13,969,732 $ 645 Interest on investment (at 8 per cent)___. 12,063,616 5 WaboOraineomie ris an See eden $ 1,906,116 $ 88 ——— a (1) Average Total acres per farm. — Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 63 Summary.—Special mention should be made of some of the princi- pal points concerning the type of farming at Hyde Park. The combina- tions of enterprises are the result of the “survival of the fittest” in the competition of enterprises for a place in the farm business. The number of livestock in the area is increasing but its increase depends: largely upon the development of the farm pastures and the improvement of the ranges and of necessity is gradual. The climate, soil, and topography limit the use of much land in this area to the grazing of livestock. The farm business of the area is diversified and fairly well balanced when all of the farm, family, and labor conditions are taken into considera- tion. The size of farm business is not great, but it is based upon the farm family as the unit of organization, and seems in most cases to be fairly well adapted to the conditions. The farm machinery and build- ings are similar to those found on farms elsewhere in the country. One distinctive feature, which has a decided effect upon the type of farming, is the location of the farm buildings and the farm family in town in- stead of on the farms. The administration of the National Forests by the Federal Govern- ment limits the use of the range to land-owning farmers and establishes priority of rights on the ranges and protection for these rights and thus influences the type of farming practised on some farms. The National Forests and range-stock farming are closely correlated. The population and the character of the individual persons have affected the type of farming at Hyde Park by limiting markets for some farm products, establishing markets for others, and by determining the abilities and training of farmers to produce successfully the crops and livestock wanted. The farmer and his family do most of the farm work. The families are large and the children contribute considerably to the family income by milking cows and working in the sugar-beets. The sugar-beet enterprise was made possible by the establishment of Sugar Factories. No tenant farms are included in this investigation. Some owners rent additional land. The percentage of tenancy is low in Cache County and Utah because (1) it is a relatively new country and until recently it was easy for one to become an owner and thus take advantage of the rise in the value of land; (2) the natural sentiment of the people is against tenancy and in favor of owning their own homes and businesses, for religious and social as well as economic reasons; and (3) the type of farming practised and range and water conditions all tend to make it desirable to own all or a large part of the farm land one operates. Even tho land values are based upon the productivity of the land, the farmer on a given farm must select such farm enterprises as will be profitable on his land, and thus on the individual farm, land values determine to some extent the type of farming. The irrigation water available, the ownership and operation of irri- gation canals, the duty of water, the amount of water required by crops, and the proper times of applications on the various crops are all factors influencing the type of farming at Hyde Park. The farm credit institutions and the.available money for farm opera- tions undoubtedly are important factors influencing type of farming in individual cases, but with the operation of the Federal Land Bank some of the credit needs of these farmers may be met. All the foregoing factors and many others influence the type of farm- ing and thus farm profits. At Hyde Park, profits are not phenominally high nor discouragingly low. On the average they allow a good living for the farm family and in addition farmers are “setting ahead.’’ 64 Bulletin No. 177 BEAVER, BEAVER COUNTY, UTAH The seven remaining areas are treated briefly, and each compared with Hyde Park. Some outstanding points of difference and similarity are noted. The city of Beaver is situated about 300 miles west of south of Hyde Park. It is in the eastern part of the southeast quarter of Beaver County, in township 29 south, and range 7 west of Salt Lake Meridian. The elevation at Beaver is 6000 feet or about 1500 feet higher than ‘Hyde Park. Table XLIII.—Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 50 Farms, Beaver, Beaver County, Utah, 1914 Average Acres(1) | Average Acres (1) item Farms 50 arms Reporting Farms | Reporting Harm ATr.ea 50 i199) 185 Owned by Operator | 48 174 123 Cash-rented Land-- 4 3 34 Share-rented Land_. 5 3 25 Crops ee ee 50 67 | 67 Pasture, 222.200 44 eu on Summer Fallow...-.- 2 0 5 Farmstead and Waste 48 12 | 12 Winteultivated:=2-=s=-- 16 el! 222 Irrigated Land Garden 2.2550) s2s2--s 12 0 | 1 GarrOtuSswee se ees - 2 0 0 Conny Lone Gi Gales: 11 0 D) Corn for Silage-..--- 2 0 9 Potatoes. =e 38 1 il Spring” Wihleate 2s 36 | 5 7 Winter Wihieate-s----- | 2 0 7 RYO one ee 2 0 4 Oats rte ee Sees | 33 fi 10 Barley, 227i eee 20 2 4 Oat Hay: oe ae 9 2 10 Way 3 22 rer a ee | 18 5 14 WWAWIGI, TEN ese nace 18 iLil 30 Alfalial <=: | 49 33 33 Oatsand: Pease 4 1 8 Peas 22228 hives sets 2 0 if Cabbage, === 2 1 14 BeGtS is 3 Se. eee | 2 0 1 Apples, not Bearing 2 0 ‘ll Apples, Bearing-__-.._. sal 0 0 Beans and Alfalfa_. 1 | 1 29 (Paliariaigs ee Seer a eee 1 0 0 BGLriess it eey a mt 0 0 Table XLIII shows the tenure and use of farm land at Beaver in 1914. On the average there were 179 acres to the farm, of which about 174 acres were operated by the owners, 3 acres cash rented, and 3 acres share rented by the operator. About 69 acres were in crops, 27 acres were in pasture, 71 acres were uncultivated, and 12 acres were in the farmstead, roads, lanes, ditches, and other waste land. There was no land dry-farmed in this area in 1914. Ee a ee ees Spe We AS pce A ees (1) Areas are given to the nearest acre. ~ Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 65 Based on acreage, alfalfa was the main crop occupying 33 acres. Wild hay occupied 11 acres and other hay 5 acres, and oat hay 2 acres, or a total including alfalfa of 51 acres in hay, or 75 per cent of the total area in crops. Other crops and acreages grown are: oats, 7; spring wheat, 5; barley, 2; potatoes, 1; oats and peas, 1; cabbage, 1; and fruit and other vegetables, 1. The significant fact about the crops grown is the large acreage in hay. This hay is grown largely for feed for livestock. Dates of farm crop operations are shown in Table XXXVII in Appendix. Table III in Appendix shows the capital, receipts, expenses, and labor income of the average of 10 better-paying farms. It shows livestock and stock products to be the main sources of income. However, some hay, grain, a few potatoes, and a little fruit are sold. The crops sold are consumed Jocally. Some feed, $47 worth, was bought locaily, and gash rent and Forest Reserve fees amounted to $18. Ex- penses for hired labor were $600, and for unpaid family labor $96, or a total labor expense of about $696 besides that of the operator of the farm. The two main sources of income on the average farm as well as on the average of the ten better-paying farms were cattle and sheep as shown in Table iV in Appendix. The better-paying farms had a larger business anc their livestock was more productive in proportion to feed fed. Man and horse labor were both more efficient on the better-paying farms than on the average farm. Tables V, VI, and VII in Appendix show the same facts about the type of farming in this area for the years 1915 and 1916 as was shown extant in 1914. However, the labor income of the farmers was greater, on the average, in 1915 than 1914 and greater in 1916 than 1915. The average labor income on all 44 farms in 1916 was $711. The average of the ten least-profitable farms was minus sete and of the ten most- profitable farms it was $2537. The farm business at Beaver is well diversified: Cattle, sheep, dairy- ing, and feed and a surplus of hay, grain, and potatoes as cash crops make a fairly well balanced business. During the winter months, how- ever, many farmers’ sons spend too much of their time in town playing pool, etc., instead of at productive farm labor. The Beaver farms are larger than the Hyde Park farms but the type of farming is more extensive at Beaver. At Hyde Park there are more acres of intensive crops and more dairy cows and fewer acres of hay and fewer range cattle and sheep. The average value of farm machinery on each farm is. greater at Beaver than at Hyde Park. This is another reason for the fewer men and horses in proportion to acres of crops and number of animal units at Beaver than at Hyde Park. The value of farm buildings is slightly less at Beaver than at Hyde Park due in part, to warmer climate, more recent settlement, and fewer dairy cows. The average crop-growing season is 25 days shorter than at Hyde Park. The mean annual temperature is 48.5 degrees F. or about 1 de- gree higher than for Hyde Park. The temperature is warmer in summer and not so cold in winter at Beaver. The annual precipitation is only about 13 inches at Beaver. All the crops are irrigated. The Beaver farm-land begins at the base of the mountains on the east and south and extends out west and north to the bottom of the valley, where seepage and excess irrigation water has resulted in some of the low-lying land becoming too wet to be utilized in its present con- dition, for other purposes than permanent meadow or pasture. The jand is practically level but slopes gently towards the bottom valley- land from the bench land. 66 Bulletin No. 177 This land is in the Great Interior Soil Province(1). (See Fig. 15). The soil has the characteristics of arid soils in general(2). The Fillmore National Forest is easily accessible to the cattle and sheep of the Beaver farmers(?). The Millard Desert affords winter sheep-range near at hand. However, these ranges are now stocked to their capacity, and must be handled more carefully or they will not even maintain their present carrying capacity. The population of the city of Beaver was 1899 in 1910(4). A large proportion of those persons in the population who were born in the United States came from other parts of Utah, and other western and middle western states, to Beaver. The-.foreign-born population is largely from northern Europe and Great Britain. Practically the same situation prevails here as was found at Hyde Park. The average number in the farm families on the farms at Beaver in 1914 was 5.4. Of these 2 were less than 16 years old and 3.4 over 16 years of age. The average number of men employed per farm was 1.4. That is the operator’s full time and the equivalent of 0.4 of a year of other man labor performed either by other members of the farm family or by hired help.’ This is two and one-half months less man labor than was utilized at Hyde Park. Table XLIV.—Size of Family and Number of Cows Kept, Beaver, Beaver County, Utah, 1914 | I res n 4H > . ear q B & 8 fa 3 > & K S Fs = a4 Oo Se One ra Fe HO fs ios} 7 2 oe Ze Bos 2 = ° = | eS = On = is je) ®o yes A ms iS oe aD os mn oo ae o © za zl ais ae are : a =) oO x eS nS = i Z, > o oO HS Ze a) Se es z All Farms...... | 48 | Bede) lA) Ae | 3b )| 45 | weil Sra | IU | alee Ses tidlsie | 2.6 16 8.8 Medium ...-..-- | 15 | Deo | poOaae 3.5 13 9.0 Harve = | al Sal (abs Speco est 16 9.5 The cows shown in Table XLIV are in most cases just common grade shorthorn cows. Many of them were range cows that were milked only a few months. It was impossible from the records taken to get ac- curately the average number of cows milked on each farm for the year or 12 month basis. Records of the two largest range cattle operators, cne reporting 96 cows and one 80 cows were omitted from the table be- cause it was so evident that their cows were not all milked even for a (1)Whitney, Milton, U. S. D. A., Bu. of Soils Bul. No. 55, (1919), pp. 83, 89-91, and 169-188, and soil map of U. S. accompanying it. (2) Coffey, George Nelson, U.S. D. A., Bu. of Soils Bul. No. 85, (1912), pp. 38-41. (3)See Fig. 17. (4) Thirteenth U. S. Census. (5)The Small Farm Families had from 1 to 4.9 members, the Medium Farm tamilies had from 5 to 6.9 members, and the Large Farm Fam. ilies included those having from 7 to 9 persons each. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 67 few weeks out of the year. Nevertheless the table shows correlation be- tween the size of farm family and number of cows kept for breeding and milk purposes. In 1914 there were on the average 46 productive animal units per man and 46 crop-acres per man. This seems to show that man labor was unusually efficient with stock and crops. But as before stated this is largely due to extensive use of ranges for stock, and growing crops requiring but little man labor. It is also due in part to growing crops that permit of the use of machinery for most of the operations. There were 16 crop-acres per work horse here and only 14 at Hyde Park. The reasons for this apparent horse efficiency are the same as those stated above for man labor efficiency. Beaver City is 32 miles from Milford, the nearest railway station, but there are good dirt-roads the year round. The main auto highway between Salt Lake City and Los Angeles, called the Arrowhead Trail, yasses thru Beaver. The greater part of the farm products are marketed or fed on the farm. Livestock, however, are driven to the railroad and shipped to Los Angeles, Salt Lake, Ogden, Kansas City, Omaha, or Chicago. Eggs and farm made’butter are sold to general merchandise stores at Beaver and are taken by them in auto-trucks to Milford for shipment to Salt Lake and elsewhere. Some eggs and butter are sold in the mining camps near Beaver. Some cream is sold in Beaver and some in the mining camps. Th few surplus potatoes are shipped via Milford. The distance from the individual farms to Beaver Post Office varies from one-eighth to four miles so none of them are a great distance from a local market. Of the 50 farms investigated in 1914, 48 reported all or a part of the land operated as being owned by the operator, 4 reported some land cash-rented, and 5 reported some land share-rented. The average area per farm of the owned land was 174 acres and about 3 acres cash and 3 acres share rented, or 179 acres in the total farm area. The 4 farms reporting land rented for cash rented an average of 34 acres per farm or 136 acres in all. The 5 farms reporting land rented on shares rented 125 acres in all or 25 acres per farm. The Thirteenth U. S. Census reports 319 farms in Beaver County having an average of 144.2 acres each. Of these farms 285 or 89.3 per cent were reported as operated by the owners, 28 by share tenants, 3 cash tenants, 2 managers, and 1 not specified. The average value of land and buildings per acre was $43 in 1915. The average amount invested in real estate was $8,174 and the working capital was $4,471 on the average of 40 farms. Table XXIII shows that the value of Hyde Park land and buildings per acre was $106, or about 2% times as much as at Beaver. The low price of land and extensive farming go together. The high value of land is a result of the greater profitableness of the more intensive type of farming. Farmers cannot afford to do extensive farming on high priced land. The facts given concerning water-tenure, water-rights, canal owner- ship and operatioin, and duty of water at Hyde Park also apply generally to Beaver. The irrigation practices are also similar in the two places. Only 7 farms out of 50 investigated reported mortgages. The inter- est rates paid varied from 5 to 9 per cent. One farmer paid 5 per cent, 2 paid 6 per cent, 1 paid 7 per cent, 1 paid 8 per cent, and 2 paid 9 per cent interest on the money obtained by mortgaging. This is an average of 7.14 per cent interest paid by these farmers. Using 7.14 per cent as interest rate and the average labor income of the 50 farmers in 1914 was $92. Using 5 per cent interest the labor income was $396, using 5.5 per cent, labor income was $325, using 8.6 per cent, labor in- come was minus $114, and using 9 per cent labor income was minus $170. The labor income was greater in 1915 than in 1914, and greater 68 Bulletin No. 177 in 1916 than in 1915 as shown by Tables III, IV, V, VI, and VII in Appendix. This was due largely to increase in prices of farm products. In 1916 the average labor income of the farmers of this area was greater than the average labor income of the farmers of the Hyde Park area. This variation in labor income was undoubtedly due largely to the changes in the relative prices of farm products and to the variation in the successes and the failures in each area of the various crop and stock enterprises. ; The type of farming at Beaver is more extensive than at Hyde Park largely because of climate, soil, markets, National Forest ranges and winter ranges, and competing farm enterprises. Livestock, cattle and sheep, are the principle enterprises because of distance to market and low cost of livestock production. Alfalfa and other hay are the principal crops grown because of cattle and some sheep requiring winter feed. Other crops grown here are not important. MONROBH, SEVIER COUNTY, UTAH Monroe is in Sevier County, three miles from Elsinore, the nearest railway station. Elsinore is on the Marysvale Branch of the Denver and Rio Grande, or Rio Grande Western Railroad. Monroe had a population of 1227 in 1910. Here as at Hyde Park and Beaver most of the farm families live in town. The elevation at Monroe is 5380 feet above mean sea level or about 900 feet higher than at Hyde Park. In spite of the fact that Monroe is more than 200 miles farther south than Hyde Park the average length of the growing season is 110 days, or 40 days less and two weeks later than at Hyde Park. The mean an- nual temperature is 489 F. or 0.5° F. less than for Beaver and about 0.40 F. greater than for Hyde Park. The average annual precipitation is 8.34 inches, only 3.84 inches of which fall from April 1 to September $0. On this account dry-farming is not practised. All crops are irri- gated. The average date of last killing frost in spring is May 28, as compared with May 10, at Hyde Park. This area is in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province. (See Fig. 15). A soil survey has been made in the Sevier Valley, the report of which gives a detailed description of the soils of this area(‘). The irrigation canals are owned and operated by the farmers who use the water. As in each of the areas already discussed there is here also some low wet meadow and pasture land due to over irrigation and seep- age water. There is a sugar factory at Austin which is three miles north of Monroe. This factory makes it possible for Monroe farmers to grow sugar-beets. A cooperative cheese factory is situated at Monroe so that dairying is also developing here. One of the main auto roads of the State running north and south passes thru town. The wagon roads are © usually in good condition. The distance from the farm to market for the most important product varies from one-half to seven miles. Monroe is not as handicapped as Beaver respecting markets, nor is it quite as well situated as Hyde Park. But as with Beaver the main farm enterprises here are sheep and cattle because of the distance to any large market and the low cost of livestock feed. The special feature of this area is the raising of February lambs for the early Los -Angeles market. (See Tables VIII to XII in Appendix). Los Angeles buyers are on the ground at selling time and usually pay fair prices for these early lambs. Table XLV shows that at Monroe as at Hyde Park there is a direct (1)Gardner, F. D., and Jensen, C. A., U. S. D. A., Bu. of Soils, Field Operations, (1900). Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 69 Table XLV.—-Size of Family, Acres Sugar-beets Raised, and Cows Milked, Monroe, Sevier County, Utah, 1914 | ep Rp eich ton rn = A Sele SHE Bm | Bole nls a A s 2s oes ia Sc 36 ries ey 2 me An ee Eo © fy KO ES a a4 O su Fs eee ee ea 72 105 105 Owned by Operator 70 85 8s Cash-rented Land.- 14 7 38 Share-rented Land... 12 ipa 66 OOF Ee ee es 72 56 56 Pasture (woods). ak 21 L39 Pasture (perm. tillable) -._. 38 4 8 Pasture Ot aGlbley DLE) ie _o2-e- 25 8 23 Summer Fallow..... 9 6 46 Farmstead & Waste. 72 6 6 Uncultivated -........ 2 3 94 Dry-farm Land........ 38 16 ace Winter Wheat......-. 12 9. | 51 151 Tiel Ce\ goa le oe 17 1 | 5 Summer Fallow..... 9 6 46 Irrigated Crop-land 022 48 | —_ Corns -=s ead 44 3 4 Batatoes .-.:....----- 68 3 3 Spring Wheat....... 56 7 9 DG ee fee 61 al 13 “Sih ae eee ene 21 2 a Timothy and Clover 12 2 12 PASI Rafa ne noel es Ga: 14 17 Sugar-beets ............ 31 Sh 7 RTCNITG Eby = ae aces tect 24 6 0 1 Mameels, 2221. 22-62) 14 0 1 OINTONR) eos ee 6 0 0 Apples, not Bearing 14 1 3 Apples, Bearing... 33 ul 2 yrdenee ar 20 0 1 Berries: ......-. een 12 0 2 AUP RICOTS =o ees. 5 0 i IRBACHCR) tir oe oo. 10 0 9 MOMabOOS cv. -he. 21 1 2 Melons: 28 = tet. 6 0 1 Carrots ee ks... 3 0 : 1 LEG ee ae ae 7 0 9 until at the base coarse gravel is found. When irrigated and well drained these sails are very fertile as evidenced by the crop yields. Some of the land is low and wet and crop yields are low on such fields. Table XLVIII shows a direct correlation between the number in the farm families on the farm and the number of cows milked but does not show such correlation between size of family and number of acres of sugar-beets per farm. : One reason there is not much correlation here between the size of farm family and acres of sugar-beets is because two fairly young farm- ers are exceptional in that they have a business very much larger than the average in every way and they fall in the class with medium-sized (1)Areas are given to the nearest acre. © 72 Bulletin No. 177 Table XLVIII.—Size of Family, Acres Sugar-beets Raised, and Cows Milked, Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914 | ra ae = 2 EL heya ede & 2 nee EO Ea or a S =~ sy 3& (ea = S| qo jaa) oO cue Ste Sos ore Sf om a ° 8 a) 2, o oA 2 S °o ss TO Z zo | Deep ile AOA 3.0 10 10.1 Large: Ae HAST A cane te aoe0: > | 4.2 ae ee 6.5 Fruits, such as apples, plums, and small bush fruits; vegetables; and melons are the main cash crops grown here. They are marketed at Sunnyside, Hiawatha, Scofield, and other mining camps that are from 40 to 60 miles distant and also at the stores in Ferron. Peddlers gather vegetables, fruits, farm butter, and meat from the farmers and sell them in the camps. Several farmers from whom business records were ob- tained had peddled during many summers. This peddling was the most important single item included in their miscellaneous receipts. Hay and grain are also sold to some extent. Hay is usually baled and hauled to the camps or fed to a neighbor’s cattle or sheep. Sugar- beets cannot be grown extensively because there is no sugar factory near. Dairying is limited because of a lack of market for dairy products. Not much care is given fruit trees because of the uncertainty of market and weather. A market as narrow as this cannot be satisfactory. The type of farming followed seems, in general, well adapted to the conditions. The average labor income in 1914 was $117 and the aver- (1) Whitney, Milton, U. S. D. A., Bu. of Soils, Bul. No. 55, (1909), gives. a detailed description of these soils. (2)The Small Farm Families had from 2 to 4.9 members, the Medium Farm Families had from 5 to 7.9 members, and the Large Farm Fam- ilies included those having from 8 to 12 persons each. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 75 age for the 10 better-paying farms was $785. The average of all farms in 1915 was $119, and in 1916 it was $412. (See Tables XVIII to XXII in Appendix). Table L shows that there were 5.8 persons per family on the farms : at Ferron, and that the average age of the farm operators was 47.7 years. This table does not show a very decided correlation between the size of the farm family and the average number of cows per farm. This may pe due to the fact that there are not enough farms in each group as given in the table to establish a normal for each group. It is undoubted- ly affected by the fact that many of the cows listed as milk cows are nothing more than range cows, which have been milked for .only short periods. WELLINGTON, CARBON COUNTY, UTAH Wellington had a population of 358 in 1910, and is situated about 12 miles southeast of Price on the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad. The elevation is 5540 feet above mean sea level. The precipitation is only c 7 inches, of which but 4 inches fall-from April 1 to September 30. Table LI.—Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 26 Farms, Wellington, Carbon County. Utah, 1914 Average Acres (1) Item Bees average Acres (*) Farms Reporting |° 26 Farms Reporting Hos MACs. 2 ios. sce. 22 26 alle, 117 Owned by Operator 25 92 96 Cash-rented Land-. 3 - 24 212 Share-rented Land 1 ' i 20 (SEG oy o}s eee aera 26 50 50 Pasture (woods) -- 1 4 100 Pasture (Tillable) -. ft 2 8 Pasture (not ~ .):- 4 2 16 Summer Fallow.... 7 4 15 Farmstead & Waste 26 29 99 ° Uncultivated -......- 10 | 30 17 Irrigated Land......-. 26 49 — ‘CRO R IN ee i eee ake eee 16 2 3 Patatoes®\..2-2-2..--- 24 3 3 Spring Wheat... _.-- 13 2 4 Winter Wheat........ 1 0 2 Banicye 24st n he 10 2 4 (GEE) SS se ee ere ee 17 5 8 2 Ty). Sa ee eee 10 5 14 PAPO Tare esc bet haces 22 29 34 OCIS eee ese nes aeae oe 2 0 1 Mangels: =... 2... 5 0 0 Séeq_ Crops...:....--- 2 1 12 TOMAtOCS) 2.---22----2: iT 0 id BeaTistei. 4 fe 2) 3 0 0 Cappaeeste3 -i..-.- 8 0 1 Apples, Bearing...-.- 6 0 1 (Cid 623k 10 0 | 1 UMW cht 0l:) soe hee 1 0 al 1812102}: tees eee As 3 0 0 Mixed Orchard.....-.- 2 0 0 (1) Areas are given to the nearest acre. 76 Bulletin No. 177 The climate, soil,. topography, camp markets, and type of farming are very similar to the conditions at Ferron, Emery County. Table LI shows the tenure and use of farm land in this area. At Wellington, alfalfa is the main crop. Table LII shows the relation of size of farm family to the number* of cows per farm. Table LII.—Size of Family and Milk Cows Kept, Wellington, Carbon County, Utah, 1914 ee n j a ~ n ei a | Le] 5 lieve © A ie $ S = Bi) Gun so ae © ey Soya || eis to jes} Qs pe) 5 g ods o S fanless 41 O 34 Ge a oa > qi Sie vA x © 2 Om 7 5 og o) a non S 2, a a Dw Un, S44 oO oO & De BOs Oa a = nm NE ie ae Se as ae io) qg mo ® SS tol Os i= oO =) > o ie =e BO i a 4 Om ou a oe eh S Bid af vel 3 5 HE O65 Ra,| He | &e aa S 5. ae oe ne a aS 28 oo ms g to) ose | & a cal > a4 O ms en] 4 =| BO Om mH OD g = oF a) 3 Bm ys SPO BS oD Z Be cel lipapioen BOM ne © beets and po- tatoes are grown at Hyde Park. (1) Because of these conditions beets are on the average more profitable, and nine or ten times as many acres are devoted to the crop as are devoted to potatoes. 19. The number of Productive Animal Units seems to be increasing on the Hyde Park farms. - 20. Heifers are raised to replace the dairy cows and because of cheap feed and otherwise low cost of production a few are sold as cows or heifers. 21. On the average there were about 7.4 units of dairy cows kept per farm. No more are kept because of the limited pasture, and also because the farm family usually does all the milking and the size of the herds varies as the number in the farm family. The larger families milk the most cows. However, these farmers are not milking as many cows as they might with as large families as they have. 22. Some range cattle are kept because of the availability of some Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 83 range land for grazing purposes on the Cache National Forest Reserve and because the milk cows cannot use the ranges to advantage. 23. Colts are raised both tor work and for sale. Relatively cheap feed makes it possible to raise colts to sell. 24. On the average there is one work horse to 14 or 15 acres of crops. The better paying farms on the average have one work horse to each 15 to 19 acres of crops. This is not an especially efficient use of work horses but is undoubtedly due in part to the brood mares, the rather intensive crops grown, and the lack of usable machinery for many of the opera- tions on the sugar-beet crop. 25. A cow pony is kept to use in driving the cows to and from pasture. 26. On all farms a total of 46 sheep including lambs are kept as scavengers. This is less than an average of 1 sheep per farm. 27. Hogs are raised for home use mainly. One reason why more are not raised is because all the farm homes and buildings are in town and a herd of hogs would be very undesirable under these conditions. 28. Hens are kept mainly to supply the farm homes with eggs and meat. More poultry in town where homes are close together would be a nuisance. 29. Hogs and hens are fed largely on table scraps, grain screenings, skim milk, and other waste-feeds. Bran and shorts are sometimes fed to - hogs for a short period before butchering. These conditions tend to make cheap meat and eggs for family use. 30. There are three features of special significance in this area. (a) Most of the land is irrigated and most of the farmers raise sugar-beets on a part of this irrigated land and milk a few cows. Water for the extension of irrigation is limited. Suit- able pasture for milk cows is limited. The sugar-beet area and the number of cows milked vary directly with the num- ber of persons in the farm family. (b) Dry-farming is practised as a means of extending or increas- ing the size of the farm business. Even the dry-farm land has been taken up by the local farmers and is no longer avyail- able to entry. (c) Grazing on the Cache National Forest offers some good op- portunities to a few farmers, but even these advantages are absorbed by a few men _ and the ranges are stocked to their capacity. 31. Sugar-beets and wheat are raised instead of raising more pasture, barley, oats, and alfalfa as feed for livestock because:— (a) Raising cash crops utilizes the available summer labor to good advantage. (b) The sugar-beet crop especially makes labor for school children. (c) The combination of livestock and these cash crops makes a more diversified and better balanced farm business and there- fore a safer and more desirable business for the average farmer than the more specialized livestock farming. (d) The combination is on the average more profitable than the specialization. 32. The balance of the farm business is fair. No regular system of crop rotations is practised. The cultivated crops receive about 6 tons of manure per acre per year, or 30 tons every 5 years. With the abundance of minerals in the virgin soil the fertility has been maintained and even increased in some cases. About 40 to 45 per cent of the farm receipts are from crops, 30 to 40 per cent from stock and stock products, 16 per cent from increase in inventory, and 9 per cent from miscellaneous sources 84 Bulletin No. 177 such as outside labor. On the average there were 3.6 crop acres per pro- ductive animal unit. This ratio furnishes ample feed for stock and allows growing cash crops as well. 33. The 52 farms, in 1914, had an average farm capital of $13,642; farm receipts, $2,510; farm area, 105 acres; crop acres, 54; acres sugar— beets, 8.5; productive animal units, 14.8; milk cows, 7.5; work horses, 4; and man labor equivalent, 1.6. One of the main reasons for the few acres is found in the small farms originally taken up by squatters in 1859. Another reason is the difficulty of overcoming the obstacles to increasing the number of acres. , 34. The modern farm machinery is in general use on these farms. The average value of machinery per farm is about $420, or $5 to $9 per crop acre. The larger farms have more farm machinery, but the ma- chinery cost is less per acre than on the smaller farms. It is likely that when a sugar-beet thinner and a sugar-beet topper are perfected that the acreage of these crops may be greatly increased. 35. The type of farming followed and the size of the farm business largely determine the kind and size of farm buildings required. At Hyde Park the buildings are fairly well adapted to the needs. It has happened at Hyde Park that because of insufficient storage space, grain and pota- toes have of necessity been sold in the fall at harvest time, when if stor- age space had been available they would have been held until winter or spring. 2 36. The average value of dwelling house in 1914 was $1335. The larger farms have better dwellings and better barns than the smaller farms and yet the shelter cost per animal unit is less on the larger farms than on the smaller farms. 37. Climate is the most important single factor in determining the type of farming in all parts of Utah. It determines whether irrigation is necessary, whether dry-farming will be successful, and that the desert shall remain a desert. ‘ 38. There are 151 days in the crop-growing season at Hyde Park; 16 inches is the mean annual precipitation; 7 inches fall annually between April 1 and September 30; the mean annual temperature is 47.6° F., with a mean difference between night and day of 21.9° F.; the mean humidity during the day is about 50 per cent; and the annual rate of evaporation from a free-water surface is about 45 to 55 inches. 39. Topography is an important factor-in determining the type of farming in Utah in general, and on individual farms. It is estimated that 40 per cent of the area of Utah will never be cultivated on account of the mountains. These mountains furnish grazing for livestock, and in Hyde Park and many other areas affect greatly the type of farming. 40. The Cache County farm soils are in the Bonneville beds and vary from gravel, small gravel, and light sand thru all grades to the heaviest and most tenacious clays. The varying soil types make it possible to diversify the farm business at Hyde Park even more than would a single soil type of good quality. 41. The control of grazing on the National Forests by government officials has (1) eliminated to a certain extent free competition in the use of grazing lands, (2) established a privileged class of farmers, and (3) largely determined the type of farming on many farms adjacent to the National Forests. 42. The carrying capacity of the Cache National Forest is estimated at 17 acres per animal unit, and it is at present stocked to its carrying capacity. The average grazing season on this Reserve is 5 to 8 months. The grazing on National Forests affects greatly the number of animal units kept by farmers. The better the grazing facilities the greater the number of animal units kept. 43. Persons are better able to do that type of farming with which they ee Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 85 are familiar. The origin and training of the farm population are there- fore important in studying types of farming. Most of the parents of the native-born white persons of foreign parentage at Hyde Park and also inmost of the foreign-born whites came from Great Britain and the coun- iries of northwestern Europe. The type of farming at Hyde Park is similar in many respects to that of these foreign countries. 44. Hyde Park farms are family-sized farms. One manager is all that is required on any of them and he does most of the farm work. 45. The average number of persons in the farm families included in this area was 7.4, but only 6 of these persons made their home on the farm. The Hyde Park farm families are larger than the average Cache County farm family. The average farm family in Cache County is larger than the average for the State and the average for the State is greater than for the United States. 46. The size of farm family has a definite relationship to the type of farming practised as is suggested by the fact that on those farms with large families more acres of sugar-beets are raised and more milk cows are kept than on the farms with medium or small farm families. The total crop acres are also greater on the farms with large families. 47. The family income is greater on the farms with large families than on the farms with medium-sized or small families. 48. These facts indicate that the entire farm family is the basic unit around which the farm business is organized. 49. There is great variation in the value of the farm home. 50. There is, however, no correlation between the value of the farm home and labor income or farm income. 51. Not only family labor but also hired labor affects type of farm- ing. The possibility of hiring school children for beets affects greatly the acreage grown at Hyde Park. 52. At Hyde Park the total man labor equivalent for the average farm was 1.6. This is equivalent to 1 man, the operator, twelve months or 1 year, and 7 months, and 6 days of additional man labor. A large part of the additional labor was furnished by the farm family and the remainder hired. A considerable part of that hired was for beet work and hay and grain harvest. 53. Sugar-beets and potatoes conflict in labor time. This is one rea- son why potatoes are not grown more extensively here. 54. The crop acres per man at Hyde Park (33:1) is comparable with that of the acres of improved land per person ten years old and over gainfully engaged in agriculture in Utah, 1909 (37.4:1). At Hyde Park, however, persons 10 years old were not considered men nor was pasture counted as crop acres. 55. Utah is not advantageously situated with respect to world markets, and prices of exported products are therefore comparatively low and prices of imported products are relatively high. 56. Where the market cannot be adapted to the type of farming otherwise best for an area, the type of farming must be adapted to the market. 57. The development of dairying followed the establishment of the condensed milk factories, creameries, and cheese factories. The growing of sugar-beets followed the erection of the sugar factories. The estab- lishment of packing plants at Salt Lake and Ogden have stimulated pork production. As a result of higher livestock prices, less free range, and better livestock, more care is being given livestock on the farms. Be- cause land is being used for cultivated crops and also because more hay is used for livestock feed there is less hay being exported than formerly. 58. The fact that Hyde Park is 1% miles east of the branch line sta- tion of the Oregon Short Line Railroad instead of nearer a main line station is a handicap in shipping to distant markets. 86 Bulletin No. 177 59. The Utah and Idaho Central, Electric Railway, runs thru the town limits and has facilitated greatly local shipments to Preston, Idaho; Logan, Brigham, Ogden, Salt Lake, and Provo, Utah; and intermediate points. 60. The State Highway passes thru the Hyde Park township. This . facilitates milk hauling and the local transportation of other farm products. 61. There were no tenant farms at Hyde Park, but 23 of the 52 far- mers investigated, rented additional land. 62. Share tenancy is more common than cash tenancy in Cache County as a whole, but at Hyde Park 18 out of the 23 farmers who rented additional land, paid cash rent for it. This fact indicates that the Hyde Park farmers on the average are more prosperous than the average Cache County farmer and also that the type of farming does not lend itself so readily to share renting. 63. Pasture land rented for from $2 to $3 per acre and cultivated crop land for from »/ to $21 per acre. The latter figure was paid for sugar- beet land. The average cash rent per acre was $9.13. The dry-farm wheat crop was divided, four-tenths to landlord and six-tenths to tenant. Hay and oats on irrigated land was rented for one-half share. On one patch of irrigated wheat the tenant got a little more than one-half, and on one patch of irrigated alfalfa the tenant received five-ninths of the crop. 64. The land is rented by these farmers to increase the size of the farm business and no doubt here, as elsewhere, renting is an intermediate step in the process of becoming owners of the land rented. 65. The small percentage of tenancy here is due to a number of cir- cumstances and conditions. The main reasons are as follows: (1) The country is new and it has been easy to become a farm owner without tenancy, by (a) homesteading, or (b) pur- chasing. (2) The farms are comparatively small, and therefore the total capital necessary to purchase a farm is not so great as to be prohibitive to the moderately well-to-do. (3) The type of farming followed is one which is conducive to ownership, is not attractive to tenants, and is not well adapted to tenant farming. (4) The great increase in the value of the land has been a propell- ing influence toward land ownership. Tenancy in Utah, how- ever, is gradually increasing. 66. Up to July 1, 1918, there had been only 8,572,842 acres, or 16.3 per cent, of all land in Utah entered for settlement. Of this area 3,397,699 acres were reported by the Thirteenth Census as land in farms. 67. The amendments to the Desert Land Laws and the passage of the Stock-raising Homesteads Acts have made it practicable to settle a con- siderable area of the remaining land of the State. These laws have there- tore affected greatly the types of farming in the State. 68. Land values are largely determined by type of farming. The agricultural value of a piece of land is the capitalized agricultural income of that land with all future increases in its value discounted to-date; and the income of the land is obviously a result of the type of farming practised. 69. The individual farmer, on land of a given value, must, however, follow a type of farming on that land that is profitable or else he will fail. 70. Land values at Hyde Park are higher than the average state value. 71. As population increases or the relative prices of farm products rise, the land is more thoroly and intensively utilized and land values Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 87 become greater. As interest rates become less or the value of the dollar decreases land rises in value. 72. About two-thirds of the crop land at Hyde Park is irrigated and ne other one-third is dry-farm land. An extension of agriculture is lim- ited by water and mountains or by climate and topography. 73. At Hyde Park, as is common in Utah, the farmers own and operate the canal systems furnishing irrigation water. Water-rights in ‘canals were obtained in payment for services in constructing the canals or were bought from the original owners. The amount of water that each farmer gets each year is often very variable and uncertain but is usually sufficient to mature his crops. The annual cost per share-of stock or per acre of land irrigated was about 50c in 1909. 74. A good irrigating stream for the average man under average con- ditions is from 2 to 5 second-feet. 75. Three to 5 acre-inches is enough for a good irrigation. Two and one-half acre-feet is the maximum needed in Utah in addition to the pre- cipitation to produce a crop if it is applied at the proper season, May 1 to August 31. 76. One second-foot will irrigate 70 to 160 acres in the four months of the irrigation season. 77. The water-master has control over the distribution of water among the farmers and is therefore a factor in determining the type of farming. 78..The crops grown at Hyde Park do not as a rule require irrigation water at the same time and are therefore not competing crops in this respect. The nearest to competition is between potatoes and sugar-beets. 79. Lack of knowledge of the water requirements of plants, the duty of irrigation water, and the proper time to irrigate each crop may affect ‘vpe of farming by showing one crop more profitable than another. Proper irrigation may prove the opposite crop to be more profitable. Much depends upon the knowledge of the irrigation farmer, the amount of water in the streams, and the division of the water by the water-master. 80. The type of farming followed depends to some extent upon the farmers’ ability to get capital or money. Men at Hyde Park and else- where in Utah are not going into the livestock business as early as they would like because of insufficient funds, and yet these farms are not as heavily mortgaged as the average farm in Cache County, nor the average of the State of Utah, nor the average of the United States. 81. With the facilities at hand some of the Hyde Park farmers might, with safety, extend their farming operations by obtaining additional capital by mortgaging their farms. When the interest rate is 5% per cent this practice would undoubtedly increase the average labor income of these farmers. 82. The average estimated total cost of farm loans on personal security in Utah. 1914, including interest, discounts, bonuses, commissions, and other extra charges wes 10.4 per cent. For farmers who have to pay this high charge for the use of capital, to borrow in order to enlarge the reneral farm business is of doubtful practicability. 83. Farm profits are largely determined by the type of farming prac- tised. The most profitable type of farming depends upon the conditions and circumstances of the individual farmer and farm. 84. Using 5 ner cent as the interest rate the average labor income of the Hyde Park farmers in 1914 was $946; using 51% per cent it was $878; using 8 per cent it was $537; using 8.6 per cent it was $455; and using 9 per cent it was $400. When interest is figured at 6 per cent labor income and the interest on investment are about equal. 85. Labor income does not include as a receipt that part of the family living obtained from the farm nor the increase in the value of the land. When these two items are included as receipts and interest is calculated at 8 per cent, the average labor income of these farmers is about $1300, of - 88 Bulletin No. 177 which $600 is the opportunity value of the farmer’s labor and about $700 is pay for management which cannot be delegated and risk or responsi- Fility taken. 86. The labor incomes of the farmers of this area are better than the average of the State and perhaps some better than the average of the United States. The business is about the same each year, and tho there are always a few who make very little, if anything, the profits of the majority are normal. 87. The variations in labor income from year to year on an individual farm result from the various causes that affect farm profits on different farms, bevause each year, in a measure, presents an entirely new set. or combination of conditions which the farmer has to meet, and over many of these he has no control whatever. 88. The landlords Ve rented out their land have received on the average between 6 and 7 per cent net returns on their investment. With Jand increasing in ee about $2.50 per acre annually, owning Hyde Park farm land has been profitable. 89. Even if interest rates were considerably higher than 8 per cent, men would buy farm land in preference to loaning their money on farm mortgages because of this increase in land value and the rent they are able to get from its use in farming. 90. While the average labor income of the farmers of Utah in 1910 was not quite as high as that for the average of the United States, this was due to a higher rate of interest being charged in Utah and is offset by the increase in land values. BEAVER, BEAVER COUNTY, UTAH 91. Beaver is situated about 300 miles south of Hyde Park. 92. The elevation at Beaver is 6,000 feet above mean sea level or 1,500 feet higher than Hyde Park. 93. Dry-farming was not practised at Beaver due to lack of sufficient precipitation during the growing season and to soil conditions. 94. Alfalfa was the principal crop grown. Over 75 per cent of the total area in crops was in alfalfa and other hay. The hay is grown largely for feed for livestock. 95. Livestock and stock products are the principal sources of income from these farms. Some hay, grain, potatoes, and fruit are sold to local markets. 96. The average expense for all labor other than that of the farm oper- ator on the ten better-paying farms was about $696. 97. The better paying farms had a larger business and their livestock was more productive in y:roporticn to feed fed than the average farm. 98. Man and horse labor were beth more efficient on the better-paying farms than on the average farm. 99. The farm business at Beaver is fairly diversified. 100. Cattle, sheep, dairying, and raising feed, in addition to raising a surplus of hay, grain, and potatoes as cash crops, make a fairly well bal- anced business. 101. During the winter months, however, farmers’ sons spend too much Bea in town playing pool, etc., instead of on the farms at productive farm abor. 102. The type of farming at Beaver is more extensive, or not so in- tensive, as that at Hyde Park. 103. The value of farm machinery per farm is greater at Beaver than at Hyde Park due to the kind of farming and the larger areas farmed by machinery. 104. The value of farm buildings is less at Beaver than at Hyde Park due in part to warmer climate, more recent settlement, and fewer dairy COWS. eee ae a ee ee Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 89 105. The annual precipitation is about 13 inches at Beaver. All crops were irrigated in 1914. 106. The soils, as at Hyde Park, are of all grades from coarse gravels to heavy clays depending upon nearness to the valley bottom and distance from the mouth of the canyon. This area is also in the Great Interior Soil Province. 107. As at Hyde Park, there is also some bottom land needing drain- age and some land above the canals which, if irrigated, would be very productive. 108. The Fillmore National Forest affords summer grazing for cattle’ and sheep and the Millard Desert is used for winter sheep range. These ranges will need to be handled more carefully in the future than in the past, or they will not even maintain their present carrying capacity. 109. The population of Beaver was 1,899 in 1910. A large propor- iion of those who were born in the United States came from Utah and other Western and Middle Western States to Beaver. The foreign-born population is largely from Northwestern Europe and Great Britain. They are therefore familiar with livestock and general farming methods. 110. The average number in the farm families on the farms at Beaver in 1914 was 5.4 persons. Two of these were less than 16 years old and 3.4 were over 16 years old. These farm families are not as large as at Hyde Park. 111. The average number of men employed per farm was 1.4. That is equivalent to the operators’ full time and 0.4 of a year of other man labor performed either by other members of the farm family or by hired help. This is two and one-half months of man labor less than was utilized at Hyde Park. 112. In this area as at Hyde Park there is direct correlation between the size of farm family and number of cows kept for breeding and milk. 113. Man and horse labor seems to be fairly efficient. In 1914 there were on the average 46 productive animal units per man and 46 crop acres per man. There were 16 crop acres per work horse. 114. Beaver City is 32 miles from Milford, the nearest railway sta- tion, but the dirt road is in good condition most of the year. 115. Milford is 206 miles west of south from Salt. Lake City on the Salt Lake-Los Angeles Railroad. Salt Lake is about 100 miles south of Hyde Park. 116. It is therefore about 300 miles east of north from Beaver to Hyde Park. In spite of this fact there are about 25 more days in the average crop-growing season at Hyde Park than at Beaver. This is due mainly to the greater altitude, less favorable exposure, and poorer air drainage at Beaver. 117. The main auto highway between Salt Lake City and Los Ang- eles, The Arrowhead Trail, passes thru Beaver. 118. Due to these market conditions the greater part of the farm products are marketed or fed on the farm. 119. Livestock are driven to the railroad and shipped to Los Angeles, Salt Lake, Ogden, Kansas City, Omaha, or Chicago. 120. Most of the eggs and farm-made butter are sold to general mer- chandise stores at Beaver and are taken by them in auto trucks to Mil- ford for shipment to Salt Lake and elsewhere. Some eggs and butter are sold in the mining camps near Beaver. Some cream is sold in Beaver and some in the camps. The few surplus potatoes are shipped via Milford. 121. The distance from the individual farms to the Beaver Postoffice varies from % to 4 miles, so that none of them are a great distance from the local market. 122. There is very little tenancy in Beaver. As at Hyde Park, some farmers rent additional land in order to enlarge their farm business. At Beaver City more land was rented for cash than for share, but the Thir- 90 *Bulletin No. 177 teenth United States Census shows more share than cash tenants for Beaver County. 123. The average value of land and buildings per acre at Beaver in - 1915 was $43. The value at Hyde Park was two and one-half times this amount. The lower price of land and the more extensive farming go together. The high value of land is a result of the greater profitableness of the more intensive type of farming. Farmers cannot afford to do ex- tensive farming on high-priced land because the greater value of the land is determined largely by the more profitable and more intensive type of farming. 124. The facts given concerning water-tenure, water-rights, canal ownership and operation, duty of water. and irrigation practices at Hyde Park apply also to Beaver. 125. Only 7 out of 50 farmers reported that their farms were mort- gaged. The interest rates paid varied from 5 to 9 per cent and averaged 7.14 per cent. 126. Using 7.14 per cent as the interest rate that farm capital should and could earn, the average labor income of 50 Beaver farmers in 1914 was $92. Using 5 per cent, labor income was $396. Using 9 per cent as the interest rate, labor income was minus $170. 127. The labor income was greater in 1915 than in 1914 and greater in 1916 than in 1915. This was due largely to the increase in the prices of farm products. 128. In 1916 the average labor income of the farmers of this area was greater than the average labor income of the farmers at Hyde Park. This variation in labor income was undoubtedly due to the changes in the relative prices of farm products and the variation in the successes or failures of the various crop and stock enterprises in each area. 129. The type of farming at Beaver is more extensive than at Hyde Park largely because of the following factors: (a) Climate (b) Soil (c) Markets (d) National Forest ranges and winter ranges (e) Competition of farm enterprises 130. Range cattle and sheep are the principal sources of income largely because of distance to market and the low cost of livestock production. 131. Alfalfa and other hay are the principal crops grown because of the necessity of providing winter feed for cattle and some sheep. Other crops grown are largely for stock feed or for the local market and are not important. MONROE, SEVIER COUNTY, UTAH 132. Monroe is in the central part of the southwest quarter of Se- vier County. It is three miles from Elsinore, the nearest railway sta- tion. Elsinore is on the Marysvale Branch of the Denver and Rio Grande, or Rio Grande Western Railroad. 133. The population of Monroe in 1910 was 1227. Those persons of the population who are not native born citizens, are largely from northwestern Europe, and are familiar with general agricultural prac- tices. Here, as at Hyde Park and Beaver, most of the farm families live in town. 134. The elevation of Monroe is 5380 feet above mean sea level, or about 900 feet higher than Hyde Park. : 135. In spite of the fact that Monroe is about 300 miles south of Hyde Park, the average length of the growing season is only 110 days, ES ste» a Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 91 or 40 days less, and two weeks later than at Hyde Park. The average jJate of the last killing frost in spring is May 28, as compared with May 10, at Hyde Park. The mean annual temperature is 48 degrees F. or 0.5 degrees F. less than Beaver and about 0.4 degrees F. greater than for Hyde Park. The average annual precipitation is only 8.34 inches, only 3.48 inches of which fall from April 1 to September 30. On this account dry-farming is not practised. All crops are irrigated. 136. This area is in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province, and the soils are classified by the U. S. D. A. Bureau of Soils. The texture of the soils is similar to that of the other areas previously discussed. 137. There is here, also, some low wet meadow and pasture land due ‘to over irrigation and seepage water. 138. The irrigation canals are owned and operated by the farmers who use the water. 139. There is a sugar factory at Austin, three miles north of Mon- roe. This factory makes it possible for Monroe farmers to grow sugar- heets. A cooperative cheese factory is situated at Monroe so _ that dairying is also developing here. 140. One of the main auto roads of the State, running north and south, passes thru town. The wagon roads are in good condition the greater part of the year. The distance from the farms to market for the most important farm product varies from % to 7 miles. 141. Monroe is not handicapped to such an extent as Beaver res- pecting markets nor is it quite as well situated as Hyde Park. But as with Beaver, the main farm enterprises here are sheep and cattle, be- cause of the distance to any large market and the low cost of livestock feed. 142. The special feature about this area is the raising of February lambs for the early Los Angeles market. Los Angeles buyers are on the ground at selling time, and usually pay fair prices for these lambs. 148. Dairying and sugar-beet raising are becoming more important as the markets are developed. Here, as at Hyde Park, there is a direct correlation between size of farm family and acres of sugar-beets grown, and number of cows milked. 144. More than 61 per cent of the land was growing hay in 1914, most of which was alfalfa. 145. Sugar-beets and some wheat were grown as cash crops. 146. Oats, rye, and barley were grown for feed. 147. Some potatoes and sweet corn were grown for home use and to supply the local market. 148. The Monroe farmers are ‘‘getting ahead.’’ Their farm business is fairly profitable. The average labor income in 1914 was $516 with interest charged at 5 per cent, $363 with interest at 5.5 per cent, $196 with interest at 8 per cent, $132 with interest at 8.6 per cent, and $89 with interest figured at 9 per cent. In 1914, these farms were less profitable than those at Hyde Park and more profitable than those at Beaver. In 1915 and 1916, however, these farms were more profitable than those at either Hyde Park or Beaver. This variation in profitable- ness is undoubtedly due to the variations in the relative prices of farm products, especially meat and wool, as well as to the variations in the successes and failures of the crop and stock enterprises. The high prices of lambs and wool have made the war years more profitable for the Monroe farmers. SANDY, SALT LAKE COUNTY, UTAH 149. Sandy is about 20 miles south of Salt Lake City. Draper is south of Sandy. The farm business records treated in this area were taken in the townships of Sandy, Draper, Midvale, Jordan, and West Jordan. 92 Bulletin No. 177 150. 'fhe elevation at Sandy is 4366 feet above mean sea level, or lower than any of the 8 areas studied. 151. in 1910, Sandy had a population of 1037. There were many foreigners and persons with limited farm experience on the farms here. 152. The normal annual precipitation is 16 inches, 7 of which fall in the crop growing season. There are 89 days with .01 inch or more of precipitation, and the mean annual temperature is 51.4 degrees F. There is a greater amount of precipitation during the crop growing season, more stormy days, and a higher mean annual temperature in this area than in any of the 8 areas studied. Dry-farming is successful in this area where soils and topography are suitable. There are 18% days in the average growing season which is 30 days more than in eny other area included in this study. The average date of the last killing frost in spring is April 19, showing that the season is not only longer but also earlier than in any area studied. 153. The soils of this area are typical of those of the Great Interior Basin Province. The soil types identified by the U. S. D. A. Bureau of Soils are: Jordan sandy loam, Bingham gravelly loam, Jordan loam, Jordan clay and clay loam, Jordan meadows, Jordan sand, Bingham stony loam, and Salt Lake sand. At Sandy the soil is predominately a sandy loam. As in all Utah valleys, the soil is coarse near the mouth of the canyons at the base of the mountains; and heavy in the bottom of the valley. When irrigated and well drained, these soils are very fertile as shown by the crop yields. Some of the land is low and wet and crop vields are low on such fields. : 154. Here as at Hyde Park and Monroe, the number of cows milked increases as the farm families increase in size. 155. There is a great variety of crop and stock enterprises on farms in’ this) district: 156. Because of the climatic, market, soil, water, and transportation conditions, a wide selection of enterprises is offered these farmers. EKach farmer has his own set of conditions and he attempts to meet them to his best advantage. Consequently there is a great diversity of vractices 157. Some farmers sell market milk to Salt Lake City, some ship milk to creameries, some ship to cheese factories, and a few make but- ter on the farms and sell it at retail. Some farmers raise hay for the Salt Lake City market, while others raise it to feed their own stock and even buy hay and grain in addition. The surplus poultry and eggs are sold to laborers of the smelters, to private parcel post customers in Salt Lake, or to a store at Sandy, Draper, or elsewhere. 158. The farm receipts were from grain, hay, potatoes, sugar-beets, vegetables, fruits, straw, dairy products, cattle, horses, sheep, wool, hogs, poultry, eggs, honey, outside labor, and increase in inventory. Grain was the main source of income. On the average, there were 7.8 crops grown per farm, and 5.8 sources of income per farm. 159. In 1914, with interest calculated at the rate of 5 per cent, the average labor income was $373; with interest at 5% per cent, labor income was $294; with interest at 8 per cent, labor income was minus $102; with interest at 8.6 per cent, labor income was minus $196; and with interest at 9 per cent, labor income was minus $260. In 1915 the labor income was greater than in 1914 or 1916 and was in that year also greater than the average labor income of the farmers of Hyde Park. However, the farms of the group changed greatly in 1916, or - undoubtedly that would have been the banner year of the three. It is no doubt true, that the increase in the value of the land was sufficient to make up normal profits to the landlords who are operating these farms. Crop yields are not as good as at Hyde Park, yet the land is valued higher on the average here than at Hyde Park. This is because Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 93 of markets, climate, and to the future uses other than agriculture to which these lands may be put. FHRRON, EMERY COUNTY, UTAH 160. Ferron is in the southwest corner of the northwest quarter of Kmery County. It is on Ferron Creek east and near the base of the Wasatch range of mountains. The waters of Ferron Creek flow thru tne San Rafael, Green, and Colorado Rivers, and empty into the Gulf of California. 161. The population of Ferron in 1910, was 651. Those farmers not native born were from northwestern Europe and Great Britain. 162. The elevation at Ferron is 5500 feet above mean sea level. 163. The normal annual precipitation is 9 inches, 5 of which fall in the growing season. The annual precipitation has varied from 3 to 13 inches. There are on the average only 37 stormy days out of 365. It is necessary to irrigate all farm crops in this area. Ranges are poor be- cause of low precipitation. The mean annual temperature is 46.1 degrees F. There are only 107 days in the average crop-growing sea- son, June 2, to September 17. 164. Ferron is in the Rocky Mountain Valleys, Plateaus, and Plains Soil Province. The soil is not as good here as at Hyde Park, yet it is fairly fertile and under favorable conditions produces good crops as shown by the crop yields. 165. While climate and soil handicap this area some, yet the great- est handicap is the marketing situation. Ferron is 45 miles from Price, the railroad town where some of the farm and range products from this district are marketed or loaded for shipment to market. Mining camps, 40 to 60 miles from Ferron also offer an outlet for some farm products. Some apples, plums, and small bush-fruits; vege- tables; and melons are marketed at Sunnyside, Hiawatha, Scofield, and other mining camps. Peddlers gather these products and butter and meats from farmers and sell them in the camps. In a few instances the peddlers are the farmers themselves. Some grain and baled hay are also sold in the camps. The principal source of income is range cattle. Stock can be driven to the railroad and shipped out to the great central markets. 166. Some cattle are grazed on the Manti National Forest, but most of them are grazed on the prairies or plateaus south, east, and west of Ferron. Because of the severe winter weather and the lack of winter grazing, these range cattle are fed on the farms in winter. Raising their feed is an important part of the farming operations in sum- mer. Some farmers let the cattle stay out so late in the fall that severe storms often cause great losses from cold and starvation. 167. A few farmers have been successful in keeping bees. One farmer has done especially well the past few years with his bee business. 168. Sugar-beets are not grown to any extent here because there is no factory at which to market the beets. 169. Dairying is also limited because of lack of markets. 170. Not much care is given fruit trees because of the uncertainty of the market and the weather. Two orchadists asked the writer’s advice ebout taking out their trees and planting alfalfa. The narrow market is a great handicap to fruit growing. 171. Yet with all of these handicaps the lower valuation of land and smaller capital requirements make it possible for these farmers to make fair labor incomes. In 1914 using an interest rate of 5 per cent, the average labor income of the Ferron farmers was $326; using a 5.5 per cent interest rate, it was $291; using an 8 per cent interest rate, it was $117; using an 8.6 per cent interest rate, it was $75; and using 9 per cent 94 Bulletin No. 177 as the interest rate it was $47. In 1915 the average labor income was about the same as in 1914, but in 1916 it was much greater than in either of the other two years. WELLINGTON, CARBON COUNTY, UTAH 172. Wellington is situated west and south of the central part of Carbon County. It is about 12 miles southeast of Price on the Denver and Rio Grande Railroad. 173. In 1910 the population of Wellington was 358. Here, as else- where in Utah, most of the farmers live in town and their farming lands are from 1 to 5 or 7 miles away, surrounding the town. 174. The elevation is 5540 feet above mean sea level. 175. The normal annual precipitation is only 7 inches, of which but 4 inches fall from April 1 to September 30. 176. The climate, soil, topography, camp markets, and type of farm- ing are very similar to those at Ferron, Emery County. Proportion- ately more livestock, however, are raised at Wellington than at Ferron. There are also more sheep in proportion to cattle here than at Ferron due largely to the range conditions. Alfalfa is the principal crop. 177. Records were taken here one year only, 1914, and then but 26 business statements were obtained as this is a small and limited area. 178. The average labor income of the 26 Wellington farmers in 1914 was $165 when ‘interest was charged at 8 per cent, the average mortgage rate for the state. The average capital investment was $8391 so that 8 per cent interest amounts to $671. Undoubtedly the years 1915 and 1916, were considerably more profitable than 1914 because of the increased livestock prices. HINCKLEY, MILLARD COUNTY, UTAH 179. Hinckley is situated in about the center of the northeast quarter of Millard County. It is about 6 miles north and west of Oasis, which is the nearest railway station. 180. In 1910 the population of Hinckley was 553. The majority of the persons are native-born citizens of the United States. There were a few persons from Sweden, Denmark and Great Britain. 181. The elevation at Hinckley is about 4541 feet above mean sea level. 182. The normal annual precipitation is about 8 inches, only 4 inches of which fall during the growing season. Because of this light rainfall, dry-farming is not practised. All farm crops are irrigated. 183. The Nebo National Forest to the east of Hinckley is too far away to be of any value to the farmers of this area, so the range land is very limited and what range there is is not of excellent quality. 184. This area is in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province. The soil is not as fertile as that at Hyde Park and because of poor natural drainage, is inclined to be alkaline. Clay and clay loam predominate although there is some sandy loam reported. The land in general is Jat; often it is too flat to irrigate conveniently. 185. Alfalfa is by far the most important crop grown. Other crops grown are: other hay, spring wheat, winter wheat, oats, rye, corn, and garden products. 186. Dairying is practised on some farms in a limited way, but has not yet developed to any sizable proportions nor is it likely to do so in the near future. 187. The main sources of income in 1914 were: (1) alfalfa seed, (2) alfalfa hay and other hay, and (3) cattle. The growing of alfalfa seed on most farms of this area is quite a gamble. But on a few farms a fairly good crop is obtained each year. When a crop of seed is Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 95 obtained, the farmer makes a very good labor income, but when the crop is left for seed and the seed fails, the dry stalks are not of great value and labor income in such cases is often a minus quantity. 188. In brief, Hinckley about feeds itself, but its clothes, household goods, and other necessaries it buys outside and pays for them with alfalfa seed, hay, cattle, farm butter, surplus eggs, farm-dressed pork, a few horses, and personal services. 189. The type of farming followed is fairly well adapted to condi- tions and on the average is also fairly profitable. In 1914, using 5 per cent interest the average labor income of the Hinckley farmers was $613; using 5.5 per cent interest, $565; using 8 per cent $323; using 8.6 per cent; $266; and using 9 per cent, labor income was $228. In 1915 the average labor income was less than in 1914, due largely to the fact that the alfalfa seed crop was not quite as good. In 1916 the labor income on the average was about the same as in 1914. The seed crop was not quite so good but prices were higher. PLEASANT GROVE, UTAH COUNTY, UTAH 190. Pleasant Grove is situated just south of east of the north end of Utah Lake in Utah County. 191. The 1910 U. S. Census gave the population of Pleasant Grove as 1618. The farmers live in town while their farms are on the out- skirts and in the outlying area. The people here are native born, or are from northwestern Europe or Great Britain. 192. The elevation is 4532 feet above mean sea level. 193. The normal annual precipitation is 15 inches, 6 of which fall in the growing season. Dry-farming is successfully practised here. The absolute lowest annual precipitation recorded is 9 inches and the absolute highest annual precipitation recorded is 22 inches. There are on the average, 66 days annually with .01 inch or more precipitation. The mean annual temperature is 49.7 degrees F. This is higher than for Hyde Park but lower than for Sandy. The warmest temperature recorded for any of the 8 areas is 105 degrees F. and that was recorded in the Pleasant Grove area. The average crop growing season has 145 days, or a few less than Hyde Park, and 35 to 40 less than Sandy, although situated further south than either of these areas. The average date of last killing frost in spring is May 12, or about the same as for Hyde Park, but a little earlier than Beaver, and much later than Sandy. The absolute latest date of killing frost is June 29, or about the same as at Hyde Park and Monroe. 194. This area is situated in the Great Interior Basin Soil Province. A detailed soil survey has been made of this area and the following soil types distinguished: Maricopa stony loam, Maricopa gravelly loam, Jor- dan clay, Fresno sand, Jordan loam, Jordan sandy loam, Salt Lake loam, and the gravel areas. These same soils are among those identified in the Sandy area. The best sugar-beet soil is the Jordan sandy loam, and the Jordan loam is the second best soil for this crop. 195. Creeks from the mountain canyons on the east of Pleasant Grove and flowing wells furnish the irrigation water for the farms. The irrigation systems are owned and operated by the farmers themselves. 196. Transportation by rail and auto roads is easy and adequate. Sugar-beets are shipped to the Lehi factory from this area. 197. The Wasatch National Forest east of town offers good grazing for stock for about 8 months of the year. More cattle than sheep were kept on this range because of adaptability and profitableness during ~tnese years. : 198. The principal sources of income in 1916 in the order of im- portance were: sugar-beets, cattle sales, outside labor, grain, potatoes, fruit, increase in feed and supply inventory, swine ‘sales, poultry and 96 Bulletin No. 177 eggs, increase in livestock inventory, hay, horse sales, increase in ma- ehinery inventory, other crop sales, increase in inventory of land and buildings, and sheep sales. 199. The average labor income of these farmers in 1916, using 5 per cent interest was $651; using 5.5 per cent interest, $612; using 8 per cent interest, $418; using 8.6 per cent interest, $370; and using 9 per cent interest, the labor income was $340. There is no doubt but that the years 1915 and 1914 would have shown a smaller labor income than 1916, because the farm prices were not as high then as in 1916. GENERAL CONCLUSIONS 200. It has been shown in this thesis that there are a multitude of factors that affect type of farming in Utah. Some of these factors are: (1) Location of the area, (2) elevation, (3) crops, (4) crop dis- eases, (5) livestock, (6) crop and stock combinations, (7) pasture, (8) the returns from crops and stock, (9) diversity and balance of farm business, (10) size of farm business, (11) farm machinery, (12) build- ings, (13) climate, (14) topography, (15) soil, (16) National Forests and public stock ranges, (17) population, (18) the farm family, (19) farm labor, (20) markets, (21) wagon and auto roads and railroads, (22) land-tenure, (23) land values, (24) water-tenure, (25) water- rights, (26) canal ownership and operation, (27) duty of water, (28) irrigation practice, (29) amount of irrigation water necessary, (30) amount of water to use and time of application, (31) farm credit, (52) farm mortgages, (33) other security, (34) interest rates, (35) farm srofits, (36) labor incomes, (37) rents, and (38) what the farm furnishes towards the living of the farm family. In any specific area, however, or on any. particular farm, the type of farming is determined by the combinations and inter-relations of all these natural and economic factors. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS It is a pleasure to acknowledge the assistance of Dr. John D. Black, Chief of the Division of Agricultural Economics, Dr. George W. Dowrie, Professor of Economics and Dean of the School of Business, and Prof. Andrew Boss, Chief of the Division of Agronomy and Farm Management and Vice-director of the Minnesota Agricultural Experiment Station— all of the University of Minnesota—in criticising these data and their preparation, and for suggesting sources of information upon the subject investigated. Prof. George Stewart of the Agronomy Department of the Utah Agricultural College also read the manuscript and gave some help- ful criticisms. Mr. C. G. Worsham made the drawings. The writer appreciates the cooperation of the Utah State Leader of County Agents and the County Agents of the respective areas included in the investigation for their assistance in taking the farm business records; and he also wishes to thank the many farmers who so gener- ously gave the information concerning their farm business. Without financial assistance from the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station, the Utah Agricultural Extension Division, and the United States Department of Agriculture it would have been impossible for the writer to have had calculated and put in usable form all of these farm business data. ° ee Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 97 APPENDIX Table I.—Business Factors of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 Average of better-paying all 52 farms farms Diversity of Farming NM Per AOt IGCGODS SLOW D:.--:-~2.2:-----<---+--222- Sec 25m 4.6 Number sources income over 8 per cent ROR “TREC ORS) ee ee 4 3 Sources of income over 8 per cent gross receipts: Supar-peetsh =... BG aD Bie PTT 9S a as $ 1,075 $ 705 (Ciesair ners acai) eee ee ee eee eee ee 597 400 CMTE TM cote o: See All de a en 891 302 (Ginnie steel ee a ee hes 356 — Size of Farm Business (eepauitrel peepee ie ee a oie en ep LOL OLS $13,642 Receipts in farm_.-_-__-- test. ee Pe end 4,133 2,510 EN CTAB SY Ty TROT Te ee ee 226 105 (NEO) FAGIPS GS) Bea SEee se ee oe ee 105 54 ENEIHES GINS E Ted OCC ts) ee enemas 12.8 8.5 Rhle (Cit ike Ae es ee ee eee LOL 7.5 WETS leu Qiisy e352 2 ee eS LS eee oar ee ee 5.6 4.0 Productive animal. units (P.A.U.)----.-.-----2- Zoet 14.8 Man labor equivalent (year basis) -...........---- 2.0 1.6 Productivity of Crops Crop receipts per crop aWeriaite i eae ose, Seem $ 21 $ 22 Crop yields per acre: UPAOURE NE OVSIS\ BREE SRE eee nee eer ease 205 bu. 178 bu. Iineatetenrineg and winter) -:__-2.......2.< 24 bu. 26 ~=bu. (OS TISy SSS ote ate ene Senne Runnemn en Seeeeee f(a bu. 70 bu. Barley (both dry-farm and irrigated)... 23 Pb 228°" tus DUNES |S 2 cae ES AL a era ee 3.6 tons 4 tons (ONE RVS Te. [tie ey: Ee IS OS ee a ee ee Sr Mee 2.4 tons 2.6 tons SHIEH CE OVC SIRS Spee er OS OR eS ie cRanen Mane eee 18.6 tons 18.6 tons Productivity of Livestock Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed....$ 120 $ 107 Net livestock receipts per P. A. U.........-...... 60 60 Cattle receipts: per heads. 22 - ees tne 22 22 MiiliceReCOlIDUS Per | CO Wirsseee-o)-eeonc deca doeuecaee 62 56 Man Labor Efficiency productive animal units per man..........-....- 12 9 CRO. ACTES “PEN WINATs. 6 oxi cece ee sons nance dua 52 33 Horse Labor Efficiency Cropracrese per work: NOMSC.<.s2cecee sc. soe eccte 19 14 ia Dor SUNCOM. sec x2 cece ee eee . 1,997 $ 946 98 Bulletin No. 177 Table II1.—Business Factors of Farms of the Hyde Park Area, Cache County, 1915, Showing Types of Farming Average of Average of Average of 10 better- 10 least profit- all. 43a paying farms able farms farms Diversity of Farming Percentage of total farm receipts from Stock: 222.22 eee 38 27 35 Size of Farm Business Motcallsta rma ca pili) eee eee eee $14,358 $12,688 $11,987 {Moral SyrOrslkelianyse CNOA ee css deeoe ee 2,962 2,458 2,059 Hotaletanmece Celp tS ses ene 3,041 1,386 1,987 Mota tanm exp ensess ss ee 877 845 799 (RoOtaly a CRODi ae Gel Sanne ne eee ene 1,569 958 1,050 Net livestockerecelptsae IL AZ 2 387 724 Total receipts from dairy products-. 470 312 414 Value of feed fed to livestock.......... 881 744 750 AOU BIGGS) alin, Te We 167 106 107 MMotalecropye ad Cres. = see eee 63 51 52 Total productive animal units (ERA) a ae 20 16 16 ‘Rotalee works hOTSCSo= ee ee een wnees 4 4 4 TotalimenmCE-yearebasis)) ess ia AG 1.6 Productivity of Crops (See tables 4 and 5 in text) Productivity of Livestock Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed). 222.4222 eee $ ika}3} $ 52 $ 2 Net livestock receipts per P.A.U..... Se 24 25 Receipts per cow dairy products...... 70 38 54 Man Labor Efficiency Productive animal units per man... 14 10 10 CLOP acres) Per ama nesses eee 42 ail 3H) Horse Labor Efficiency Crop acres per work horse...........- 15 14 14 Labor Income ...............-..-.-. $ 1,446 $ —93 $ 589. awe Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 99 Table III.—Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming No Value Warm Capital Hin iclleecl GRE Spelithew ka GTM 2.es ceeweasacebecs- sasserecc> ieee eee pee SU 167 $11,407 FY TRTRLEE.Ce hvie Ke\zhe (oN ee ee eS es Se ily Machine work hired......-.... Be Ba Seed AE ae ed ye er AS se oe on PAROS See eae See ee CR Ot Ue ede ke aaetaaen eects nec cate petee 284 \UPEA RE 2 aL ed Ana SE 8 SR Te oad rag 8 ea ee eee, ee an ofr ean te ime Ea SR 25 Cash rentvand- LOrest: TESenvie’ L8CSi..2-- sore. eee masaemee ote eemen vate 18 IMISCeIIANCOUS EXPENSES) 225 o2ocia As Aes oes sedate ceuamenccbe nce pousteaner wont 21 Vic UO SO Lethe ly) 1a DOD tase. oabcdeca-eeescuacetecba sotaseeet hace que eewentemeawan=eebenane 96 Noy DO Wed goVied Ob: of =) af cts See e. See ce ee an epee eer Soh cee erat SN Ge yee $ 1,360 Farm Income (Receipts minus expenseS) ........-.....-.--------c.---0-ceee-eeeees 2,581 Interest.on otal. harm: Capital (6/8; per Cent) icc... ososk isc ee eace eo csese 1,651 TREY eal dhl hetero} 010s ge gene eae oP AUB io SUNN Na ies ade Pees Ort ta Ce, nes Sie SP ny eee 930 100 Bulletin No. 177 Table IV.—Business Factors of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 Average of better-paying all 50 farms farms Diversity of Farming Number of sources of income.............-........-- Gel 5.4 NUMD er TOL CLODS SO willaesssses eee reser eee eee 7.0 6.4 Number of sources income over 10 per cent TOSS MOGCERDUS yin: eet eee eee ee eee ee 2 2 Sources of income over 10 per cent gross Z receipts: Gatien es ee ey Te ee Eee $ 1,202 Ce AAT ISU ATCSL=) On RY Mie cera area oie MEO RD TERS ea TR ie eM SM oe SiS 301 Size of Farm Business Mo taliecap ital lye este ne an See eh ae ee $20,637 $14,158 MO TAN sal CHGS pitta ee ee TO Maer AE Sea 167 179 CrODFACT CSP eee ee ee sae 105 69 ACreSs alialfarvandsotnen Waynes cee 89 51 De CO YEasy gets SNe Benak SI Si cle en Glen Penn eee 10 6 FIV Tee ra Re ae ae a 28 Nk Pe ee ae As ee 1.8 1.4 (ENS RAC Ate eee ee ee OT ee ee INR eS 114 47 Piovehwieniye) Ghanlieakeyl hawkers 150 66 Productivity of Crops Crop receipts per crop acre......-.-..--.-----2------ $ 6 $ 5 Crop yields per acre: PO tAtO CStea ee e e eeeee eee RL e ve Eee ele as isi Lobe Wales oh, SDEIMe Swille ait tae eee ee en te ee ee 23 @©bu. 23 bu. (EET SSR e aes AT a, A cee dk Le et oy Wat i ee OL) 40 bu. JNU RET We ep cae eta URS Be el A ean 2.2 tons 2.4 tons ETC re ey ee 2 ON 1.7 tons 1.9 tons Productivity of Livestock Net livestock receipts per $100 feed fed_...$ 229 $ 153 Net livestock receipts per P. A. U.(*)-...-.-..... 19 20 Cattle receipts per head((2) -.....-.....-..----------- ilal 8: Milk receipts ep GTC Oe e eee eee eee 32 aly Man Labor Efficiency ; Jfiscellaneous receipts per man_.....-........--. $ 139 $ 157 Productive animal units per man_.....--.- DS 82 46 Crop ACTES? DER aan ee es 5 eed ee eeneene ee 58 46 Horse Labor Efficiency Cropyacress per wor kehoOrseusss see Bee 22 16 Labor Income PRUNE A eee Se feeme ak See $ 930 $ -29 (1)‘‘A. U.” represents ‘‘Animal Units’’, ‘““P. A. U.”’ represents ‘‘Pro- ductive Animal Units’. Work Horses are not counted here as Productive Animal Units. (2)Does not include milk cows. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 101 Table V.—Business Statement of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 Average of 10 Average better-paying least-profitable of all farms farms 40 farms Farm Capital eR PEREa hee ee MB $ 8,315 $10,050 $ 8,174 VATS LOVOM LG See ee 0 rs Se ne ae ne oe a 5,056 4,667 3,402 NAGHINerVe cds tOOlS- 2+ 2s is ee 873 479 555 IPESyayols “CW ail) TeXeyeXe yee ee ne 498 542 464 (CEYSN OY” S25 5 he he a Se ne Se oo) eee ee 75 10 32 motalehanm «Capital. -23 2222 he site e se ce wee $14,817 $15,748 $12,627 Farm Receipts (CHAD IO) ees eo eh Le a a ee ee $ 324 $ 349 $ 319 JUIN ASSOC) 6. Se ene a a 2,790 758 1,255 Miscellaneous) receipts) ©-- 22: -2-2-2.2-<-<.2.-0e¢==2-8 441 102 228 Increase in feed and seed inventory...--..-.- 364 34 189 Avrogeril ANE bridle dgyel cen) 0) fee ae one eee $ 3,919 $ 1,243 $ 1,988 Farm Expenses @urrenty tanm "OxXpensesi ut escent =e $ 1,013 $ 686 $ 665 Depreciation in mach., bldgs., fences-..-.- 185 172 140 Decrease in inventory of feed and seed... 0 0 0 MOtaAle Mari HX ONSSiec.05 5-0-8222) Looe eeencees $ 1,198 $ 6.858 $ 805 Farm Income (Receipts-expenses) -..--.--..-- 2,721 385 1,183 Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 TS CTGCON Ua) les eee eee ee a ee aba Mos: 1,260 1,010 Miaborsincome! 05 ee eee ee $ 1,538 $ —875 Ay 2 ly (is: 102 Bulletin No. 177 Table VI.—Business Factors of Farms of the Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 Average of 10 Average better-paying least-profitable of all. farms farms 40 farms ae Diversity of Farming Percentage of total farm receipts PO MAS TOG ka ees gba ee a Cee al Bil 62 Size of Farm Business Fixed Farm Capital (Real Estate) --.-..-- $ G,oD $10,050 $ 8,174 Wiorkamern© a pital seks a eet ee eee 6,502 5 (a) ) 4,471 LENsYy ic ge a REY CXS NL] OLAS en en tn ae ee ae Bat) Ib) 1,243 1,988 Bann expeWSCSs eee = Seer ee, See 1,198 858 805 ING tives TOC Ke GEGEN DDS ecssssree nee eee 2,790 758 1,255 Receipts from dairy products......--:--.-... 279 112 209 SATO O Sie itaee Raye eee ene oe ee eee OU oe 138 158 190 GOW UACK Sites teste aca eee serene eee 65 13 62 Productive animal units (P. A. U.)-.-.... 83 73 54 WiorlkeshOrsesy 222 82. ee ee eee 4 5 4 Men a@isycanrrbasis)) 262 ena eee 2 1155) 1.6 Productivity of Livestock Net livestock receipts per $100 feed 120 it eae ai RRR ST, Dens eee Mie Sauer $ 265 $ 72 $ 138 Net livestock receipts per P. A. U.....-- 34 10 24 Receipts per cow dairy products.......-.- 47 17 30 Horse Labor Efficiency Crop acres per work horse.....--...:......--.-- 18 15 16 Labor Incomes 22 ee > 1,538 $ —875 $ 1b 3 Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 103 Table VII.—Business Statement of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 Average of 10 Average better-paying least-profitable of all 44 farms farms farms Farm Capital Real estate . Tbeinel eS SER ee ee ener $ 9,261 $ 8,660 $ 7,078 TBS winitlte ITM eAet aie os ee See ok eh A eee 1,720 1,955 1,696 La @irovelice ee os eee a eo ee 6,302 2,385 3,057 MIB WGLITMETY? tales Reale 5 eee Oa ee ee eee 866 443 504 Level, airatte lS bly a) ot bre} eeeeee ee one a eee ee 698 679 580 Total: Harm! Capital. -..-- A ee eet atest oll $14,122 $12,915 Farm Receipts Crops (TESTS EOC se ee eee ea 60 $ 47 $ fla Gra Tile 55... ble c/s Ae eet eon ae ean OR nt 86 ae éal 155 TEIBIN, © coke, Stee OP eee are ne eee Ee 130 239 193 WUMeHICROD Sh etc ee eee 10 1) 7 Livestock LD evil | Or COX 0 DCO Sy eee ae ae ee ee 348 254 260 Boultryeandwees, Ssalese:5-4 2-22.25 eo 52 20 44 Bapuleesalece pees 6s ase te me Ee a 634 277 292 IGE SUSE SH 2s SR RSA SSE Pee seer ne ran 52 143 83 PvLaueve qe) (Sten Vets foe eee Ske eens ee nee ae ae ae 2,032 -— 467 SHUT) BNE RE RS) Eee ed ee eee 193 101 122 (CHURWATS TRS OPETT OUT as see ose SS ee <8 ne er ee 545 296 304 Increase livestock inventory........-.-..------- 1,744 127 729 Increase machinery inventory......-.--.--------- 24 98 26 inerease teed and Supplies... 2----..------2... 392 _- 159 Morale Harm» FVCGCLDLS..s-2--ass0-2s.ccc--a02--osce~ee $ 6,302 $ 1,792 $ 2,948 Farm Expenses Blacksmith and machine work.....-......---- $ 53 $ 43 $ 51 RTTre Cibelli) Oe, ee ee eel oo eee 494 145 185 Machinery, building and fence material.. 104 152 72 Latevete lope genial Cte ae nee en eee eae eee 196 30 67 WMIGOS eo MeMus. ld taxCSe.- ete... c sth ee seseweoce 280 189 200 OTM OTMCRPCTISCS hes ene noes aee sean peter etse 59 15 25 ME IVIESTOCK, DIT CUASE Gite pease cee oe aces ease caewecomen 823 494 473 Decrease in feed and supplies................ = 108 Decrease in land and buildings.....-.........- 31 39 33 MaliteuGtm tammy: LapOL... 9) 2.5.0.-- etconnen oe odebe ak 215 60 98 AM GVRP REG eh gale) D>. ¢ of su els (=|: pee ee AA Be Sener Se aimee $ 2,255 S$ 15276 $ 1,204 Warm income (Reeeipts-expenses) -........... $ 4,047 $ 517 pe a! Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 HDISie sy aha) pases Seta: Senna ele D ster Sak OBE 1,510 Tea RS 1,033 (ia bor-IncCOMme: norsk ges ates cae $ 2,537 $ -—613 fs leat 104 Bulletin No. 177 Table VIII.—Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Monroe Area, Sevier County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming Farm Capital Mo tale ane smi pk aly tes reste ae eee e Renee COUN Lhe een Leeann ety Eee 104 IVT CIWS geet Se ease ar ee) SE oe Se Rk ea Rate ca eee 10 Othemcatvleteess a re ee Be MD CIAL BE SO 3 ae eg Na a Ea sn 24 FLOTSES ATG COLES. oe ee eee ips aisha) be hs ie ce deo nae eee tees 9 IN GSW OU cay aS) eye ee eg a ee eS eae na La ee eS ee Ey ERE ee depreveyo lies) 01(0 lets) o) 0) Wet: teem pe Rn et ee ee IR ee ee eR ee ee Pee ae eae Ca ee Ne ESOS | Pele I Se ee cree ees ene Gh Uo Ore TS Lua EDEE Ty ph oa Yet Cope Wy 001 FT Lek ae aN ae 2s Cee oe er ae enn Farm Receipts Crops OTE COGS pees sea ae ee ae eee Gia eee see ce ee ee eek eee eee eee saeco eee ene PRAY 4 eee Bo Se NS ta RM Be rie oe ee ea hte coe Rea ee SUuSa4r=Deets. 22.2. 55e ee ee eae see es Mruits anid: viezetalbl es ice ee eae ee ee nee ee Livestock Dairy ‘PrOGUGts iii. . eee Ue ee ee ees Cattle yn se Se eee Pn a he a ae FLOM SCS ets ces sce s e ae eet reat ences ote aeeeenaaseeeee oobi te ean Shae Sees Seep Sa WOO) Meee ea see Ue ear ie nel ao FAN cele ASL ree ETO BES) bir. heck i Se Se aaa A Seale UE Pah, a a Poultry sama Tee eS eee ete ae else Sane es ss au Ra MiaiscellanGous! MECEUP ESI 2 see eee eles ee eek ae a Increase in feed and supplies................-.......- ne sare Wei ie ts A Taare tele Totals Marm: RECEDES sa eee ee ee eerie eee ea we Se oe Farm Expenses Fined labor esse Diet ORS ae i eS ge ESS re 2 A eee eet nee eget Machinery repairs, Ade depMe Ci ato wees rr eae ee Building and fence repairs and depreciation........-.........-.---.._.- BGG act bese a I ee eee re eae See eae FLOP SCS O CUM ee i Ee ee ele ee CAN Re Breeding, Leesan (SC Cd se ee ee te eee ee ee ee aes eee ew Threshing and twine (excludes toll) -_..........._...- ee eee ere Ur bs aa Machine: wor kein ire Cis a ee ee I ee ee Hi: Fo: 5) < rae et cy Ee em Ae es MN gr Fo ey eae Ry Oe Rea eds As Water ‘tax: 2:25. 2e ee eee ae ee tee ee ee een Cate Boe BE Se ae Cash» rent “and sfonest, resenve: LCCS assets cera ee ee ee Miscellaneous texpeNiSGs) totes ee ee Le ae ee ne ee Value: of familyslabone tc. ee ee ee ee Total. Warimi/Bpcp ens CSS sescsiate eo. oe gee see ce Oe een eee ee Ree Te eee Warm Income (Receipts-expenses) peer sins dim Gh 2s MACRO) OR ORR Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 per cent) ..............-..-..---- Labor Simcoe }\2: 22.25. eh eee eee Sees Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah Table IX.—Business Factors of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming 105 Average of 10 Average of better-paying all 63 farms farms Diversity of Farming Number of sources of income....................-. 6.9 6.2 NUD CHOLCnOp SiS T OWills: <2. -2228 oe s 6,675 $ 7,246 TaLVCS TOC Kiysetys eae aN he ee Oyo L5 1,084 2,607 MACIIMETY: {ie 25-2 2c ce oe see es ce ey a Le 572 472 469 Heed and ‘seeds. #2228 2 aN bie Ree aes ll 180 325 Cash = 2esegte acs Stace ste goes eee eee cesta 392 51 141 Total Farm Capital...._...... SE Seed Ae Sue Si SU T6) 1 $18 2462 $10,788 Farm Receipts CTRODSS Eas a eet rn Se eS a ee $ 614 $ 446 $ 546 Livestock and livestock products_______-.....- 4,672 484 1,653 Miscellameoish, sees ee ee das 256 130 192 Increase in feed and seed inventory........-. 120 3H 100 Total WanmPRecelp ts. e eee eee $ 5,662 $ 1,092 $ 2,491 Farm Expenses Current tanmi Expense cies saeeeee een $ 2,008 $ 597 $ 940. Dep. of machinery, buildings and fences.. 102 110 98 AONE TM eiaaly Tp a oa ee et eteteen ee $ 2,110 $ 707 $ 1,038 Farm Income (receipts-expenses) _.........- >) oO, 0 D2 $ 385 $ 1,453 Interest on Total Farm Capital at 8 per COniby, (hia Ce ee ea Sabana seer . 1,406 677 863 Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 107 Table XI.—Business Factors of Farms of the Monroe Area, Sevier County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 Average of 10 Average better-paying least-profitable of all 38 farms farms farms Diversity of Farming Percentage of total farm receipts Pico a NOVO * & Se ee Re Se eee 82 46 66 Productive animal units per 100 ACT CSMCTON Giessen =e ae ee see 234 46 106 Crop acres per productive animal Ne ees ae See Sea ew tS Soe 0.43 2.2 0.9 Size of Farm Business TATA GANG eeete case tr. eS as 2 $17,576 $ 8,462 $10,788 AVRO Kel CANOGA ese ree es Sa ee oa hatgiG ot 3,542 JPSsehob ty aeLeyeYS I 0) hs) ee eee ee eres 5,662 1,092 2,491 TACO CDS OVEN AISLES) ee ee 2,110 707 1,088 (MODRRCCCID USE cena 2 a8 Seat eee 614 446 546 DPebluvestock meceilpts.......--..----------- 4,672 484 1,653 Receipts from dairy products......-. 235 123 188 Value of feed fed to livestock-.__-.-.- 1,846 615 928 SA CUES Th oe ET C00 eee ee eee Ree ee eae 76 45 54 (SURO N as SNC aya pe sae RO Rs ee eee ei 56 39 44 Productive animal units (P.A.U.)-- iyeyal 18 47 \WToIl EC ING IR ees Se eee eee 5 3 4 WIE TIA GleavCaruDASIS)) ste. -2 6. <---22-8 5-5-5 2.1 ie 1.6 Productivity of Crops (Qhray ay arta (Xo b-< (G4) ), Se eee near a eee eee 110 85 100 Crop yields per acre: TO TAINO CS ae teete ae e aee i 149 bu. SSO Ten Se Wile cites a ease 36 bu. (CE nS peat nae ee ae, Se ee oe ee ee 52 bu. 1B cl (eng Rea ec ee ee we ee 62 bu. SENN TT Wigs is oe Bes ay Fe apc ee 9 ee ae 3.3 tons (OMEN BNE eee eso 5 ee eee ene 4.8 tons SUP eUT COL Aare tate ees one. soe ene 10.2 tons Productivity of Livestock Net livestock receipts per $100 TOCG, OG) = ee ccs eee cere och _cee es $ 253 $ 79 $ US Net livestock receipts per P.A.U. 36 27 36 Man Labor Efficiency Productive animal units per man 61 14 26 Maborvincome:2---4---e.4----- $ 2,146 $ —292 $ 590 (1)Crop index shows the yields per acre compared to the average yields of the area when each crop is given its proper proportion by weighting py acreages harvested. 108 Bulletin No. 177 Table XII.—Business Statement of Farms of the Monroe Area, Sevier County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 Average of 10 Average | better-paying least-profitable of all 57 farms farms farms Farm Capital Real estate: Tea ict ee a SR Se Se $ 9,005 $ 2,748 $ 5,303 LSA Cobb ob sap Mee eed ok eae ee RN RU Dae Be Lee 1,790 1,088 1,416 Tivos GOC ei eteet i ceca ea ees eA ee 6,749 697 2,552 Machinerys: 42.55 et ee eee 569 281 450 Jaxevoleeiovel shoo oy bie a 514 198 430 Totaluharim © ajp ital sess seen oes ot ree eee $18,627 $ 5,012 $10,151 Farm Receipts Crops: IPO TAO CS pets see eco ee Sater oee $ 40 $ 14 $ 32 GS ANT gee eee ces A ot Sock be aN Yee eae 262 76 204 ED El yeeenres ote ee eee Sr eee ee mses ae 783 12 200 Sugar=beetss cetera Oe ee ees 555 102 387 TRU Gy gee oe a eee — —— 3 OME ICrODS) score oe ee eee eee a 31 7 Livestock: Dainy products) si. .-2 kee ee eee ee 196 we 183 Poultryar andes Sale gi aeeseee eee 51 25 57 Cattle sallesi 22.4 :2 oo ee ee ae 1,213 WGP 543 Horse sales Je cuenta het oS staeS 28 14 By Sheep! fsallesy). itl o ls ee ee Te 2,501 22 613 Swine salesiy 4s 22s ee 311 49 115 OPMENIRE CE TPES ssh ee ee ee A 1,100 103 380 Increase in livestock inventory...--........-.- 1,222 — 433 Increase in machinery inventory-...-.... 33 —- 8 Increase in feed and supplies.................. 621 (al 418 increase in land and buildings...-............. 30 — — Notaleharm VRC Celp ts sess. ee $ 8,946 $ 793 $ 3,640 Farm Expenses Blacksmith and machine work..............-..- Sela) $ 25 $ 86 LIne d labore sees ale) oe Pee ae 782 17 259 Machinery, building, and fence material.. 207 25 115 Heed and seed steesas-.- a See eee 341 39 139 Mees; rents jandetaxes te eae ee 517 82 246 OthenrexpeNS estes seek ee ee ee 256 5 56 MAVESTO OK wD UTC las 6 Cleese eee 2,248 83 746 Decrease in livestock inventory............-.-- — 38 — Decrease in machinery inventory....-....... — 18 — Decrease in land and buildings................ — 40 2 WIIG. Ce Itemaanhy TEV oor ses - 110 66 ilssal Potal, Harm (Exp enseses tesa eee ee eae $ 4,596 $ 438 $ 1,780 Warm Income ,(Receipts-expenses) --..-....- $ 4,350 $ 355 $ 1,860 Interest on Total Farm Capital at 8 per cent ee 1,490 401 812 Mabor. (Income. 2252-4. eee $ 2,860 $ —46 1,048 Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 109 Table XIII.—Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming No Farm Capital NO PAIAGROS MING Anes e-ek ceca Td ces seb concas cents coe se see ce ae 130 GUUS CrON SY Lee eee” As i ee em Sheet See RB eS 9 COME PUSTP. CORY HENS), 22 se tse aed Bre ED ee eae eee apy San EEE Fo) rk! 13 ERO SCS MraTEOMICO LUGS foetus teen eee Ce hoe Pe ce eae oe 9 SUG, cscs ones eee ieee ae t et ePne aeeeen ans ae eae Se 7 EET) £5 reer ce ee se re te oP EE 2 ESSE Soe Peete ee eee eae 12 J EXO LLLELER ES ae 5 De DS e e ROMS Nel eB 72 WIE) NSTE gee i ie Sea A ie ee ee Ra ee ene ene oe ee Ne HGe deat) ees UD ll C States ee a es Pe eh Ree eee (CEYSID: ss555 55 a te SS ee a ee ee ee er eu eerie rene oY oto Progrenn” Le are call a Okey ot eee HE Rae a ema ne ee AE sr A gE ee ee Rene Farm Receipts Crops EO GEOG S Watee ee ae eet core Seas eee oS .- S Reek eee (QE Ia Nice ole ied eee Fae eRe ee ee ES Bes Moh, oo SO Seo TRIER aka sy Sd dS ON Fe aaa Se ae 2 eee ae a amN ea ete Pe er Speed 254) P SHIGE hte it ie oe a ee ee ey COE yep be ke em CAR NY SULSAT-DECtS) 2225.2 -c eects ene Seale Le a nae ey eee Abe aTOMVe Pe GAD LES. iiss. ocak 5) Sa 8 aes eee Livestock DD SITE VgeT OCU CLS yeerce nescence ee St een cae eA ok (OG ELC maecereer ee er ee OS SE al eo ee ns a re FOUN OS meeeiere acta oes ee Lee iat 5 ee ee ee SHEGD EAT Oe sw OO lee nt ce Fe Be eS ee eee ee EUG PS aa. eee ee. ee 2 been Sef tie Sh a ht) eee se eos ee EO UNi Ve AN Om Ge Rize eee £8 eee i Te re 1s a A eee ae WiSCellaneOustT CCOLDtS peters: .- 5 steer Le oe MnCreaseuinel Ged: ana isp ples 2.68 ce te eee ee HOLA TIME eEGCEIDUSs oO, Don $ 4,587 $ 3,868 TAlViGStOCK 4 aii ae aes Ae eens eee eeu © Qrilelsii 2,151 * 1,984 Machinery. amd: tool six nseess ee eee eee 457 410 382 Mead van “S60 Sees e ne ee eee eee. 15 206 208 CBS ee ee A eee A ee Sane 4 17 15 Total apical een acme ee $ 6,328 vet Rial $ 6,457 Farm Receipts CROPS yee SE era Ee Seek Se Se $ 458 $ 269 $ 321 ENLViCStO Ct yet a aia teen: tie nets Se Dee ek AMine 1,040 423 653 Miscellameousmrecelpisi se eee eee 371 38 166 Increase in feed and seeds inventory.... 100 27 41 Total’ Harm: Recelpts*.2.. 4 sone & 1969-9 SS Tbe $: 1/180 Farm Expenses Gurrenit) tarmeexpenses esse eer eee een $ 479 $ 692 $ 481 Depreciation in mach., buildings, fences 64 65 64 Decrease in inventory of feed and seeds 0 0 0 Total Marny GH Rp Cn RE Sesser eee $ 543 $ uti $ 545 Farm Income (receipts-expenses) -.-.-.------ $ 1,426 $ 000 $ 636 Interest on Total Farm Capital at 8 [OKSRE APeXS) OV of) WARE bee Maes SU SMR ye aera 2,0 So He 506 590 Balky ihabor: income. 2.22542. 920 $ —590 $ Nabe) ee Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah Lag Table XXI.—Business Factors of Farms of the Ferron Area, Emery County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 Average of 10 Average better-paying least-profitable of-all 48 farms farms farms Diversity of Farming Productive animal units per 100 acres (CIAO. ea oh 25 LA ER es eS Se een 70 60 60 Size of Farm Business IMG tell te fk oa we Core 0 tr (ae eS te $ 6,328 Sao til. $ 6,457 VAOUs I= MCapiGal | ole el 2,747 2,784 2,590 amnNere COND USM ta -5 Sse Pe ee ee 1,969 157 Ld Sel Hane GK DEMS CS: ste ye A Fe Vs. 543 wove 545 CLODMCCOLMDUSMI= = sak os ee te 458 269 321 INC be MIWESTOCK= (f GCCID tS ect eo 7,091 $ 6,769 Karm Receipts Crops IPO GAUO Cy eet reece tot ee ne os aR ea $ 10 $ 13 $ ils} (GT Ta avr eee ee ae ee a ee 57 28 95 ET ARV) S eco oe ee. a ee Aer 20 6 iil ETS eee en a 5 oe Le eee ee ee 500 IY 166 OLHWErGCTODS: 2 see es ote ee eee 104 12 66 Livestock ID BTVe PTO CU CTS sean se -8 sd ee ree eee ees 81 42 63 Poultryzand) egen sales ree eee eee 156 56 82 Cattle: Sales 2 2 ee ae eee 456 106 221 TORS, SallOSi vce ee ees ere Dea Bee 35 139 91 SihieepysSallles: 222i ae eee oes See 21 — A Siwil'@ xS alle si aca see ee ae ee ee ae 105 66 82 OtherArecei pts: (2. ee ee eee 445 44 206 Increase in livestock inventory...-..........---- TAY) —- 253 Increase in machinery inventory-..-..--.--- 39 —— ie Increase in feed and supplies..............-..--- 154 114 ards TNotale Marini ECE lis eee eee ae $ 2,902 $ 643 $ 1,544 Karm Expenses Blacksmith and machine work..........-.-.-- $ 46 $ 38 $ bil 1S greYo Um Fe oy cs pee eeres aie ANA Sone ye ea ony Se 60 1 28 Mach., bldg., and fence material...............- 90 13 64 Heed aNGiiSCCC ga a a eee ee 40 23 24 Mees; "rents: andwtaxese. 2-2-2 se Wee eee see 147 87 101 Other expense. eee 37 12 26 IGIVieStOCke, DiUTChias Calas eee et uence 294 26 i593} Decrease in livestock inventory...............- —- i5) 70 — Decrease in machinery inventory....---.---- — ib -— Decrease in land and buildings...............- 56 Sl 39 Valier of tamiilhy aula) Oro sseac seen 169 76 104 TOCA oH ary kp CS 6 Saesee eee eee eee ee eee $ 939 $ 399 $ 6559.0 Farm Income (Receipts-expenses) -..-.------- $ 1,963 $244 $ 954 interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 DERVCCNT)\ 23.2 ce os ee on Coe Re ee eee 681 591 542 Habor Income yes ae eee $ 1,282 $ —347 $ 412 Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 119 Table XXIII.—Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Hinckley Area, Millard County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming Farm Capital EMO ACR ES eeu eh ATeINa 2 see ee oc oes eck Jana tebat Eee Ree SS dese tenn aeb 163 $ 9,176 IMU GONG. goss! a oS a AES ee ee ee eee 6 372 COVEMVSAR (CW ELE MS Ae Sa al Oe ee eed a ee eee ee ee 12 427 POSES SCO NT ELE COS eee ee tens et eee ae iY RRR see ge Fat N RE ot ot 6 632 SUNGEO ean ETE a gp arn a ra eo ae ee, 2 ee 2 11 TEM OVERST aS Be a ee ee ee ee eee eee ie eens eer eee 3 112 TPO ETON Ae cee ce eae Re a en i a ee Be SR 43 22 INTO a STEEN SNS A ee at die BRE 2c Bi A Eee Rn eS ene OM So ee 660 FENGSVOL Cera O LO FSV A 0) oy) ICS en a NE Eee eee ene eee a eee 268 (OVS oe see le Ee i Ne Nee a Ses OS) Ra SES Oe Pe ee ee eee age eee 149 MocaleettarinesO©apitale 2s waste etka ne oe. ceran eee ae oes a. 49 20) som $11,828 Farm Receipts Crops TE YG) HEH OVENS IS | eS See Oe acl SRP RANE pr ae ele ear A, A $ 5 (Gaal Sec eee ce ee ere at eee my A Rete inet es n/n nea 63 EET ea apes essen ete nes ORG Dy eS lee a Dh ke Saas soe ese 531 Baier aN ermVe SOLD LOS esis cose ee teeter esse a ee oe, Ae ea 2 PAU Raul ae SC Ce ae te rg AE Re ee ca oe ee eas Lae 1,019 Livestock Lo) eastiveay gees ©) UU ties gare ee eee ee ee ee ee cen cae alisjal COREY BLISS Py eR ae Ee ES A ee ee a ee ee 329 ER OUES Stes os ek ee Be LA Rn ee eee ee 88 SUT EYE Cy Senta LU Sea Vo Lae a ea ET eee APA eset UA) SIME ee 3 TE (PERS) Seaton ore ene Le a SORT Shel es i eee A Ce ARES 154 ROT Gye Ge Co eS te Alec eS eae es 0 hs a ie eh essence 43 MSGCIIAMCO MSM RE COL UES messes kee een te. 22a eRe 82 oe eS ee nne sane 273 Inercase sinelLeeqduanmdssip pes s 28. es Seek. ornces ee sceeer seeee ee saacene Ihr (ar Cobtoxécaly By ecole 1 RueC6Ksih OLAS Sy ee meee ae tne Sa Meee ok! ee ka im fare 1 eee See on $ 2,838 Farm Expenses LBhtasye lh WE Yop eae aes ed ET Aad 2 SES ee ee oe eee ee ee $ 157 Machinery repairs and depreciation..................-2:-----2-------.----- 12 Building and fence repairs and depreciation.................---..---- 34 TENG SG! ee pe ak mes ore OE a SD al ne ee ee ee 36 Horseshocine and wererinary, LOCSies--2---c-ses0-2---neeeenemeneenoce-eecene 2 ORR TORR TOTIG BOCUG! coe nc. eeepc hectare he Rc tnsceuectcececde an 26 Threshing ana twine (excludes= toll) 2.--2---. 220-2222. 2e-on = cabct-nas 32 Wiehe ee wOtecre Mine Cees en eee ns Se be eos seed eee ee atc te ket eae 8 APES ENG h fo SS. ARS RE Fe A Se aero ne as ae rs eee a eee 64 SOATEST aR eA ne ee ne Ec See Scan cabeersyecdeessucasbuca 10 Wie EIS OUS MORN OMRCR ete ces ates oe aece acer encase ease -cac—ancacu-esue 25 Wann. toa anrnni hl bye TEN ote es See Ee Ee i oe ee eee 83 AMayiceil TMEGeicel: Tap alehal= (20 peer wea SRS Peeper anti ree eee ore $ 6489 Farm Income (receipts minus expenseS)..........-..-.-.-.--..--------+ $ 2,349 Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 per cent)..................-- 946 Tash ar ey esl WIT aT arte! hey Suge SS See Sees ie ae e ee a e ee $ 1,408 120 Bulletin No. 177 Table XXIV.—Business Factors of Farms of Hinckley Area, Millard County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 bet- Average ofall * paying farms. 59 farms ‘ Diversity of Farming NumberioL Sources Oi in COmess ee ae eee 6.3 bee INUIT S VO LTC, OF) S FLT O Walle eee ee ee eee 4.3 4 Number sources income over 10 per cent gross MOCCUD TS pean ses tae oe Nee Se eee nee eR 3 3 Sources of income over 10 per cent gross receipts: Alitalia S866 dicts tei Ao eee CDE ee sae as Rein ee $ 1,019 $ 340 Gay se Rem 9,826 $ 7,983 Farm Receipts Crops PAGAL OCS pee ee eee oe meee See ns ee $ 17 $ —- $ 2 GET ene eee pet eee a. ea 242 154 146 TRIB Scare eee SOs ecreh kc Ae ee ee eee 5b it 55 222 SUERTE) OVSVST GTI oe RS ee ee = _— 9 Other crops: (alfalfa iseed))i=.-----=.=.-- Cite 87 307 Livestock DD aiiiy. pO O GNICUS gan seen ae ee ce 124 87 112 Poulltpysandver ey sales esse ees eee 82 25 60 CHENIN iS HLUGIST® Soke se 2 ae ae eee 220 101 167 [nl(oncste SW Watches een il a 32 29 59 SEO DeSales cs sae ee nk sae aces eek ee 12 — 5: SNAIL SIAS ET WSs} | a ina a ee aes Pe eS 213 72 96 OUEST APC GCOLD US ae. sess cea ok Se re este 423 273 235 Increase in livestock inventory....--.........- 156 -— 22 Increase in machinery inventory-.--...---.- 51 all 28 Increase in feed and supplies..............-. 168 22 112 CROLaIMHarIMeEVeCOlM uss c= aes. ee 22s es ok Sine Oi rel! $ 956 $ 1,582 Farm Expenses Blacksmith and machine work........-...------ $ 115 $ 58 $ 67 1S hiyeteyo le RE OVO, ea eee ene ee SOE ee ees 72 63 58 Mach., bldg., and fence material.............. 115 86 73 MGC UmMan GO SCO Rim ae oe koe Se eee 24 90 45 HIGeAMETONtsy, ANG TAXCS. 2}. hse se cee alfa la 81 85 OPNeTSXPGENsOs yet es ee 43 26 30 Wivestockmpurchasgeg: 2.25 s2--s2-oee-ste eee 146 60 138 Decrease in livestock inventory.............. — 109 oo Decrease in land and buildings............. am 15 24 16 Wale: Ofetamily: laboris.:sc- 2 eccs-ccee- eee ee ac 79 81 63 A BYo yr eM led he A ava leel B>.¢ ofS} al: (ols eee Rees See Re ea $ 720 Say bis $ 5675 Farm Income (receipts-expenses) -.....--.--- $ 2,361 $ .278 $ 1,007 Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 DET IUCOIIG Wine ee ee ee ee 649 786 639 ean Ore EnCOMG! 120: cence Ws 28-5 es SL R02 $ -—508 $ 368 124 Bulletin No. 177 Table XXVIII.—Business Statement of Farms of Pleasant Grove Area, Utah County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming Average of 10 Average of 10 Average better-paying least-profitable of all 57 farms farms farms Karm Capital Real estate I EES TH 010 Sat a AC OU UR a ele eS $ 8,060 $ 8,642 $ 5,019 TES Uni ara Si eT a aOR Tee eee deaO5 1,030 1,235 TEV St CI oe ee ee 1,526 536 892 Miavehimery7 ois or a a eee e see 2 613 182 350 Heed amd) supple she ee eee eeee 308 287 296 TotalawarmuCa pitas 2. =v ese ate een eee aces ba a Bray > 5,677 $ 7,792 Karm Receipts Crops IPOtaALOCS see ee ee ee ee ee So BB. 9° 8 17 $ 133 (re eaiaina eee Se eee is ERS eg eh eee eee 23 91 141 Tica yet ee oat cat at See A ee ee yl — 41 Gulearsb GCs’ coe eseteance cee oe ee eee 3852 96 298 TB TURD EG) Soke ee ek ME ea ey 98 185 126 Otherjierops) 22 ee eee 25 iti 18 Livestock Datirye DT OCUGES) se: seer ee ene eee eee nee 361 6 170 Poultry and ere sallesea ee eee AD 20 57 Cattler sales 2 eee ee Pe aes ae 627 47 186 Horse) Sales) 22.2 TNIV wk alee a whee — 40 36 Sheepesalleg a5 20 oi 2 wes oe eer eanewes 1 1 3 Swine sale gn ta ces hese Lt Fee el eee 330 oll 82 Otemer-receipts 28 yee ee a 244 pel 178 Increase in livestock inventory...-.......-.--- 211 a 56 Increase in machinery inventory......-.-....- 28 50 24 Increase in feed and supplies.....-.........-...- 176 30 87 Increase in land and buildings. ...-...-........ 36 20 13 Rotaly harm RWeCelp tse. Se eA ae Seon enlan $ TG $ 1,649 Farm Expenses Blacksmith and machine work......-.-..-.--- $ 54 $ 34 $ 38 LIS C! Vab Ogos se sees nee ta nee ee eee mere eee 130 57 77 Mach., bldg., and fence material.............. 125 84 87 Meed“and: seed sae 2 ae ee Cee eeaes 141 27 58 Bees rents: and (taxes 2--20.) 2a 154 aa aU par 128 OWED “EXPENSES! 22. Se eee ol 66 28 i VeEstockwp UT Chiais Cesc ree eeennnes 422 20 akabal Decrease in livestock inventory....--..-..------ — 23 — Wallies Oy iheabtby Meioyore 8 eek OT 70 81 “yonnewl Idtheraa IDp-qovernsteysje ea $ 1,164 $ 492 $ 608 Farm Income (Receipts-expenses ) -----.------ $ 2,053 $ 224 $ 1,041 Interest on Total Farm Capital (at 8 DERG) ters ee ee ee aed age 940 454 623 Labor Income SRL ROO chery aE VS ey, ikjalales! $ —230 $ 418 125 in Utah ‘ming im Some Types of Irrigation Fa 'STET “00d aodey dog ATUUOW “V ‘C'S "ST6L “ST “AO N uo soowd wie (se) 'ST6I ‘SL (O UO Sood WARY (=) ‘() WO] UAYL} VIOM YTGT OJ Sodltd “YTET-OS8T MOL SOOLIG WAA “T “99d ‘LI6T ‘Hooqivex “VW ‘d ‘“S “A(1) (s)09°T 0Z'T cet 00°T 0€ iS ss Cie ; a = (z) OFT 0e'T Gel C6" Lh GTI TO Sse er ie aes = OFT 08° 09°T C6" $9" 96° 68° a Se ees oe = <= 00°0T 70°L €L°s L6:h -6kte tae WE Pon Sab Skea ae rd re OLLT 00ST .00°ET 2 O0°R= “OTL. O16 1008 1) 00nbe ce s00s0 rr eet, eae LG Si 0g'T eo: 09° 8g" 6F gs" 6¢° 0g ai Ze te 08'T 09°T 00°T G9" 09° 09° 89° OL’ sou 79° og" 39° OFT 0ZT 9L° eg 0S" gg" 6¢° 99° 09° Lg 0g 8g" 16° G3" 19° cr ev OF 6P LY 8h St 8s" vt 88°T Blink oa'T adem) ie ey gL OL $8" GL’ 69° GL’ IST¢ OTS STIS o8'0$ SLos oL 0s gL0$ Ts0$ PE0$ FLO$ SG 0$ TL OS (1) 8161 LT61 9T6T GL6L PIGI° 816T ZLeT- TEGT “OT6R = = so eae 3 ier Oye | 2| 97.85 | ae Grandays. eae 56| 108 52| a 3| 92.86| 1.78] 5.36 ENO Aik eat A ee POS | Arai) PMO ee 5] 97.47 ~=2=)|) eee suey Se ase ee eee Si 1.7 93 1 3| 95.88] 1.03] 3.09 Kane. ste. Soe 1ZiO}) 126i6)| 5 eae 8| 93.33 | 6267. Millana ert. Ome, 360] 135 302 4} 98.69 1.31 Moma aint ei ees oe sees 238| 85/ 211 27| 88.66 --|11.34 APNG, Spee on ee ge oe 143] 126 GS Tyree 6| 95.80 ----| 4.20 EUUGIN) ee tye ee oe 193] 491 188} 2 3| 97.41] 1.04] 1.55 malig @sse eee 1,366] 54/°1,254| 45] - 67|. 91.80] 3.29) 4.90 | | | DSO ian coe 38] 108| 38> 2] 45-52 |100-00)) =a ee Sanpetews: 2-1 se ae ILM al 80}| 1,163 4| 24] 97.65 .34| 2.01 DOWIE 2253. eee owe 312] 88 OTe een ne el by ee O ye dag 2-25| sao PS) 6 ll wep eae Meee em es 362| 97 345 2| ° 25] 95232)» G5 A ieloYs) [a aee name, | eae 301] 137 281 5| 15] 93.36| 1.66| 4.98 | | {UL OY 0725 SAS Rae I ee 186! 106 DLSiG| ©) sa) 52100200; a WiGaln ye eeee: sett ee 1S BO) Coral oo T| 32] 96.75| —- .58| 2.76 Vein 2200 Dee sube tas Zool GSy 207 wale LG) 95.85 =| “od Washington 1205 2: Ss a0 MCE ee 6| 96.79 ~=20| “Wome AAS) 012 oh irae me Site eee 942| 63 885 Tl) BO) 93295) > 4a iene | | (1)1890 U. S. Census. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah Table XXXIII.—Tenure of Farms in Utah by Counties, 1900 (1) Pee! see eee | 8 |e be Area as aie FE sa |as a |ailas se Sm +O Rie Oe 5 5 a) A o a3 < Bb O/;|EH] s al i> O02 a 5% Mie Wtate:. 2S... | 19,387| 5,177 135| 311| 506].1,207 Counties | IBGAVOR ts228- 25. -e.22- | 301| 216 = 22 Boxeldery: 22+... 1,017| 813} 21 47 (CHAO) 0c) eens aaa 1,795 1,446| 16) 76 WAT TION (e522 -ce-nencn- =~ | eS 112 5 6 12 4 | ee ae ee 938) 611] 16 40 UNTO TVH Al. 2 eee oe 458 400 3, 37 (Cantield, 22.22 237 228 oe 4 Gand 7522. lecaras | 121| 100 5 9 NO) ees ee se ees sye 235 197 13 15 UES See eee eee 356 249| 3| 35 AS AUINC: esata be eee 213 188 4 4 Lui EY oC Se seas 676 575 ‘i 27 INT Sar eee | 299| 217 12| 22 [£4013 a ae, 189 159 1 Ly, 2016] | RARE te oe ee eRe | 276 230 21| 18 ged BY: 3 ee eee | 2,208 1,561 41 152| 187 roe Wag ILC: 1 a | 66 7| aa Sanpete. es 1,618 ile siilie 30 144 PSS [1 s) ee ae ie ee a 946 | 810| a ler 42 SS ORT iy nce ae 608 526 19| 32 MOOgley ees) ee aes | 487 422| ied 26 V0 I le aR ae 559 466 7| 41 | Se ee es ames 2,760 2,041 22 195 WaSaLEN 2.222 32 -<-- 492| 386) 4 45 Washington) =.2--- 477 355 | 4 12 STEER gS ene aa | 271 215] 2| 31 INGO ER! east | 1,479 1,098 | 13] 73 | (1)1910 U. S. Census. 130 Bulletin No. 177 Table XXXIV.—Tenure of Farms in Utah, by Counties, by Percentages, 1900(1) Percentages +, 2 A le XIV. XX. XXI. XXII. XXITI. XX XXV. XXVI. XXVII: XXVIII. XXIX. . Persons 10 Years of Age or Over Labor, Farm Income, and Family Income, Hyde Park, Cache. County :-Uittahi, i942. ee 2 eee Value of Farm Dwellings, 50 Farms, Hyde Park, Cache Countys Utah) 194s 228 2 ee ee ere Relation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 . Relataion of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914 . Relation of Value of Farm Home and Labor Income, Hyde Park, ache County: Witer ls welt ilt4 ier oe en eee Order of Crop Work at Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah Engaged in Agriculture Tn Utah) UO iO Ae eee ee, a A Ra ah ee ee 34 . Average Cost of Hired Labor on. Farms, by Counties, UTIs GTi) 2 BS gL Se coe ie es a eS Se ae ae 35 WiaiesrotsMarms ai bor sim Wyte ieee e861 8 lt seen eee eee 36 Ratio of Agricultural Workers to Improved Area of Farms, ISOS IPSN Lae: ayant albus 2 a ee AS eee ae eee ee 36 Tenure of Farms, Cache County, Utah, 1880, 1890, 1900, eu) Gil. Oye a es eae ee ae ee 40 Number and Kinds of Tenants, Cache County, Utah, 1880, 1S 908, T9005 anid! 19s) 04 2 eee ee ee ee 41 Total Land Area, Land in Farms, Harms) by «Counties Ulta hy 9 0/9 eee Percentage_of Tenancy, italy 18/80 =169 iQ ss see eee Total Value of Land and Buildings and Value of Land and ' Buildings per Farm and per Acre, 52 Farms, Hyde Park, Cache .County, Witalliy aiQ ica s sees eee Distance from Market and Land Values per Acre in 7 Areas, ital: OT. ee ace a Eee ne Percentage of Land in Farms and Farm Land Improved and Land Value per Acre, by Counties, Utah, 1910-..._............ Relation of Improved Farm Land to Value of all Farm Land per Acre, Utah, 1910 and Improved Land in Table XXX. XXXII. XXXII. XXXII. XXXIV. XXXV. XXXVI. XXXVII. XXXVIITI. XXXIX. XL. XLI. XLII. XLIII. XLIV. XLV. XLVI. XLVII XLVIII. XLIX. L. LI. LVI. . Size of Farm Family, Acres Sugar-beets Raised, Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah ey Title Page Average Values per Acre of Farm Land, Buildings, Ma- chinery ,and Livestock, by Counties, Utah, 1910-........... 45 Average Value of Land and Buildings, per Acre, by Coun- LES sas Wibel Men COUSTUS MY Cal See 2 ec. terest mcs cacutlas qaneeanetboctwe- wee ocs 46 Crops Grown, Period of Irrigation, Number of Irrigations, Days between Irrigations, Logan and Richmond Canal, IWS) OD? no Se ose ele AES Sd ee een ee ee ee ee 50 Farm Mortgages, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914....52 Mortgage Debt of Farms by Counties, Utah, 1910-....._......... 53 Farm Mortgages, Utah and the United States, 1910-...._...... 54 Average Labor Income, 52 Farms, Hyde Park, 1914-............ 55 The Farmer’s Pay for Management and Risk or Responsi- bility Taken, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914-..... 56 Business Statement of the Average of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming and Labor Income........ 57 Business Statement of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming................ 58 Business Statement. of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming......-......... 59 Labor Incomes of 32 Farmers, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914, 1915, and 1916 Labor Income of Utah Farmers, 1909 (1910 U. S. Census)....62 Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 50 Farms, Beaver, Beaver County Witelee we O ie ee ec 64 Size of Farm Family and Number of Cows Kept, Beaver, JEEP NEI AC OY OND Ha Fie GN TEEH 0, |G EE) UC, SS es aR ee 66 Size of Family, Acres Sugar-beets Raised, and Cows Milked, MONTOS A SeVICTH COUDEY ental UO are ee oe soe cecese 69 Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 66 Farms, Mon- ROC MOC eC OMMEYA MUNG) SOM 4 22 See ke eee ee ec 69 Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 72 Farms, Sandy, SEEM TURES MO oyeire ya oeLUN ez) shamed LM 1 We: SiR a ee ee 71 Size of Farm Family, Acres Sugar-beets Raised and Cows Milked, Sandy, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914................ 72 Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 38 Farms, Ferron, HEMT Vie OUI y seed ile eee OG) Arta ee ee ee ets 73 Size of Farm Family, Number Milk and Beef Cows Kept, MerronseHEmMery sGourmby,, Wiel, 1 Olde ee 74 Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 26 Farms, Wel- Hinton (CaAnrpOrMe COMUNE. Uta LO Aye oc. ccacc ces awnane 75 . Size of Farm Family and Milk Cows Kept, Wellington, Car- |oxoyals (Choi irat eN7e OLDS Er eH TS wl i Be: US eet a Se ae ee ne eae 76 Size of Farm Family and Number of Milk Cows Kept, PinGgwecve MUulAarauwGOouNty, Utama, LO4 at . Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 59 Farms, Hinck- Ike WIT eI al™ (Oey rire Gee SLO 1) 0 ipgeee URS Ja I ee a a 77 and Cows Milked, Pleasant Grove, Utah County, Utah, 1916---....... 79 Tenure and Use of Farm Land per Farm, 56 Farms, Pleas- ane Grove: WULah County, Wtam, £906........ 2.2... 220....80 138 XVI. XVII. XVIII. XIX. XX. XXiI. XXIT. XXIII. XXIV. KXYV. XXVI. Bulletin. No. 177 TABLES IN APPENDIX Title Page . Business Factors of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache Coun- Ly, Utah 914 Showine Types ota css. eee 97 . Business Factors of Farms of Hyde Park Area, Cache County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming...........- 98 . Business Statement of 10 -Better-paying Farms of the Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utah, 1914, Showing A laig vYene(oy cial shF Wak osu h a eqamssesan ine Mua e see 7 A ilies Seok tS Ck MIS go's Beek Ik a 99 . Business Factors of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utahy- 19i'4 = Showanie Type! o fey Hy are rn oe 100 . Business Statement of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver Coun- ty, Utah elo 5 Sho wine yp e oie ammo ene eee eee 101 . Business Factors of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver County, LORW al TUS Sao aliases DN Aevs) one Ie iemahates ks ek Or . Business Statement of Farms of Beaver Area, Beaver County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming____...__.. 103 Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Monroe Area, Sevier County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type OL WE ARINC sos BS eee I oe ee ee 104 . Business Factors of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier County, Witahe 69 14s Sinoiwamiss hy; Go teteyed Te rat aie eee ee 105 X. Pusiness Statement of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming ._..-_._..__. 106 . Business Factors of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier County, WW Te AIG Sloonyigalee UP vqoereOni lMeNraau uae ase 107 . Business Statement of Farms of Monroe Area, Sevier County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming........_._... 108 Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Baring cet Os ae Ea ae oe en ee 109 . Business Factors of Farms of Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming_._______.--.- 110 . Business Statement of Farms of Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming.............- alabal Business Factors of Farms of Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming.............. aba Business Statement of Farms in Sandy Area, Salt Lake County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming ........ IER: Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Ferron Area, Emery County, Utah, 1914, Showing TTY Deo NOs THVT Tn iT eae ae es oe ee ee 114 Business Factors of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery County, Utah. 2904 Showin Typeror haart pee eee eee eee 115 Business Statement of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming...-.......... Business Factors of Farms of Ferron Area, Emery County, Utah 9 1'5:.S how ines iy: e co fe Blair ian eee eee eee LUG Business Statement of Farms of Ferron Area, Hmery County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming...........--- ris Business Statement of 10 Better-paying Farms of the Hinckley Area, Millard County, Utah, 1914, Showing ET yg: Ost | EO eave TV Tits a a ae 119 Business Factors of Farms of Hinckley Area, Millard County, Utah, 1914, Showing Type of Farming...........-.. Business Statement of Farms of Hinckley Area, Millard County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming.......-.-..-. Business Factors of Farms of Hinckley Area, Millard County, Utah, 1915, Showing Type of Farming........---- Table XXVII. XXVIII. XXIX. XXX. XXXI. XXXII. XXXIII. XXXIV. XXXV. XXXVI. XXXVII. XXXVIII. XXXIX. XL. Some Types of Irrigation Farming in Utah 139 Title Page Business Statement of Farms of Hinckley Area, Millard County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Manmine.---s-s-2-5 123 Business Statement of Farms of Pleasant Grove Area, Utah County, Utah, 1916, Showing Type of Farming....---------- 124 Average Farm Prices in Utah, December 1, 1880-1918-..--- 1256 Tenure and Use of Farm Land, 32 Farms, Hyde Park, Cache County, Utah, 1914, 1915, and OMG eee ee 126 Tenure of Farms in Utah, by Counties, RRS Olen tee eae enea se 127 Tenure of Farms in Utah, by Counties, TL CAT \(() chien at 58 See es eee 128 Tenure of Farms in Utah, by Counties, 1900-..-...-.-.--.---------- 129 Tenure of Farms in Utah, by Counties, by Percentages, TSE eee ae cee aae a mi ca Pe ae 130 Tenure of Farms in Utah, by Counties, THOS Ue 2S ee asia Percentage of all Farms Operated by Owners, Utah, 1889 Soh Se ee ee ea pag enn ae ge 132 Dates of Farm Crop Operations in 8 Areas of Utah-.-.------ oo 134 Average Yields of 7 Important Utah TOPS oo2o--e2-- +2262 ---=--==-- == 3 Percentage Yield, or Crop Index, Based on Average Wigetse ee 2 ae OO Ee SUSE ae oan asa a ea 134 Percentage Yield, or Crop Index, Based on Average Iowa SE ee ee ae eet cetacean Ta 134 140 Bulletin No. 177 BIOGRAPHICAL Birth and Marriage.—Edgar Bernard Brossard was born on the Brossard Stock Ranch, Oxford, Bannock County, Idaho, April 1, 1889. Son of Alphonse Aimable and Mary Catherine (Hobson) Brossard. Married Laura Parkinson Cowley, daughter of Mathias Foss and Luella Smart (Parkinson) Cowley, August 25, 1915. School and Collegiate Record.—Attended the grade schools at Ox- ford, Idaho; and Ogden and Logan, Utah; and did high school and college work at the Utah Agricultural College, 1904-5 and 1906-1911 inclusive, where he was granted the Batchelor of Science degree in Gen- eral Science with a major in Economics, June, 1911. September 1916 to June 1917 he was a graduate student in Agricul- tural Economics and Farm Management at the University of Minnesota, where he was granted the Master of Science degree in June 1917. Sep- tember 1917 to June 1918 he did graduate work in Agricultural Eco- nomics and Farm Management at Cornell University. From June 1918 to September 1919 he was again registered in the Graduate School of the — University of Minnesota, from which school he was granted the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Ph.D.) June 1920, with a major in Agricultural Hconomics and a minor in Farm Management. Teaching Experience.—He was instructor in mathematics at the Utah Agricultural College, 1909-1910. He was State Farm Management Dem- onstrator for Utah for two years and three months, September 1, 1914 to August 31, 1916, and again from June 1, 1917 to August 31, 1917. At the University of Minnesota, 1916-17 he was assistant Farm Manage- ment Demonstrator and in 1918-19 he was instructor in Farm Manage- ment. From September 1, 1919 to date he has been Professor of Farm Management at the Utah Agricultural College and in charge of Farm Management Investigations at the Utah Agricultural Experiment Station. Organizations and Fraternities.—He is a member of the American Farm Economic Association, The National Irrigation and Drainage Con- gress, The Utah Educational Association, Pi Zeta Pi (a social fraternity), Alpha Zeta, (a professional agricultural fraternity), Gamma Sigma Delta (an honorary agricultural fraternity) and Phi Kappa Phi (an honorary scholastic fraternity). Other Activities —In undergraduate years he took part in college activities. He was the first ‘‘Four-letter’”’ athlete of the Utah Agricultural College, having won four official sweaters in one year, one each for foot- ball, basketball, baseball, and track, and one year was captain of the football team, and another year manager of basketball. He took part in college dramatics and was on the editorial staff of the college paper as well as class president of the graduating class 1911. His work and studies while not in college, have permitted him to travel and become somewhat familiar with the States of the United States lying West of the Mississippi River and Minnesota, Illinois and New. York. He studied thirty-two months in Europe, October 1911 to May 1914, and while there visited the large cities and some of the most interesting parts of England, France, Germany, Switzerland, Holland, and Belgium. Headquarters while in Europe were at Paris, France, where he learned to read, write, and speak the French language.