Historic, archived document Do not assume content reflects current scientific knowledge, policies, or practices. Washington, D. C. April 25, 1924 TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT OKLAHOMA, KANSAS, NEBRASKA By H. R. TOLLEY, Agricultural Economist Bureau of Agricultural Economics, and W. R. HUMPHRIES, Assistant in Agricultural Engineering Bureau of Public Roads CONTENTS Description of areas . Farms operated with one tractor and horses Size and age of tractors SNORE oe San 2 Ad's Phd top Riel. alte Gal Nees BRE BAC bY SE Work done with tractors Work done with horses Horse labor equivalent of tractor work Proportion of work done with different forms of power Work stock needed in addition to tractor Cost of keeping work stock Cost of using tractors Reliability of tractors Annual cost of power for drawbar work Changes after purchase of tractor Owners’ opinions regarding use of tractors Farms on which tractors were not owned Number of work stock Cost of keeping work stock Annual! cost of power for drawbar work Changes between 1918 and 1921 Opinions concerning tractors Cost of power and man labor for different operations Farms on which no horses were owned WASHINGTON GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 1924 apn SP Re Pa re Pee eee * edly i a . — | ~ 2 oo 24. oT . ~~ Washington, D. C. April 25, 1924 TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT, OKLAHOMA, KANSAS, NEBRASKA. By H. R. Totiey, Agricultural Economist, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, and W. R. Humpuetiss, Assistant in Agricultural Engineering, Bureau of Public Roads. »] D] CONTENTS. Page. | Page. Description of areas... .. SSAA an eee ae 4 | Farms operated with one tractor and horses— Farms operated with one tractor and horses. . 5 continued. size and ace of tractors... 5.22... 2.0.25. 6 Changes after purchase of tractor.......- 43 Number, of work stoéke< ie. si... 2 eee Uf Owners’ opinions regarding use of tractors 49 Work done with tractors. ..-......-.-.. 8 | Farms on which tractors were not owned. - 50 Work done with horses.................- 19 INumibercofswork: st0ck=.- =~. . =5.5-5.4--5 50 Horse labor equivalent of tractor work... 22 Cost of keeping work stock...........- 53 Proportion of work done with different Annual cost of power for drawbar work. - 54 {OLIMSTOMPOWEFS 2 80) 25. 1a k oS 23 Changes between 1918 and 1921......._.. 5d Workstock needed in addtition to tractor. 26 Opinions concerning tractors. ..........- 56 Cost of keeping work stock.............- 28 Cost of power and man labor for different Costioiusine tractors. 2-222. 2.2 ee 32 OVCTAONS Ss c2 tee ae oy) 56 Reliability of;tractors.......2..505.2.-22- 38 | Farms on which no horses were Owned...... 57 Annual cost of power for drawhbar work. . 38 | Farms on which twotractors were owned..... 58 During August and September, 1921, the United States Depart- ment of Agriculture, in cooperation with the Kansas State Agricul- tural College, end the College of Agriculture of the University of Nebraska, made a study of the use of power on 390 farms on which tractors were owned, in northern Oklahoma, Kansas, and Nebraska.! A personal visit was made to each farm and the following data ob- tained: (1) Work done during year with tractor; (2) work done during year with horses; (3) cost of using tractor; (4) cost of keeping work stock; (5) changes in operation and organization of farm after pur- chase of tractor; (6) opinions and ideas concerning use of tractor. The investigation also included 85 farms‘on which tractors were not owned, but which were comparable in size to those on which tractors were being used. These were visited to obtain data which would afford a direct comparision between costs and practices on farms where tractors were owned and on farms of similar size and type where they were not owned. 60589°—24——1 2 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. Three areas were selected for the investigation: (1) Harper Count Kansas, and Alfalfa County Okla., hereinafter referred to as the south- ern area; (2) Thomas, Sheridan, Trego, Gove and Logan Counties, Kans., hereinafter referred to as the western area; (3) Phelps and Kearney Counties, Nebr., hereinafter referred to as the northern area. The location of these areas is shown in Figure 1. A report was obtained from any tractor owner willing and able to give the desired information provided he had owned his tractor for at least one year and was using it for drawbar work. A few of the men interviewed were using two tractors and a few did not own any horses. The farms on which tractors were not owned were selected so that their average size would correspond as nearly as possible to the average size of the farms on which tractors were owned. In each area, how- Se aA ie Ce min nN OK LAHOMA L_] Fig, 1.—Areasin which investigation was made. ever, tractors were in use on a majority of the larger farms and it would have been difficult if not impossible to find nontractor farms equal in number, size, and type to the farms on which tractors were owned. Table 1 shows the number of farms surveyed in each area classified according to the type of power used. The different classes of farms are discussed se parately in the following pages. TABLE I.—Number of farms of different classes visited. Le . South- | Western | North- Type of power. ernarea.| Area. | ernarea. | Total PML OMANI OTROS hb ele eee aco come eee te eee ee 120 107 127 | 354 Horses only... ..- Be bei ak Sie oa othe one's Gras sw aoe ae ee 26 31 28 | 85 weraeLOr png NO NOTSEs, 001 occu i wads ot cbccataoc Gee eee eee 4 11 0 15 POO LOIS SUG. NIOTSES 2 ob os Pel. Se eee 6 13 2 21 US i a ine Senne Bae, Gedo oo Je oe. 156 162 157 475 TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 3. The more important points brought out in the investigation con- cerning the 354 farms operated with one tractor and horses are sum- marized in Table 2, and concerning the 85 farms operated with horses only, in Table 3. TaBLE 2.—Details of operation on farms on which one tractor and horses were owned. TS TREPOT EGE 1! LETC ae ee SLAG CHT J Sse e oS Se SH Ona Sa ener amen acres. . SIS CED UO ie 1 OS ee eee Goes si Areain- wheat (seeded 1920). .....2...02.2--2-25--F-cs--ee- do.-...| Tractor work per year: Wrawipam (home fanm')=..:-2:2-s2s 22.2. s6a-- 32-225 hours. . Oli ACHOMONATIN) = soo. clot ea ob apse dade stamens dozs--| USOT. 22 $5 eee Se SEE gOe eet G0 322- SRG. as (eee a re ES @ozz=- Fuel per year for drawbar work: CASHING ae
. Se a See oe Ss aia de aa dollars. - Pers OUIe ees neo so eRe ete Sn eos eee do=te WMionkesLOcksper farms oso. 2 oSec Ses 5. cSaos Seas 3 number. . -Horse labor: HeeEaiHT POR ViCAl—. =. sm2 S552 soso sces tones Sen encee hours. - permieaukpelny Calse-s 0 See Ss.) ete sb eseenss don 2: Cost pemhour othorse labors = - 6. 52552-22222. fe cents. - Annual feed consumption, per head: Grane ss sees ae re a Se Ok msn Se. tee te ets pounds. . ciygan mOuenare 20 ee 7 ee sos o22 eo. bs eeee Sass does. EE StHETE: a 5 Sa eee ie ae ge eer months. . Cost of keeping work stock: Tein isting 22 Sa ee eee ae ee ei eae dollars. . TEP NED GL ye ete SRS See OS ee ee a 0) Cost per year of power for drawbar work: Lota Gractorand ‘work stock): - 2.2.22 222.2. -2-2<- dollars. - PGrChOWMACLG sever ot k= Sc atict tel olde ene ec cut oosee GO=ae Horse labor equivalent of total drawbar work: BCT aia seen 2 a2 yee noc Ses eo oda eS aise oes hours. . IRETECLOMACT CMS S45 -E es © tc ho 5,2 SPSS. ee eos Sede dors =: Proportion of total drawbar work done with tractors.per cent. - Increase in size of farm after purchase oftractor.--...- crop acres. . Work stock per farm if tractors were not used........-- number. . Necessary work stock per farm in addition to tractor-..-.-.- do Crop acres per horse: Relonrepiunehase OL WACLOIS..22 =< ac =22 5. >-oein2s-2 -ots2see +s NEAL on 8 Seo Ce See Oe ee ees eee PO tentialierop.acres per NOTS@>-_-.....-.- = a2 2. see -s2--s25-- Reduction per head in feed for work stock after purchase of trac- tors: SGU Alid eee AO eo eset oa Sains micis o sin sie Seiwieiseeo per cent. EA ygAMOULOMPN ARE? Bane 8 oo 28 Sakis soe este a closes dos: Reduction in family and regular hired labor.......... months. . Net increase in combined cost of power and labor due to using pict ObGee eater ee 2S Saas shoe a cies atiode:e dollars. . Proportion of owners who charged tillage practice. ...per cent. . Proportion who believed tractors responsible for increased yield SSTSACLO See ee i ed) ye 5 5a SoS oe Ge geek Sess per cent. - Proportion who believed present tractors would be profitable = 22cd00s S54 eGo SSO Oee Beng ee ee ee ee per cent. - Proportion who intend to buy others.................... do.... 1 Increase. Southern} Western | Northern) Total or area. area. area. average. 120 107 127 | 354 326 842 377 500 262 516 299 352 213 407 | We 259 365 350 | 203 | 302 24 19 | 33 | 26 50 5S Al 48 439 422 277 376 531 345 111 324 301 379 332 336 57 54 34 48 1, 499 1,556 1,375 1, 472 6.8 6.3 7.4 6.8 106 46 57 71 588 520 357 484 1.61 1.49 1.76 1.60 7.5 10.2 7.4 8.3 3, 690 3, 816 4, 206 3,914 472 393 566 482 22 18 13 17 1,529 1,247 2,421 1,765 2, 600 2,440 3, 200 2, 820 6.6 7.4 4.5 6.1 583 522 517 541 76 50 69 64 Baya 1,042 874 1,025 4.47 2.02 2.92 3.17 6, 812 7, 483 5,930 6, 670 26 15) 19 19 45 46 28 40 18 98 44 S 10.1 1552 9.6 ATS 7, 5.7 7.4 6.5 6.5 26 34 31 30 35 51 40 42 46 70 46 | 54 20 27 Ale ( 21 12 15 6 7 ay 2.9 0.8 1.4 343 157 172 206 69 62 65 66 29 14 20 21 78 84 65 75 15 85 59 72 4 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. TABLE 3.—Details of operation on farms on which tractors were not owned. | Southern| Western | Northern! Total area. area. area. farms. Pum Her Of fAXWIS... 0» + «<2 aisin wn anne semana epee ae See 26 3L 28 85 BEV OL fad. Ono Winnie noe Sn ono. 2-5 Pee ee eee acres. - 316 779 376 504 Prop aces Per larm.. <2). fo. 2... oe keen eee eee go... 250 446 288 334 Area in wheat (seeded 1920)... 2. 2 sto eee oes do.... 196 323 164 232 RVOLEStOCK per farm: -.: sess... ee see eee number. . 9.8 12.2 9.3 10.5 wae per head .25-.0.2 +. eka! - Jeers eee eee dollars. - 108 71 111 94 Necessary work stock per farm....................... number. . 9.8 1 ies 8.7 10.1 Cost of keeping work stock: Rar farm: -.. 2. bo oatect ba eeee ee aan Soe ee eee dollars. . 838 670 608 701 BU OA = acc we Ue 4 Cotes east s © a ae eee eee do.... 84 54 65 66 Annual feed consumption, per head: RETO oc ek ns 2 Becton Ste hes en, eee a pounds. . 2,073 1,780 2,927 2,246 Pay. And DOGCRAEe. see sg s canes ae oes See eee doz22 3, 160 3,140 3, 060 3,140 MASULITO! 2555 Fone cnt cane nea seei eae condemn ee months. . 6.1 6.4 3.9 5.5 Horse labor: BET AAD MON YORI acter aos oa oe ee eee See ee hours. . 6,819 6, 658 5, 561 6,346 PELMNGAG“VEL VOal 6.2 ds 35 sae ye oe eee ee doz: 709 565 610 624 ast per hour of horse labor: .-- .: 8-50. cecseso- ees eee cents. . 13 10 12 11 Increase in size of farm 1918 to 1921.............-... crop acres. . 9 78 42 45 Crop acres per horse: Reh See cr Ba nd. Soe eee ee ee doe 3 25 33 28 30 NOP Ae NL. 2 poe. ee ok ee ee do 26 37 31 32 Crop acres per necessary horse. ...:-....-----s¢<--ssace do 26 38 33 33 DESCRIPTION OF AREAS. Southern area.—According to the 1920 census of agriculture the avearge size of all farms in the southern area was 242 acres, 191 acres of which were classed as improved. On the average 119 acres of wheat, 62 per cent of the improved area, were harvested in 1919. Nearly all of the land is level and suitable for cultivation. Rainfall is usually sufficient to produce a crop of wheat. On the farms visited the yield per acre of the wheat harvested in 1921 was 20 bushels. Wheat is practically the only cash crop. Little livestock is kept, and on many of the farms none is raised for sale. Tillage practices in this area are more intensive than in either of the other areas visited. Nearly all the land planted to wheat is either plowed or listed and sledded, and in addition much of it is gone over with a disk harrow. Most of the harvesting is done with the binder and the wheat is usually threshed from the shock. Western area.—According to the 1920 census of agriculture the average size of all farms in the five counties in the western area visited was 737 acres, 527 of which were classed as improved. In 1919 159 acres of wheat per farm were harvested. The topography of much of the land makes it unsuitable for cultivation. This rough land has never been broken and most of it is utilized for grazing purposes. On most of the farms visited a larger part of the land was under cultivation, and the proportion of the area in wheat (see Table 4) was much larger than the average for the area. The rainfall is often insufficient to make a crop of wheat. The average yield in 1921 on the farms visited was 8 bushels per acre, and on many it was 5 bushels or less. Tillage practices are less intensive than in either of the other areas. Less than half of the land in wheat on the farms visited had been plowed previous to seeding, part of the remainder had been disked and on part the wheat had been sowed in the previous year’s stubble without any preparation whatever. Headers are commonly used for ee a TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 5 harvesting. However, in both this and the southern area a con- siderable number of tractor owners use combined harvesters and _ threshers. Northern area.—According to the 1920 census of agriculture the average size of all farms in the two counties of the northern area vis- ited was 245 acres, 215 acres of which were classed as improved. An average of 86 acres of wheat and 58 acres of corn per farm were har- vested in 1919. Corn occupies a greater acreage in this area than in either of the others. It is usually planted with a combined lister and drill without previous preparation of the ground.. Wheat is usu- ally planted on the corn land, much of it with one-horse drills which go between the rows of standing corn. Where the corn is cut the land is usually disked before the wheat is planted. Where wheat fol- lows wheat the land is usually plowed before planting. The average yield per acre of wheat harvested in 1921 on the farms visited was 14 oaha: FARMS OPERATED WITH ONE TRACTOR AND HORSES. Table 4 shows the average size of the 354 farms operated with one tractor and horses and the acreage devoted to different crops in the different areas. TABLE 4.—Average size of farms and crop acreage in different areas. Crop acreage. Area Total Num-) ; | | | | not area Area. _ ber of | Other Giher | _ no : farms. | Bar- Al- |Other Sowed Other Weed a PALS Wheat. tec. Oats. small| Corn.| row falfa.| hay. | feed. \crops. Total.| ped. farm. J jeraum. crops. | | Acres. |Acres.|Acres. Acres.|Acres.|Acres.|Acres.|Acres.| Acres. |Acres.|Acres.| Acres. Acres. i 9 « Southern...) 120 213 od Be 13 4 9 1 a 3| 262| 64| 326 Western....| 107 AGT |. 39 8 | 2| 2% 9 1 8 18 5| 516 | 326) s42 Northern ..| 127 177 is lige: Tp Baro 7 oe er ae hare ry ele | 299} 78| 377 Total_...- | 354 959| 131 10 | iy ae 4 | 5 8 | 8| 3] 352] 148] 500 uf j 1 Cane, Sudan grass, etc. - The average size of these farms is considerably larger than the aver- age size of all farms in the different areas, and the proportion of the area in wheat was somewhat greater than for all farms as shown by census figures. On nearly every farm visited in the southern and western areas, and on most of the farms in the northern area, wheat occupied a greater acreage than any other crop and determined the amount of power kept on the farm. On the average the proportion of the crop area of the farms surveyed in wheat (seeded 1920) was 81 per cent in the Southern area, 79 per cent in the Western area, 59 per cent in the Northern area, and for all farms 74 per cent. The number of farms of different sizes based on crop acreage operated with one tractor and horses in the different areas is shown in Table 5. The size of the farms in the western area was considerably greater than in the other areas, but tillage practices and yields were such that on the average practically the same amount of power was used per farm in each of the three areas. 6 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. TaBLE 5.—Number of farms of different sizes in different areas operated with one tractor and horses. Size of farm (crop | Southern) Western | Northern || Size of farm (crop | Southern) Western | Northern acres). area. | area. area. acres). area. area. area. Less than 160...... $6 | ee 10'}| 480-620..2005 0: 5 | 22 8 Se aan se 36 5 re ae a 2 | 14 | ceeeeee OT ES CU ee ae 34 17 46 ')| ‘300 and over: =>: )-- clo cceoe 12}. a ee si | ee re 18 18 29 tS ye 7 19 if Totals te. 120 107 127 i | SIZE AND AGE OF TRACTORS. The number of tractors of different sizes in use in the different areas and the average size 1n crop acres of the farms on which they were used, are shown in Table 6. The tractors are classified according to the number of 14-inch moldboard plows pulled. The three-plow size predominated in each area. In general the larger tractors were found on the larger farms. TaBLE 6.—Number of tractors of different sizes in use in different areas and size of farms on which they are used. Southern area. | Western area. | Northern area. | All farms. Size of tractor. : | a “ a a % ‘rop 2 rop rop Nr rop Number. Shred, Number. | aaa Number. acres, | Number. see 7 = ver | | | Per farm. Per farm. Per farm. Per farm | 28 202 | 34 | 436 26 239 88 | 303 EMOW 2
Denote re nne cee apiakey 20 36 34 18 74 a pare saa Fea 9 120
Hours of tractor work:
farawiar (home farm); Js... see seme oe 279.| 307 | “SSL 452.) “429 | 608.|_-.---]|_.---- 365
Bel nome farm)-) = 22.0: eee oe eee 2 13 30 42 39 ay aes pe Pe Pa 24
BEISU OTIS e $e ho 20S 8k Aa an ee ee 34 63 45 | 42 73 DONE rae ee 50
I PA ay 0)" UE 315 | 383 | 459| 536] 541] 715]......|...... 439
Western - ie as | esis ee re
tc | a ne ei, eee Pen | Laer e | 2a as, death ale 29"). Aa. oe 107
Hours of tractor work:
Prawpar (nome farm) 2... --.-oces.2 oe-eee oe 213°] 221 |) 228") S85.) 419 |. 464) > 458 350
Pe MGINe TAIT)... os aelsae i. s- Core Reet eine aoe 6 7 19 24 22 yal 24 19
©Custom:....... Be wait adh bop Oh eee eee 129 64 60 41 47 54 30 53
SN ee OG ae thon, Sead adios Coe ae eee 348 292 307 450 488 539 512 422
Northern sa | :
ME MITELO DOD ms pos om 2 sje Swern expec haa Seinls ab 10 27 46 29 7 Boles se Sole ee ease 127
Hours of tractor work:
Drawbpar (dome farm) -.... 5.2.0. .uc% 26. 157 | - 429207) eOa8s1> 23H OT et Le od | 203
PAPAIN D GATOL). ..s'one vocec eke eb se ators \4 15 25 56 44 (Cm Ree el eee 33
PeOMies..£.. Staou. Soe TS. ass Soe See. 21 41 34 42 75 oS fl Bets PS, 41
a — P ' . bas —e oon a Ye eee res
i el th i a
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 9
Table 11 and Figure 2 show the number of hours tractors were
used for different kinds of work on farms of different sizes in the
three areas.
SOUTHERN AREA
Hours of Work
Size of Farm
(Crop Acres)
160-239...-- YZZZZZ73
400-479....-
480 andover
Less than 160
160-239_.__-
240-319-2.2-
320-399_...
ee
ALL AREAS
354 Fars 22772 | | | |
(Bs | gum Drawhar Work = —BeltWork wz Custom Work
Fic. 2.—Hours of tractor work per year on farms of different sizes.
There was a larger percentage of small machines on the smaller
farms than on the larger ones and to this extent the number of hours
of work per year is not a true index of the amount of work done by
the tractors on the farms of different sizes. The table shows, how-
ever, the relative importance of the different classes of work. :
The work done annually by an individual tractor depends upon the
particular field operations for which it is used, the amount of belt
and custom work done, and to a certain extent upon the amount
of time it is out of running order when needed, as well as upon the
size of the farm. The variation in the number of hours work done
during the year by the 354 tractors is shown in Figure 3.
The number of hours the different sizes of tractors were used for dif-
ferent classes of work is shown in Table 12. The two-plow machines
did considerably less belt and custom work in each area than did the
larger sizes. For all areas, 88 per cent of the work done by the two-
plow machines was drawbar work on the home farm, and only 26
machines, 29 per cent of the total number, did any belt work what-
ever. Most of the belt work on these farms is threshing, and the
small tractors are not powerful enough to drive most of the threshing
machines used. (See p. 15.)
60589 ° —24——_2
10 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
TaBLE 12.—Work done annually by tractors of different sizes.
Size of tractor.
Area. = : =
‘ _ | Over 4- All
2-plow. | 3-plow. | 4-plow. plow. farms:
Southern.
OTIS MINDY... oo wine wae eee ee ee 28 73 16 3 120
Hours of tractor work:
Draw bar (home farm). .-.. 2533... eee 360 368 384 160 365
Belt (home farm) =. u's: eee eee 3 28 44 14 24
CUSTOM. < oo WS co npcemtenaew onic ae 34 51 68 86 | 50
Dotal. 22.15.00 ogame eae ews eee 397 447 496 260 439
Western
Rear figs THIN DEP. 2 x5 sacha eg ee as ee eee 34 49 14 | 10 107
Hours of tractor work:
DrawbarGouome layin) ><) ees pene ees ae 344 350 350 | 368 350
DBelGMMOME (ar) see es oo we Soe tet oe ae 7 17 48 24 19
(USTOMI. ec eee oe te ae ee eee 41 67 31 65 53
1) © ee Sane Cees Sank! AT UR | 392 434 429 | 457 422
Northern
Harms, NUWMbHEr: +... 2o.0- seb. eee eee 26 85 10 6 127
Hours of tractor work:
Draw bar (homie farm)» 22... .o2c-c2, cece eek eee 209 203 233 127 203
Belt (home farm)... esos ee eee 20 33 61 41 33
CUSEOMI. « 5.2 cn foun’ 2S sn oe eee eee 21 40 101 52 41
Total: Bah Ashok So See eee) ee ee ee 250 276 395 220 277
Number of Tractors
Hours per Year 50 0 25 50 0 25 50
Less than 200..|
200=399:- -»
400-599__._.
600-799... =
ooend over. —_ be
&) SOUTHERN AREA WESTERN AREA NORTHERN AREA
Fic. 3.—Variation in number of hours per year tractors were used.
DRAWBAR WORK.
The average number of hours the tractors were used for various
kinds of drawbar work is shown in Table 13. In each area they were
used more for plowing and listing than for any other kind of work.
On part of the farms tractors were used for practically every field
operation except haying and cultivating row crops. ‘They were used
for drawing corn binders on 3 farms in the southern area, on 7 farms
in the western area, and on 2 farms in the northern area.
TABLE 13.—Hours per year tractors were used for drawbar operations.
Southern! Western Northern All
Operation. area. area. area. | farms.
ad
Hours. Hours. Hours. Hours.
Plowing wid listhie so. 05. oe Loi eee 140 141 122 134
Diskine. harrowing, and sledding ......-....-...-5,- 2.2) 127 69 16 70
MARINO TOW CYODS «062 fect mee oe nsk eee eae ee eee () 6 ‘ 4
USING 9) bi eee eer or 42 76 23 45
RPMI SORUNS PTR 2. op ccc ne cece onsen anc n cca eee 54 56 34 48
BMISCOMANIOONS S28 so0.0b ki ot lixvz.ic cbs cle teal eee eee 2 2 1 1
OMS. kins. ctehen le es cence be. eee 365 350 203 302
1 Less than 0.5 hour.
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. igs
Plowing and listing.—Table 14 shows the number of acres plowed
and listed per farm and the percentage done with tractors. On the
average 18 acres per farm were plowed in the spring and 140 acres in
the fall. The spring plowing was usually for spring grain or “sowed
feed’’ (cane, Sudan grass, etc.), and only a small amount of either of
these crops was raised on the average farm. (See Table 14). Listing
was not common in any except the southern area.
Fall plowing required more power than any other single operation
-in each area, and the tractors did a larger proportion of this than any
other operation. On many of the farms the tractors did all of the fall
plowing and on only a very few farms were horses used for as much
as 50 per cent of it. (See fig. 4.)
Fic. 4.—The 3-plow tractoris the most common size used. Tractors are used more for plowing and listing
than for any other operation.
TaBLE 14.—Plowing and listing per farm and percentage done with tractors.
: Southern| Western | Northern Average
Operation. Area. | area. area. | all farms.
Spring plowing:
meCOS POY FATHE Will! tractors: .... 2-2 ees ce ce ee ce eee eee 4 23 7 10
Peete MCE eatit WHALHOISES .... <2 2-22 2 ona ncte cen esce ess 9 7 9 8
i.e chem, 1 en Sane eee 13 30 16 8
percentare Gone witht tractors. .............-.-2-----s-2-----2-- 31 77 44 56
Fall plowing:
merece or tAlinWiLll SEACLOFS:.-- 0-2. 2-4-2 sts 22.22. --- 111 132 117 119
Berri srar WiLll NOTSOS).. 2205-2 oon nce een ce nee 18 21 23 21
Dn a a ee red ee ee 129 153 140° 140
DeLee CONC Witll WACLOIS.. 2.22.22... 2 fife et see ee eee ed 86 86 S4 85
Listing:
Meresperfarm with tractors.....2:..::.5-.2.2.-.202062--24: 44 5 | 0 16
PPP SSESHEMY Wipe NOESCS 2222-125... ae cnet ese nds 31 2 | 0 11
LTS sedis ac AS ee pee ne a 75 | 7 0 27
PECL Are CONG wWilM TTACLOIS..\.-2-2...-.---2.+---222--5--42- 59 | GATS Ses aces 59
12 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
TABLE 15.—Disking, sledding, and harrowing per farm and percentage done with tractors.
. Southern | Western | Northern| Average
Operation. area. area. area. | all farms.
Disking unplowed ground:
Single disk—
Acres per farm with tractor. ....4..22-.- 2.0.3 (‘) 2 3 2
Acres per farm with lorses .- 9.2.2 2.c.-- 5 omoccepncese 3 13 47 22
tal co! > 528 one ae opie ee ee ee ee 3 15 50 | 24
Percentage done with tractor: <2. 228k ee eee oe a ee eee eee 13 6 8
Tandem disk— |
Acres per farm: with tractor. (22-4. 235. Pee sree 22 145 12 56
eves per farm ‘with Tomses 3 Fe cw ck tere tenes 6 14 0 | 6
GE eS ce ene ee a ec er 28 159 | 12 6
Percentage done with tractotscs.2-222 oes esos eae tans eee 79 91 100 90
Disking plowed ground: |
Single disk—
Acres per farm with tracwor. 2225.26 ses sae. coon 15 0 1 | 5
‘Acres per farm with horses= 320 ese ee eee ee 8 2 5 5
A a een Sinan a ERLE TIN 8 23 | 2 | 6 10
Pereentage. done with tractor... 5... 32522 e isch ent beep ose ee GON Ss eks: ole soe 50
Tandem disk— |
Acres per farm with tract0l.2..< <2: -2-2s--se eee se = 82 | 3 | 3 30
Acres per farm with horses.:. «2... <2. 2 egepuaces 0B. Bi ae cree | 5.7
Crop acres per necessary horse. .......... 37 43 | 46 47 | 47 GAVeree | 46
Western area: |
Number of work stock owned...-........|...... G4) 7. 82 | 726" | eae) 2a tas diners 10.2
Cropiacres;per horse =~. <0. see eee ee 34 36 46 62 45.| 57 59 51
Number of work stock needed. .......-..|...-.. AND | DsDy) 6os9. \) Dilole Sabai asa: lone: 7.4
Crop acres per necessary horse. ..........|.....- 49; 51); 59 85 65 80 79 70
Northern area: |
Number of work stock... ...4..22h-2ss.- 4.1 LY Yolk CUM) Via < ice (0) ft WA Lg ee |g 7.4
Crop acres perhorse: -2...54552440- 555-058 33 Sia) 39 A ee? fel aa: = mae ie 40
Number of work stock needed. .........- ra ae OW es ok i i al a Be 6.5
Crop acres per necessary horse. -........- titod 43) 47 46 50 AQ (rc seals foe 46
The number of work stock which a man considered necessary de-
pended not only on the size of his farm but upon the size and type
of his tractor and the particular operations for whicn he considered
his tractor satisfactory. Consequently there was considerable vari-
ation in the statements as to the number of work stock needed in
addition to the tractors on farms of similar sizes. In general the men
with smaller farms considered that they needed a proportionally
greater number of work stock than did the men with larger farms.
The men on the smaller farms, however, were not keeping a greater
number of surplus work stock than were the men on larger farms.
Of the 56 men in the Southern area with less than 240 acres in crops,
26 considered that they needed 4 horses in addition to their tractors
and 12 considered that they needed 2, but only 15 of the 56 were
keeping 4 head or less. Likewise, of the 52 men in this area with 240
to 399 acres in crops, 32 considered that they needed 6 head or less,
but only 15 were keeping 6 head or less. Of the 22 men in the west-
ern area with less than 320 acres in crops, 11 considered that they
needed 4 head and 2 considered that 2 horses were sufficient for their
needs. However, all but 3 of the 22 were keeping more than 4 head.
Of the 37 with 320 to 479 crop acres, 27 considered that they needed
6 head or less, but only 18 were keeping 6 head or less. Of the 37 men
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. pas
in the northern area with less than 240 acres in crops, 24 considered
that they needed 4 head and one considered that he needed only 2,
but only 13 of the 37 were keeping 4 head or less. Of 46 men with
240 to 319 crop acres 36 considered that they needed 6 head or less,
but only 18 were keeping 6 head or less. |
Table 28 shows the exact number of surplus work stock on the
different farms. In all, 158 tractor owners, about 45 per cent, con-
sidered that they needed all the work stock they were keeping. One
hundred and eighty-one, about 50 per cent, were keeping more than
they considered necessary, and the remaining 15 were keeping less
than they considered necessary. act 9-25: $43.98 | $6.06 | $4.77 | $0.05 | $0.73 | $5.55} $7.59 | $3.00 | $1.64 | $64.09
Western: 5ssei62 22: 25. 97 5. 44 4.63 02 . 24 5.07 4. 82 1.50 2.98 41.74
Northern: 222. 252.-=. Stasi elt. OF 4.17 . 05 . 83 6. 01 5.31 5. 00 . 96 58. 86
2/0! Pa eS A 35220 7.42 4. 53 . 04 | 58 5. 51 5. 84 3.09 | 1.92 54.18
COST PER FARM OF KEEPING WORK STOCK.
Table 34 shows the average annual cost per farm of keeping work
stock on farms of different sizes. For all farms the average cost for
the year was $541.
TaBLE 34.—Cost per farm of keeping work stock on farms of different sizes, 1921.
Southern area. | Western area. Northern area,
Size of farm (crop acres). Number | Cost per | Number | Cost per | Number | Cost: per
offarms.| farm. offarms.|} farm. offarms.| farm.
LGC Ta a G0) ee ee ee 20 $350 Qalkeee a 10 $332
LED) CGS ES be hee 08 Oe Seale ae eee eres ee oe ee 36 542 5 $410 27 417
MEO Un ee Be ee eee ee ee 34 614 17 406 46 | 461
eemteeee ne ee ce. 18 | 667 18 395 | 29 | 556
COCO pe a Me hs a Mek, UF 4 BI, - 7 986 19 362 | 7 793
GS Se Se oe ee ee ee ey 742 22 670 8 1,016
Gall BD (PRS oe ae ae eee | |e ea (ee 14 GY {: 7a eens ene, aS
PLL DEG! Oye ea hess SS See eee ee een pee enn (a eee a 12 843 j| Sees 6 eee
|
Total and average................... 120 583 107 | 522 | 127 | 517
ey rr
32 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
COST OF HORSE LABOR. Z ed
The cost per hour of horse labor was determined for each farm by
dividing the total cost of keeping the work stock by the total number
of hours of work done by the horses owned on that farm during the
year. For all farms the average cost per hour was 17 cents. In the
southern area the cost was 22 cents per hour, in the western area 18
cents, and in the northern area 13 cents. There were wide variations
in both the cost per head of keeping the work stock and the hours of
work per head, and consequently there were wide variations in the cost
of horse labor. On 68, 19 per cent of the 354 farms, the cost was less
than 10 cents, and on 78, 22 per cent, it was 20 cents or more.
Table 35 shows the cost per head of keeping the work stock and the
cost per hour of horse labor on farms where they did different amounts
of work per head. In general the cost per head of keeping the work
stock was greatest on the farms where they were utilized most fully,
but the cost did not decrease in proportion to the amount of work
done. On the average the cost per hour of horse labor was least on
the farms where the horses did the most work per head. These figures
should not be interpreted to indicate that a tractor owner should
use his horses on unnecessary work or on work for which the tractor
could be used to better advantage just for the sake of reducing the
cost per unit of work, but they do show the importance of reducing
the number of work stock to a minimum and thus decreasing both the
total cost per year of keeping them and the cost per hour of horse
labor.
TaB Le 35.—Relation of hours of work per head to cost per year of keeping work stock
and cost per hour of horse labor.
Southern area. Western area. Northern area.
Hours per head. Num- | Cost | Cost |Num-| Cost | Cost | Num-| Cost | Cost
ber of per per | ber of per per | ber of per per
farms. | head. | hour. | farms. | head. | hour. | farms. | head. | hour.
WOSS GOAN 200.2. tc ae owes oe 13 $74 | $0.58 16 $42 | $0.37 |
AYU ORLY, ea ee ae er 40 71 44 51 18 16 | $54 $0. 16
BIN ORS OO 2 ar as a» Soe ae ae 31 | rb) -15 32 60 me 63 | 70 .14
UDR C LS Ce i ies a SS 26 89 Ai 10 56 . 09 38 78 ig
MEATIGUOVON: 0-522 ..ceeeo es 10 | 102 mg! | 5 57 - 06 10 62 07
Total and average. .... 120 76 22! 107 | 50 18 127 | 69 | “ig
COST OF USING TRACTORS.
Each tractor owner reported the first cost of his machine and
estimated the total length of its useful life. The annual deprecia-
tion was determined by dividing the first cost of the tractor by its
estimated life. The cash outlay for repair parts and expert labor
during the year, and the amount of time spent by the owner or reg- .
ular farm labor in repairing or overhauling he machine were obtained.
Interest was grace at 8 per cent on the average investment. Table
36 shows the average annual charges for depreciation, interest,
repairs, and upkee of the tractors of different sizes.
he total annual cost of these items for each tractor was divided
by the number of hours the tractor was used during the year and to
this was added the cost of the fuel and oil used per hour to obtain —
the cost per hour of work. The cost per acre for each operation
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. aa
was obtained by multiplying the cost per hour by the number of
hours required per acre. No charge was made for shelter, taxes, or
insurance, but these items would amount to only a small percentage
of the total cost.
TABLE 36.—Average annual charges for depreciation, interest, repairs, and upkeep of
tractors of different sizes, 1921.
Annual charge per tractor for—
Size of tractor. Number. | 7 | Renal E Farm
7epre- | Interest. eee xpert labor for | Total.
| ciation. parts. labor. repairs. |
LLNS Sa oe 88 $170 $43 $36 $12 36 $267
27h ee 207 242 68 50 10 8 | 378
LATIN SS Oe ST re ee eee 40 311 88 87 13 4 508
Over RDOWae fe ose toe woe 19 371 112 80 Zs 8 | 576
oi. soe 354 | 239 | 66 | 53 11 ida 376
First cost—The machines used by 36 of the tractor owners had
been purchased second hand, and the reports on these machines are
not included in most of the following tables and discussions con-
cerning the various items of cost. The average first cost of the two-
plow tractors which had been purchased new was $948, of the three-
plow tractors $1,482, of the four-plow tractors $2,023, of the five-
plow and larger tractors $2,505, and of all tractors $1,473. Most of
these tractors had been purchased at prices considerably higher than
now prevail (1924). (See p. 37.)
Infe-—The average estimated hfe of the 318 machines was 6.8
years. An owner’s estimate of the life of his machine depended not
only on its condition at the time and the work which he expected to
do with it in the future, but also, to a considerable extent, on his
opinion as to when it would be more profitable to discard it than to
spend more time and money for repairs. Consequently there were
wide variations in these estimates.
Table 37 shows the average estimated life for machines of different
sizes and ages. Evidently there was no tendency for the men who
had owned their machines for a short time to overestimate the
length of time they would last, since for all except the large sizes the
averages for the machines which had been in use 14 months or less
were lower than the averages for all machines.
TaBLE 37.—Estimated life of tractors of different ages.
|
2-plow tractors. 3-plow tractors. 4-plow tractors. 5-plow and larger.
Age of tractors sa |
(months). Average Average | Average Average
Number. estimated |Number. jestimated}] Number. estimated) Number. |estimated
life. | life. | life. life.
|
Years. | Years. | Years.
Years.
Mean less 5... 5... 33 5.3 76 | 6.6 13 5.6 8 7.5
LTD Sa eee 26 6.3 63 rosy 1l <0) 2 6.0
= pte a ee 16 7.9 32 6.7 9 8.0 3 4.7
ao and OVEr. ==--.-2-- 4 8.0 18 764 3 9.7 1 10.9
|
|
}
34 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
Repairs and upkeep.—The age of a tractor has considerable in-
fluence on the annual cost for repairs and upkeep and these costs
for two-plow, three-plow, and four-plow tractors of different ages
are summarized in Table 38. It is seen that in general the cost for
the older tractors was greater than for the newer ones.
In determining the repair and upkeep cost for each tractor, repair
parts and expert labor were charged at the cash cost and farm labor,
that is, the labor of the owner, members of the family, or the regular
hired help, at 20 cents per hour. The number of tractors on which
there was no cost for any of the three items during the year covered
by the investigation is shown in the last three columns of the table.
In all, some repair parts had been purchased during the year for 266
of the 318 machines, some expert labor had been used on 91, and
some farm labor on 284.
A considerably larger percentage of the tractors which had been
in use a short time than of the older ones required no cash expense
for repairs during the year.
TABLE 38.—Annual repair and upkeep costs of tractors of different ages, 1921.
| Average expense per tractor Number of tractors
for— without cost for—
Age of tractors (months). _Number. Fea EN grag TT ce Sa
| : xper arm ; | Expert) Farm
Parts. | yabor. | labor Total. | Parts. labor. | labor.
2-plow:
PRIMLUOSS cence sem J eae are 33 $20; $12 $4 $36 8 22 | 7
[KD SS ease SA ae tae 26 43 15 a 65 4 20 4
eh eee ee a 2 pa 16 66 | 12 6 84 2 | 13 1
SMAHOMOVED | Siasn pase cs02~0e 4 6 | 5 4 15 0 | 3 0
3-plow: |
WAS ATIOUIOSS yea eee ee 76 | 29 5 7 47 19 57 | 4
POO DOL totes 5S - 2 ee Sst se| 63 | 59 8 76 7 46 7
DIA RO ee aye A gee AER 32 | 53 | 12 | 8 73 5 20 3
Gund over: !. 0-20) ee 18 91 | 8 6 105 2 12 | 1
4-plow: |
NAS AIOSS.. ete. tee seas ee 13 97 | 8 6 111 2 12 3
NS On2O. 3's ko Li ee ee 11 | 90 | 9 | 10 109 0 7 1
244 1S): ee Oe, PRO ea aie oe ae 9 | 86 | 29 | 13 128 | 1 2 1
Romain Over. ..0! eee foes 3 | 85 | 0 10 95 0 3 0
| |
|
Fuel and oil.—Table 39 shows the amounts of fuel and oil used
pet year and per hour for the drawbar work done on the home farm
y the machines of different sizes. The average tractor used 660
‘gallons of fuel per year for drawbar work, 49 per cent of which was
gasoline and 51 per cent kerosene. The average cost per gallon of the
asoline used during the year covered by the investigation was 25 cents,
Be cine’ 17 cents, and lubricating oil, 89 cents. These are somewhat
higher than present prices in the same territory. (See p. 31.)
TABLE 39.—Fuel and oil used per year and per hour for drawbar work on home farm by
tractors of different sizes.
| Drawbar Fuel per year.
a : \Num-| work - os Oil per | Fuel per, Oil per
Size of tractor. . | :
| ber. Ud Gasoline. licerosene. Total. al hour. hour.
. s | | = __ iad kre
Hours. | Gallons. | Gallons. | Gallons. | Gallons. | Gallons. | Gallons.
210 CL ae 2 88 309 | 270 275 545 | 51 1.8 | 0. 16
RE oh, 2. 207 | 296 310 339 649 | 43 2.2 | 15
RIMS eral) Soro 2 40 334 454 | 439 893 | 62 2.7 | -19
Over 4-plow.............- 19 268 465 | 374 839 | 63 e114 A
Total and average..| 354 | 302 324 336 | 660 | 48 2.2 | 16
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 35
The amount of fuel and oil used per acre for the different operations
by machines of different sizes is shown in Table 40. Although the
larger machines required greater amounts of fuel and oil per hour,
there should be no great difference in the amounts required per
acre for the different sizes if implements which provide full loads are
used. The table shows that there was little difference in the average
number of gallons of fuel and oil used per acre for plowing with the
different sizes. On nearly all of the other operations, however, the
small machines used the least fuel and oil per acre. In alarge measure
this was due to the fact that the implements used with the larger
tractors did not always provide full loads for them.
TaBLE 40.—Fuel and oil requirements per acre for different operations.
aT
}
| 2-plow. | 3-plow. 4-plow. plow | All.
Operation. (eee cane 2 ek eee!
| Fuel.| Oil. | Fuel. Oil. | Fuel.| Oil. | Fuel.| Oil. | Fuel.| Oil.
Gals.| Gals.| Gals. Gals.| Gals.| Gals.| Gals. | Gals. | Gals.) Gals.
SCRE ee 2.15 | 0.21 | 2.10 0.15 | 2.20} 0.20] () Cariezos 0.18
oo Sins oe ee eee 2. 28 ZA he Os ee te FZ. OF -15 | 2.03:| 0. 16.| 2.16 .16
Se eee Ona a 00 de 32 208 1. C) (2.8) lel Ise fete 1. 24 . 08
2 PTR me St ee eee f fl Be SW a es . O8 (*) CE eee = 1.18 0g
Disking plowed ground. ............---- . 96 06/| .99} .06/] @) () (@) (@) 98 06
Disking unplowed ground............-.- . 80 09; 1.04! .07| .97 () @) | 1.01 08
JA inic. oe ae 46 04; .49; .03] @) Ca ee eee) ae oe .4 03
ie 2. Se ee ee ee Ey il 06 7 .05 77 04 . 69 05 ahh 05
“OL fiird 2 ee . 80 . 06 .81 . 06 ate L06;t @)-f:@) 81 06
CVn ir. 2 ee eee @) | (@) -89} .06) (Q) (1) (4) ) . 89 06
Sie ere ee eee gE A at BS 2:3 -09; (@) Cie eee 1.25 09
1 Less than 10 tractors.
COST PER YEAR AND PER HOUR OF USING TRACTORS FOR DRAWBAR WORE.
Table 41 shows the average cost per year and per hour of using
tractors of different sizes for drawbar work on the home farm in
each area. For the entire 354 machines the average cost per year
was $484, or $1.60 per hour. The average cost per year varied in
the different areas in accordance with the amount of work done per
year, and since in general the cost per hour was least for the machines
which did the most work (Table 42) the average cost per hour was
greatest in the northern area.
The costs per hour on different farms using tractors of the same
size showed wide variations because of differences in annual deprecia-
tion and repair charges, amount of work done during the year, and
the amounts of fuel and oil used.
EFFECT OF HOURS OF USE PER YEAR ON COST OF USING TRACTORS.
Table 42 shows the cost per hour of using two-plow, three-piow, and
four-plow tractors, that were used for different amounts of work per
year. The annual depreciation, repair, and interest charges did not
increase in proportion to the amount of work done with the tractors,
and consequently the cost per hour was least for the machines which
did the greatest amount of work.
These differences are reflected directly in the cost per acre or per
bushel of producing crops and show how the man whose farm is so
organized and managed that he obtains large use from his equipment
|
36 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
can produce at low cost. A farmer should not, of course, endeavor
to use his equipment as many days or hours during the year as possible
just for the sa iS of reducing the cost per day or hour, for even though
the cost per day or hour decreases ah increased use the total cost per
year must increase.
-
TABLE 41.—Cost per year and per hour for using tractors of different sizes for drawbar
work.
Total
: Drawbar | cost per Cot ied
Size of tractor. Number. | work per Peete for a eae
year. rawbar i kines
work =
Southern area: Hours.
PEI OLS) ps a eae ee 4 SM Me NE eek I er i oe Ses ae 28 360 $447 $1. 24
B=DIOW wat - te See MSL OE a eters eee Aled el eee 73 368 599 1.63
A-plow:- fo osu st ooh See ote ee thee ee ee 16 384 720 1.88
Over 4—plo were. fas tee ON et ee ona et eee 3 160 683 4.27
Ocala. 2 Non Ste Supe at oe en ea el een eee 120 | 365 588 1.61
Western area:
PMOW ode tac, hn o oc sett Dae 2 ete an 34 344 426 1.24
PLOW crea ie.- anion sec EE ee ee eee eee eee ee 49 350 512 1.46
AW LOW eo se sapseo orc oe ya Sloan eee ee ee ee 14 350 664 1.90
Over 42plow-< j2 2202 - 5oo ee se nates See eer ee ee 10 368 673 1.83
Motels te a Soe OS eae eee ee ee 107 350 520 1.49
Northern area:
P71 0) (0) eee a Renter ae eee Be imate Re pe 26 209 304 1. 46
Bi] 0} (0) ee ae tM IEE CRAM US Sh Pes A tp has cies bay Se 85 203 356 1:75
ADO Wie dengan veins aaa He acy tte ore ae ene ee eae 10 233 487 2.09
Over4-plowe. 2. soe eee es ewe Cee ee ee ean 6 127 377 |: 2.97
Dota tee oe See Se Se ae See oe Nee 127 203 357 1.76
Allareas:
PPNOW as oo ores ies, < ein Sa Oe a ee ee eee 88 309 397 1.28
S-DlOW esl ad. 5 td ooo pe ote eee ees cee ene egesacaee 207 296 479 1.62
BET LOW sia. oie cists «pnw Ee SR re or re ee ee 40 334 642 1.92
Oser 4-plow..'- 5220s 2 oete ase eee a ee eee 19 268 617 2. 30
otal. 2. /fc xg a ee eee ae ee 354 | 302 484 1.60
The table indicates that since the amount of work done has only a
slight effect on the annual charges for depreciation, repairs, and in-
terest charges, a farmer should give prime consideration to the cost
of fuel and oil and not to the total cost per hour of use when deciding
whether to use his tractor for operations where it is of doubtful value.
TABLE 42.—Lffect of hours of use per year on cost of using tractors.
Average | Hours of} Cost per | Cost per
Number
é ‘ hours of | drawbar |} year for | hour for
Hours of use per year. Peat use per | work per| drawbar | drawbar
: year. year. work. work.
2-plow:
mess than! 200... Sa 6) ac ee 16 160 147 $263 $1.79
DY US 08) a ey pee a ee oe ls Pal be Ss Be 42 280 258 365 1.41
BOOM BOOS S.. = Pat ne ace See ae eee 24 494 417 469 ta |
EMM ONOVGl nc... i oe ee Some ee eee 6 799 669 689 1.03
3-plow:
BECAN REA DOU: Soc. US dans seeks ae ee Seem 47 134 116 357 3.08
PUTCO. ces ok oe. SRE Oe ee eee ee 76 298 232 429 1.85
UT US a aE ete ARR MORI a, MN TR eae peek oa st ak 56 494 399 555 1.39
SRM PANG OVER cc eos cco. oe eta tote cee eee eee 28 744 568 665 74
4-plow:
BRCS SMS T AN) sooo ance < owes weet. see oe eee 4 115 96 340 3. 5A
EMO IIS tats oh te a ail kre sae Be on od oe eee 13 309 252 580 2.30
See ARENDS ea ea ice aias Peis ms Deeg = ee 15 496 379 687 1.81
Bina dvOVeL- <2 cen. ues Cc eee 8 746 503 809 1.61
aes Pee
Aa et
—— ee eee ee ee ee
ee ee eee ee
a
i St ee
Se ee
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 37
COST OF USING TRACTORS IN 1922 AND 1923.
The prices of tractors declined considerably in 1921 and 1922, and
prices of fuel and oil were somewhat lower during 1922 and 1923
than during the year covered by the investigation. Tables 43 and
44 show the approximate average cost in 1922 and 1923 of using simi-
lar tractors purchased at prices current in 1922 and 1923 and doing
the same amount of work as was done by the machines on the farms
surveyed. The depreciation figures shown in each table were ob-
tained by dividing the first cost during the year by the average
estimated life as obtained from the tractor owners. The interest
charge was computed at 8 per cent of the first cost. The cost for
repairs and upkeep are the same as the 1921 costs obtained from the
farmers. The approximate tank-wagon prices to farmers of gaso-
line, kerosene, and lubricating oil in these areas during the year
ended August 1, 1922, were 21 cents, 12 cents, and 70 cents per gal-
lon respectively; in 1923, 20 cents, 11 cents, and 67 cents respectively.
The costs for fuel and oil, as shown in Tables 43 and 44, were obtained
by charging the amounts used for drawbar work in 1921 at the
above prices.
TABLE 43.—1922 cost of using tractors.
|
Southern} Western | Northern All farms
| area. | area. area.
Syst Le 2 ee ae ee ee dollars..| 1, 100 1, 100 1, 000 1, 065
CE SEEDED et DG en eee years. . 6.8 6.3 7.4 6.8
Ur a ee SO pe eee dollars. . 162 | 175 135 157
a SUTEEG1 SUE Pee Le See ee Ee ee ee ee doz 2-. 50 | 51 45 49
Annual cost Ofrepairs and upkeep --:.------.-:--.----..- dete =| 106 | 46 57 71
Tn: eee do 318 | 272 | 237.00 | 277
Per cent drawbar work is of total........-.----- get arg 83 83 73 80
Annual cost of depreciation, interest, and repairs for drawbar
OU" BOT TE, Da en ee ee dollars. -| 264 226 173 222
Annual cost offuel for drawbar work: |
VBISG a. Boh tg ie i on ee ae ae Oe ee d0.222 112 72 23 68
USUI SC ee ee Ree ane dos: 36 45 40 40
Cost oflubricating oil for drawbar work ..........--------- do..-: 40 38 24 34
€ost per year for draw bar work ..--.---..--..-.------s---- do....| 452 381 260 364
Post perhourtordraw Dar WOLEK...2. 5s. s2224-.-551...2.22- GO=sce 1. 24 | 1.09 1. 28 1.21
Cest of drawbar work, 1922 percentage of 1921.........-......-.-- 77 73 73 75
TABLE 44.—1923 cost of using tractors.
| South- | West- | North- | All
erm area. | ern area. | ern area.| farms.
2 lS? COS GUA eae Se re ee ee dollars 1, 100 1,075 960 1, 045
io SSSEOT 03 Oe le I ee years 6.8 6.3 7.4 6.8
PUMP MEMEOrnION._..-.5.. 52-2 - 2 s<-ss=0----2 2 toe dollars. . 162 171 130 | 154
SUITES Stig Rete ee eee ee dor 50 50 44 48
Annual cost of repairs and upkeep.....---...--.----.-.---- de: 5-. 106 46 57 71
Do et a ee do 318| 267 231 273
Percent drawbar work is of total... .--.......s-2.-2:-s2-ee00--s 83 83 73 80
Annual cost of depreciation, interest, and repairs for drawbar
Wiis. Ac ea! Bee Aen ae ey sae ies ee ee dollars. . 264 222 169 218
Annual cost of fuel for drawbar work
GOEL Eee Og ee er ee os es et adore: 106 69 22 65
LEU STS PG ec ee me Sa Ay A ae eee dos: 33 42 37 37
Cost of lubricating oil for drawbar work................-- doe == 38 36 23 32
Cost per year for drawbar work..........-.....-----.---- do. i... 441 369 251 352
Cast perhoeur, for. draw bar Work... =. ....-2.2..-.2-2-s22 dos. 1.21 1.05 1. 24 1.16
Cost of drawbar work, 1923 percentage of 1921.-..-........-..--. 75 17 70 7
38 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
RELIABILITY OF TRACTORS.
The reliability of a tractor has a decided effect on its profitable-
ness. ‘To obtain definite information on this point each farmer vis-
ited was asked how many days during the year his tractor was out of
running order, and for how many days it was needed while out of
order.
On the average the 354 tractors were out of running order 10.6
days, but were needed for an average of only 2.1 days of work during
that time. Some of them had broken down near the end of the season
and had not been repaired immediately, and some had been taken
down for repairs or overhauling and allowed to remain out of run-
ning order for considerable periods when not needed. Two hundred
and twelve, or 60 per cent of the total, had been out of order during
the year, but 59 of the 212 had not been needed for any work while
out of order. The remaining 153 had been needed for an average of
about 5 days of work while out of commission.
No great difference in reliability was shown among the different
sizes. About 61 per cent of the two-plow tractors, 57 per cent of
the three-plow, and 50 per cent of the shir alo and larger machines
were not out of order when needed at any time during the year. The
age of the tractors likewise had no marked influence on their relia-
bility. Of 130 machines which had been purchased new and which
had been in use 14 months or less, 72, or 55 per cent, had not been
out of order when needed, and the remaining 58 had been out of
order when needed for an average of 4.6 days. Of 86 machines which
had been purchased new and which had been used 27 months or
more, 54, or 63 per cent, had always been ready when needed and
the remaining 32 had been out of order when needed for 6.1 days on
the average.
The number of days tractors were out of order when needed in
each area is shown in Table 45. In the southern area some time
had been lost by about 60 per cent of the machines, in the western
area by 40 per cent, and in the northern area by about 30 per cent.
Considering only those which had been out of order when needed,
the time lost by each machine amounted on the average to 5 days,
4.7 days, and 4.5 days in the southern, western, and northern areas,
respectively. :
TABLE 45.—Days per year tractors were out of order when needed.
Number out of order when needed for— Average.
Number lapis SPT ae
Area, of For those
tractors. | 0 1 or 2 3 or 4 5 or 6 7 days For all | out of or-
| days. days. days. days. or more. | tractors. | der 1 day
or more.
eS. a? | |
Senter. - 5-2. - 2... 120 47 34 16 6 17 Bont 5.0
WMOSUCIMc oto. 55 cee 107 64 12 il 11 9 1.9 4.7
Wortern. 22-2 ..5623. 127 90 17 8 5 7 L3 4.5
BOTA eee eS 354 201 63 35 22 | 33 2.1 4.7
ANNUAL COST OF POWER FOR DRAWBAR WORK.
On the average farm the cost of keeping work stock during the
year was $541 and the cost of using the tractor for drawbar work was
$484. Thus the total annual cost of power for drawbar work was
ea le i, taal ee nia ee Me
= — > a ;
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 39
$1,025, or $2.91 per crop acre. The cost of using the tractor was 47
per cent of the total. Table 46 shows these items for the farms of
different sizes in each area. In the southern and western areas
the cost of using the tractor was 50 per cent and in the northern
area 41 per cent of the total cost.
While the total cost of power ....-
increases with the size of the farm Fiabe at 500 Dollars 1500 2000
in each area the average cost per Less than\60
crop acre for power was higher on
the small farms than on the large 320-399.
ones. In general both tractors 400-479...
and work stock were utilized more 4);
fully on the larger farms (see =
Tables 11 and 23) and since on the
average the cost per unit of work Lessthan|60.
SOUTHERN AREA
done with either form of power 349-319”
decreased as the amount of work 320-399.
done annually increased, the total
cost of power was proportionally ¢40-799
less on the large farms. Figure 14 800andover
shows graphically the cost of power :
on farms of different sizes. WESTERN AREA
On many of the farms more work [tegsthani¢o J
stock than necessary were still 160-239...
being kept and the cost per farm 355-399
of keeping work stock would have 400-479
been reduced by an average of 7 agains
about $115 (see p. 47) if they had
been sold. Likewise, if the tractor NORTHERN AREA
work had been done with machines 354 Farms _—_—»< [oa
purchased at current prices the ALL AREAS 2
cost would, on the average, be ®
something like 25 per cent lower
than the figures shown.
TABLE 46.—Cost of power for drawbar work on farms of different sizes, 1921.
emus //orses c— 7Jrocrors
Fig. 14.—Cost of power for drawbar work, 1921.
boar Average | Costof | Cost of : Z | Per cent
= a | Number size Keeping | tractor Total Cost per | tractor
Size of farm (crop acres). of (crop eaekes-tacdatec | Coe crop eost is
| farms. acTes). stock. |barwork.) Y@!- acre. | of total.
Southern area:
WSS GMATTAGO! S25 e228 T 20 130 $350 307 $757 | $5. 82 54
GU CODA OE Re ee ket | 36 202 542 477 1,019 | 5. 04 47
PAAR SE see ee 34 278 614 596 1,210 4.35 49
a7. ape ee ee ee 18 359 667 769 1, 436 4.00 Be
cli \ ite ee es | 7 415 986 855 1,H1 4.44 46
Ae A OVOr 3 2 Fe { 5 41 742 1, 022 | 1, 764 3. 26 58
Total and average......_. 120 262 583 588 1,171 4,47 | 50
Western area: Pa et an se
UL ea Ne Ee iG 219 410 256 666 3. 04 38
PAM EOI see a) k 17 281 406 366 772 2.75 47
TE DE eS ee 18 350 395 433 828 2.37 52
IUD 7 PR 19 44] 362 521 883 2. 00 59
ie UN Se sy! 22 555 670 | 658 | 1,328 2.39 50
TEL ne ee 14 703 578 | 667 1,245 1.77 x
muscu evers 2 22'S: 12 1,054 | 843 | 47 1, 390 1. 32 39
Total and average.....__. 107 516 | Boe 5 1,042 2.02 50
Northern area: Se SS ee a es
ess thaw 160.6 5.22 io 10 135 | 333 260 593 4.39 44
i 27 202 417 279 | 696 3.45 | 40
“1 iL! See ee 46 276 461 345 | 806 2.92 43
Ae 29 | 369 556 422 978 2.65 43
UST LY a ae 7 438 793 373 | 1, 166 2.66 32
2 a ee 8 585 1,016— 550 | 1, 566 2.68 | 35
Total and average....___- 127 299 517 | 357 874 2.92 41
40 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
VARIATIONS IN COST.
There were wide variations in the cost of power on individual farms,
the total cost of power for drawbar work on some farms having been
twice as great as on others of the same size and type. Figure
15 shows the variations in each area. In this figure each dot
represents one farm, the vertical distance from the base line represents
the combined cost of keeping work stock and of using the tractor for
drawbar work, and the horizontal distance from the left represents the
crop area of thefarm. The heavy lines connect the points representing
the average cost on farms of different sizes as shown in Table 46.
In some cases the death or injury of some of the work stock caused
heavy depreciation and a high cost of power for the year; on other
farms Bit repair costs for the tractors were responsible. It is evident,
however, that the proper management of tractor and work stock and
the judicious choice of sources of power for different operations would
have resulted in a considerable decrease in the cost of power for the
year on many of the farms.
SOME FARMS WITH LOW COSTS FOR POWER.
The story of an individual farm on which the costs indicate an
efficient use of power should be of value in showing how power can
be obtained at alow cost. Table 47 is asummary of the data incident
to the cost of power for drawbar work on six such farms, two in each of
thethree areas. Therelative costsfor power on thesefarms as compared
with the other farms in the same areas are shown in Figure 15.
TaBLE 47.—Farms with low costs of power for drawbar work.
Southern area. | Western area. | Northern area.
_————$—$—<—<<— | qc“§ |——uqe | ————qq— | um i |
RERODVALCD on nek ok oc oc te ph ee ate ea eee acres... 146 392 740 | 1,090 145 622
Area imiwiheat.o.-ccc. 2-5. Coase os es oe do.-se 125 285 275 900 85 450
ATCA MMNCOMM: <2 te dct ec oe tans seco eee eee dow: 0 30 80 0 60 120
REZBODURACHOY 92. = 2-6. mos Seana ea eeee reer plows. . 2 3 3 3 3 4
Watevotpurchase of-tractor - =. 4... sea eee eee July | Aug Mar. | June. | Aug Apr.
1919. | 1919. | 1920. | 1920. | 1918 1920.
Nek Of wOlK StOCk!(..1-. shoes tat sea eee 2 8.5 10 20 4 12
Tractor work per year:
Drawbats 2). 62-0 iy. 25 eee oe ee hours... 342 242 489 534 123 266
[S521 ee, See an RE EMD ik” oS Oo eel pS do... : 5 120 0 20 75 238
Gustom: 2208. en kee Pee gdo-=- 0 180 140 0 0 355.
SOTO ee a lain claw shee ea ee ee ee aoe 347 542 629 554 198 859
Horselabor equivalent oftractor (drawbar) work..do..| 2,013 | 2,638 | 4,446] 4,910 716 4,026
PIT SUCOST ONULACLOS . Fo..25% oc «cet eetemccceee dollars. . 790 | 1,200} 1,095] 1,760 | 1,660 2,505
Pemimaved topalliies =...) =e nocee eee eee years... 8 8 5 10 10 6
Annual cost ofrepairs and upkeep............ dollars. . 22 116 50 5 7 237
Fuel per year for drawbar work:
BRSOLUO So yoc co Se a n eee t e galls... 571 578 6 67 3 10
iNenosenes <2 5- 0 ete Jae ogee eee ee GO: s2tle seen se lae eee 1, 274 844 262 700
Oil per year for drawbar work.................. doz 33 48 98 44 16 30
Cost of using tractor for drawbar work:
ATE ORT 5 oe 2 est od Se. Soe eee dollars. . 339 331 462 432 202 373
ee en nae do..:.| 0.99} 1.37] 0.94] 0.81] 3.64 1. 40
Zou yaine of work stock...\.....- 22-2 2.----neces go...2 55 650 612] 2,100 400 1, 435
Annual feed consumption per head:
Chi Woes | eae Seer nie a Em ees = pounds..} 1,600 | 1,596 360 600 | 2,800 1,470
avant MOU eDAPOs 2.6 ee once ewe en rece ees do....}| 3,000 | 2,340] 4,000] 6,000 | 5,006 1, 660
Cost of keeping work stock per year.........-- dollars. . 115 601 392 740 261 794
Cost per head of keeping work stock per year....do.... 58 71 39 37 65 66
PICISGISDOMMON VOals- cons ns-- ws wes. 2cs-~- sees hours..| 1,765} 6,988 | 3,820] 7,160 | 2,317 6, 896
Hare labor per Meads 2 Soba. ese cere te) 882 822 382 359 579 575
Cost.per hour of horselabor.....-.....-..-.<---: cents 7 1 11 12
Horse labor equivalent of total drawbar work. -.hours..} 3,778 | 9,626] 8,266 | 12,070 | 3,033 | 10,922
Proportion of total drawbar work done with trac-
BORE oes oe, Sage Bere eee ee eas oe es per cent. . 53 28 54 41 23 37
Total cost per year of power for drawbar work (tractor
eitd HGrse) 2.32 eters ee ee dollars. . 454 932 854 | 1,172 463 1, 167
Cost per crop acre of power for drawbar work....do....| 1.32 2. 38 1.15 1.08 3.19 1. 86
Annual Cost of Power— Dollars
Sanna FEET
ee | | te
mee tlt iro
Bee
000 ara pie : ae Farm No.2
80 160 240 320 400 480 0 80 160 240 320 400 480 640 800
Crop Acres Crop Acres
SOUTHERN AREA NORTHERN AREA
Annual Cost of Power —Dol//ars
080 160 240 320 400 480 640 800 60 120
Crop Acres
WESTERN AREA
Fig. 15.—Variation in total cost of power per farm for all the areas.
41
42 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
Farm No. 1, southern area.—This farm of 146 crop acres was operated with a two-
plow tractor and two head of workstock at a total cost for power of $454, or $1.32 per
crop acre. The power furnished by the tractor for drawbar work cost $339 for the
year, or $0.99 per hour. This low cost is the result of comparatively small investment,
few repairs, an estimated life of eight years, and normal use of fuel and oil. The low
investment in the work stock and their full utilization on all of the two-horse opera-
tions is responsible for the low cost of 7 cents per hour for horse labor.
The tractor plowed 85 acres and listed and sledded 40 acres of the wheat ground,
disked and harrowed (in combination) the oats ground (11 acres), drilled the wheat
and oats, and harvested them with an 8-foot binder. The horses plowed 4 acres for
Sudan grass, harrowed three and one-half days in preparing the wheat ground, planted
and cultivated 6 acres of corn, made 4 acres of hay, stacked 80 acres of grain, headed
6 acres of kafir, and were used 43 days for threshing. A third horse was purchased
for use in harrowing and listing, and sold when this work was completed. Had all
of the drawbar work on this farm been done with horses, 3,778 hours of horse labor
would have been required. On this basis the tractor work represents 53 per cent of
the total drawbar work done on this farm.
The owner of this farm had just begun farming in that community, consequently
no changes due to the use of the tractor were recorded. ‘‘More work in a given time?’
was considered the chief advantage of the tractor and “‘first cost and depreciation”’
the chief disadvantage.
Farm No. 2, southern area.—This farm is considerably larger than farm No. 1 (see
Table 47), and an average of 8.5 head of work stock in addition to a 3-plow tractor
was used in its operation. The total cost of power for drawbar work represents an
increase of 205 per cent, with a corresponding increase of 270 per cent in crop acres
overfarm No.1.
The tractor was used for 242 hours of drawbar work, or 28 per cent of the total. The
depreciation and repair charges for the year were both considerably higher than on
farm No. 1, but the large amount of belt and custom work done reduced the propor-
tion of these costs chargeable to drawbar work so that the cost for the year was practi-
cally the same as for the tractor on farm No. 1.
The cost of keeping work stock on this farm includes $100 depreciation for the loss
of one horse during the year, and interest on a larger investment than on farm No. 1.
The yearly horse labor per head is practically the same on the two farms, although
more of the heavy work was done by horses on farm No. 2. The horses did 50 acres
of spring plowing, 60 acres of fall plowing, 37 acres of listing, 335 acres of seeding, and
drew the binder and header on 335 acres, in addition to performing 1,568 hours of
other labor. The tractor did 225 acres of fall plowing, 215 acres of harrowing, and
was used for threshing on the farm, besides doing 8,000 bushels of custom threshing.
The size of the farm had not been changed since the purchase of the tractor, but the
work stock had been decreased by 5.5 head. The horses had all been purchased and
no colts were being raised at the time of the investigation. Three months less of
family labor was used during the year than had been used before the tractor was pur-
chased. ‘‘Saving horses in hot weather,’ and ‘first cost and depreciation?’ were
thought to be the greatest advantage and disadvantage of the tractor. The owner
believed that in 1921 an increased yield of 5 bushels of wheat per acre was directly
traceable to the use of the tractor through greater depth of plowing, better seed bed
preparation, and more timely work.
Farm No. 1, western area.—On this farm the tractor was used for a greater variety
of work than on any of the others described. In addition to 103 hours of plowing and
137 hours of disking it was used for seeding 565 acres of grain, cutting 155 acres of
grain, listing and planting 65 a res of corn, and cutting 25 acres of corn with a corn
binder. The seeding was done with two 8-foot drills, and a 2-row lister and drill was
used for planting corn. The tractor did 54 per cent of the total drawbar work on the
farm, which is 8 per cent above the average for the western area, at a cost of 89 per
cent of the average cost for drawbar work.
The tractor was out of order for six days when it was needed for disking. During
the year $40 for new parts, $5 for expert labor and two and one-half days of farm labor
were spent on it. The horses were fed 2 tons of roughage per head and a light grain
ration supplemented by five months of wheat, four months of grass, and three months
of night pasture during the year. The low cost for feed, together with a $50 colt credit,
were largely responsible for the low cost of $39 per year per head for keeping the
horses. ‘Two work horses had been disposed of after the purchase of the tractor and
the owner stated that he had made a marked reduction in the grain ration allowed
the remaining horses.
Farm No. 2, Western area: This farm was by far the largest one of the six and the
total cost of power for drawbar work was naturally greatest, yet the cost per cro
acre was only $1.08, which is less than on any of the other farms. Five hundred an
Det
Te a
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 43
fifty-four hours of work with $5 annual repairs and an estimated life of 10 years
resulted in the low cost of 81 cents per hour for using the tractor for drawbar work.
Twelve mares, six geldings and two mules were kept on this farm. The mares were
kept primarily to raise colts and the operator considered that only 12 head of work
stock in addition to the tractor were necessary for the proper operation of the farm.
The mares had produced six mule colts during the year and the colt credit for the
year reduced the cost of keeping horses by $210. The low grain ration fed was
another factor contributing to the low cost ($37 per year) of keeping work stock.
In addition to fall plowing, disking, drilling, and cutting cane with a grain binder,
the tractor was used 1] days for harvesting grain with acombine. Large horse-drawn
equipment was used on thisfarm. For plowing, a three-bottom disk plow and a three-
bottom moldboard plow, each drawn by six horses, were used. ‘Two-row listers were
used and a 14-foot header, each of which was drawn by six horses.
The owner estimated that the grain ration per head of the work stock had been
reduced 50 per cent and roughage 20 per cent after the purchase of the tractor and
stated that he could raise more colts since the tractor was doing most of the heavy
work.
Farm No. 1, Northern area: Twenty-three per cent of the total drawbar work was
done with the tractor on this farm, which is the smallest farm of the six. Eighty-five
acres of wheat and 60 acres of corn were the only crops raised. The tractor plowed
30 acres for wheat, disked the remainder of the wheat ground, drilled 30 acres, and
cut the entire 85 acres with a 7-foot binder. The horses seeded 55 acres of wheat with
one-horse drills in the standing corn, listed, and cultivated (three times) 60 acres of
corn, and were used for stacking grain, husking corn from the standing stalks, and
for hauling wheat from the thresher to the grain bin. Four horses were needed (the
same number as was on hand) to do the work and one colt was being raised.
The work stock were fed 50 bushels of corn and 24 tons of roughage per head per
year supplemented by three months of grass and four months of stubble and stalk
pasture. The cost per head of keeping the horses was $4 below the average for the
area and the hours of horse labor 13 above the average. The cost per crop acre for
power, $3.19, was the highest of the six farms because of the small size of the farm.
Likewise the cost per hour of using the tractor, $1.64, was highest on this farm, despite
a low depreciation and few repairs. Yet when the size of the farm is considered the
cost of power was very low. (See Fig. 15.)
In addition to the drawbar work the tractor was used two and one-half days for
shelling corn and five days for shredding fodder. It had displaced two head of work
stock. The owner believed it had been responsible for an increase of 5 bushels per
acre in his yield of wheat in 1920. He was using it as his primary source of power and
considered it a profitable investment.
Farm No. 2, northern area: The horses did all of the drawbar work on this farm
except 330 acres of fall plowing, and harvesting 475 acres of grain. These two opera-
- tions however, required 37 per cent of the total power for drawbar work. Of the total
hours of work per year done with the tractor, 31 per cent was drawbar, 28 per cent was
belt, and 31 per cent was custom work. Hence this four-plow tractor follows the
general rule that the larger tractors are used for a greater amount of belt work than the
smaller ones. Three 7-foot grain binders were pulled on this farm at one time at a
cost for power and man labor of 39 cents per acre compared with 87 cents per acre for
all farms where tractors were used for this work. The tractor was overhauled between
busy seasons at a total cost of $237 of which $50 was for expert labor.
Twelve head of work stock, the same number as the operator stated he needed,
were kept, and four colts were being raised. A reduction in both grain and the hay
ration of 30 per cent per head and an increase of 10 per cent in pasture had been made
since the purchase of the tractor. When farming with horses only, 18 head had been
kept for 480 crop acres, one for every 27 crop acres. At the time of the investigation
142 additional crop acres were being farmed with 12 head of work stock, one for each
52 crop acres.
CHANGES AFTER PURCHASE OF TRACTOR.
For each farm visited a record was obtained of any changes in size
of farm, in the number of work stock and in the amount of feed
consumed per head, in the amount of family and regular hired labor
used or in tillage practice which had been made since the purchase
of the tractor. From this and other information obtained the change
im the cost of power and labor due to the use of the tractors and the
change in investment due to their purchase were computed.
44 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
CHANGE IN SIZE OF FARM.
Table 48 shows the changes in size of the farm in the different areas.
Twenty-seven of the 354 tractor owners had purchased their machines
when they started farming and the reports of these men are not in-
cluded. Of the 327 farms, 191, or 58 per cent, had not been changed
in size, 114, or 35 per cent, ‘had been made larger by an average of 166
crop acres, ‘and the remaining 22 had been decreased by an average of
111 crop acres. For all farms there was an average increase of 50 crop
acres after the tractors were purchased. The increase was greatest in
the western area, 98 crop acres, and least in the southern area, 18 crop
acres. About 40 per cent of the tractor owners in the western and
northern areas and only a little over 25 per cent of those in the south-
ern area had increased the size of their farm.
The reports of the Bureau of the Census show that between 1910
and 1920 there had been an average increase of 11 improved acres
per farm in the southern area, 230 in the western area, and 16 in the
northern area. While the increase in the size of these farms after
tractors were purchased was doubtless greater than the increase in the
size of all farms during the same time in these areas, it is probable that
the tractors were not “primarily responsible for the i increase, as there
was also an average increase of about 45 crop acres on the 85 farms
where tractors were not owned. (See Table 64.)
TaBLeE 48.—Change in size of farm after purchase of tractors.
No change in
SE Increased in size. Decreased in size. All farms.
Total * A
num- Average size. verage size. verage size.
Area. ber of
farms. |Num-| AVel- |Num- Num-
ber. or ber. | Before ber. | Before Before
‘ ur- 1921 ur- 1921 es 1921
chase chase
Crop Crop Crop Crop | Crop | Crop | Crop
acres acres. | acres acres acres acres acres
Sotithern. .....- --:. 116 75 250 31 201 309 10 353 210 245 263
WOSEOTII... <2. 54-2 96 52 498 38 318 576 6 367 302 419 517
INiorthern...=-...:. 115 64 269 45 220 347 6 309 201 252 296
MOEA s os 327 191 324 114 247 413 22 344 233 | 299 | 349
CHANGES IN WORK STOCK.
Before the tractors were purchased the 327 men had been farming
an average of 299 crop acres and keeping 9.8 head of work stock—one
for each 30 crop acres. In the southern area there had been one horse
for each 26 crop acres, in the western area one for each 34 crop acres,
and in the northern area one for each 31 crop acres before the tractors
were purchased. These men had been keeping practically the same
number of work stock in proportion to the size of their farms before
they purchased tractors, as the men who were farming with horses only
were keeping in 1921. (See Table 58.) In Table 49 the ‘‘ work stock
per farm if tractors were not used”? was determined by dividing the
average size (crop acres) of the farms in each area by 26, 34, and 31,
respectively. The “work stock per farm, 1921” and “ necessary work
stock per farm” are the same as given in Table 27. On the average
bs
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 45
the 354 men were keeping 3.4 head less than they would have been
keeping if they had not owned tractors, and they considered that they
needed 5.2 head less, an actual reduction of about 30 per cent and a
potential reduction of about 45 per cent. The reduction had been
createst in the western area and least in the northern area.
TABLE 49.—Displacement of work stock by tractors.
Work |
stock per| Work pte Actual | Potential
; . Number | farmif |stockper| Jo reduc- reduc-
Area. of farms. tractors farm, | stock per | 400 per | tion per
| werenot| 1921. |*" "PB farm. farm.
| used. ;
LE eee 120 10.1 7.5 | 5.7 2.6 4.4
_ | LEIDER Ses Ae gs il eae 107 15.2 10.2 7.4 5.0 7.8
_ oes St ee eee 127 | 9.6 7.4 6.5 | 2.2 3.1
eee 34 | Fie 8.3 6.5 3.4 5. 2
|
CHANGES IN FEED OF WORK STOCK.
Each man was asked for an estimate of the change in the amounts
of grain, hay, and roughage, and pasture consumed per head by the
work stock after the tractor was purchased, and it was found that
about three-fourths of them had made some change in their feeding
practices. The averages of the estimates for each area are given in
Table 50. Based on the amount of feed consumed per head by the
work stock on the same farms during the year covered by the inves-
tigation, the change had amounted on the average to a reduction of
about 460 pounds of grain and 210 pounds of hay and roughage per
head.
TABLE 50.—Average of tractor owners’ estimates of change in feed per head of work stock
after purchase of tractors.
Change in annual consump- | Nymber
s tion per head. : of
roar perc | if Farmers
ie Farmers. | g ees
| Grain. | #4y.ad} pasture. | img no
fea ches "| change.
Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cenit. |
Mmmnnemerene: fable Aa. 2582/7 So oe de 116 —20 | +2 +9 | 30
SOT 2 Se a eee rere 96 a 5 +5 | 16
_ USD sob! oy 2S ae gig 115 —17 —t +3 | 32
(ooo SR ee eae a 327 2] 7 | +6 78
CHANGE IN AMOUNT OF LABOR USED.
For each farm the number of months of family labor and of regular
hired labor used per year before the tractor was purchased and that
used during the year covered by the investigation were obtained.
The amount of extra or day labor used was not determined, as on
practically all of the farms visited extra labor was employed only
during the harvesting and threshing season, and it was not believed
that the tractor could have any influence on the amount of such
46 BULLETIN 1202, U. 8. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
labor used. Neither were any reductions in the amounts of time
actually spent at farm work by the operators of the farms themselves
obtained.
For the 327 farms an average of 6.1 months of family and regular
hired labor was used during the year of the investigation. This was
0.9 month less than had been used before the tractors were pur-
chased. As stated above, the farms had been increased in size b
van average of 50 crop acres. Table 51 shows the changes on the 191
farms which had not been changed in size after the tractors were
purchased. Sixty-five, or 34 per cent, of the 191 men had reduced
the amount of labor; 116 or 60 per cent, had made no change, and the
remaining 10 had increased the amount of labor used. For the entire
191 there had been an average reduction of 1.4 months, and for the
65 farms where the labor had been reduced, an average reduction of
4.1 months. The reduction was greatest in the western area, 2.5
months, and least in the northern area, 0.8 month.
TaBLe 51.—Change in family and regular hired labor after purchase of tractor on 191
farms where size was not changed.
Months of family and hired | Number of farms where labor
A Average labor per farm. | was—
ene Aunaber ee,
: of farms.
Before Reduc- Not Tn-
acres). |purchase,| 1921 tion, | Reduced.) snanged.| creased.
Southern..........- bes 75 250 6.6 5.4 1.2 28 45, 2
Miesterne = =. 2s 52 498 9.0 6.5 2.5 22 27 3
Northern.........---- ‘of. UR 269 6.5 5.7 8 15 44 5
UN) 25 (See Saar ae 191 324 7.2 5.8 1.4 65 116 10
CHANGE IN TILLAGE PRACTICE.
With regard to tillage practice, each farmer was asked (1) whether
he was making it a practice since he purchased his tractor to plow a
greater percentage of his land and to reduce correspondingly the
amount listed or disked without plowing; (2) whether he plowed
to a greater depth than formerly; and (3) whether he practiced
better seed-bed preparation other than plowing than he did before
he purchased his tractor. The replies to these questions are sum-
marized in Table 52.
In all, 215, or 66 per cent, of the 327 reported some change in tillage
practice. In the southern and northern areas more men reported
deeper plowing than either of the other changes, while in the western
area more plowing and less disking and listing was reported by the
greatest number.
TABLE 52.—Change in tillage practice after purchase of tractors.
Number
= Number who did
Pia rak ee N anes who |Number| better
Area. of reported | reported ioctahec pers seed -bed
farmers.) no | some | Ser cent| Heeper. (tion other
change. | change. ofland. than
plowing.
I ee eh Ne eee 116 36 80 41 65 50
ermereeateets ss ewe Pe ee eee ee 96 36 60 46 32 36
Denvemirteties. .o8 2. oe oo oe ol eed 115 40 75 44 58 41
SS a Sn ke ee | heaT 112 215 131 155 127
COREE 2) SG lll SR Eg al Mean tie aS 100 34 66 40 47 39
! The 27 of the 354 farmers interviewed not included in this table started farming with tractors.
7
|
:
A
{
4
|
4
|
:
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 47.
CHANGE IN COST OF POWER AND LABOR.
In Table 53 is summarized for each area the average change in the
combined cost of power and labor due to the use of the tractor. The
cost of using the tractor for drawbar work and of keeping the work
stock are shown in Table 46. The ‘‘cost of power with horses only”’
has been obtained by multiplying the average cost per head of keep-
ing the work stock m each area as given in Table 29 by the number
of ‘‘work stock if tractors were not used” as given in Table 49. The
value of the saving in family and regular hired labor was obtained by
crediting the reduction in labor on the farms which were not changed
in size (Table 51) at $50 per month.
It is seen that for all farms there was an average net increase in the
combined cost of power and labor of $206 for the year. If the surplus
work stock had all been sold and the cost per head of keeping the
remaining ones not increased there would have been an average
reduction of about $115 in the annual cost of power. The value of
the feed consumed per head by the work stock on these farms where
tractors were owned was on the average $4 less than that on the 85
farms where tractors were not owned. If it were assumed that the
cost per head of keeping the work stock would have been $4 greater if
tractors had not been used a further saving of about $47 per farm
would be shown.
TABLE 53.—Changes in annual cost of power and labor due to use of tractor (averages),
L921.
Southern} Western | Northern All
area. area. area. farms.
Cost per farm of power for drawbar work, 1921: |
BIRTECL CEO Trt fe Psy A ES is Saran sun bin, Jae w c/ayare creeie tee $588 $520 $357 $484
WVIOEKES LOC Kee pasate rene Fe dee tons or ac ae acis ide Seg Hage 583 522 517 541
TOD Soar 8s Se eS BSB ee Bee Be Oe ae eel ei eae iBalAl 1,042 874 1, 025
Costofpower wichwhorses,on ly... - ...2: =... 2-522 -2-----2-2--- 765 767 662 749
Increase in cost of power due to using tractor.................-- 406 275 212 276
Saving in family and regular hired labor (at $50 per month)..-. 60 125 40 70
Net increase in cost of power and labor due to using tractor. .... 346 150 172 206
As shown in Tables 32, 33, and 44, both the cost of using tractors
and the cost of keeping work stock were lower in 1922 and 1923 than
in 1921. Table 54 compares the average change which would have
occurred in the annual cost of power and labor for the years of 1922
and 1923 with the change shown in Table 53 for the year 1921, pro-
vided tractors purchased at prices current in 1922 and 1923 had been
used. It is seen that if tractors purchased at 1922 prices had been
used on these farms during the year of 1922, the average net increase
in the cost of power and labor due to using the tractors would have
been $123, and if tractors purchased at prices current in 1923 had
been used during the year of 1923, the average net increase in cost
of power and labor due to using the tractors would have been $98,
as compared with the average of $206 for the machines in use at the
time of the investigation.
48 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
TaBLe 54.—Changes in annual cost of power and labor due to using tractors in 1921,
1922, and 1923.
1921 1922 | 1923
Cost per farm of power for drawbar work:
TACCON, 5 20.55 oo nk oe oe Soe ae ee ee Oe OE Re eee ee ees Sint $364 $352
Work stock.2 22h. $f. 5 0 ee en Ce ee eee see 541 415 450
| rn Aime eerste i MR aed En Ro BOAT pee 1,025 779 802
Costiof power with: horses only-032 5s ase ena aes coe eee ae ne 586 634
Increase in cost of power due to usiug tractors....................-.- 276 193 | 168
Saving in family and regular hired labor (at $50 per month)............... 70 70 70
Net increase in cost of power and labor due to using tractor........- 206 | 123 | 98
INCREASE IN INVESTMENT DUE TO PURCHASE OF TRACTOR.
In Table 55 is summarized for each area the average increase
in investment due to the purchase of the tractors. In each area
this increase had amounted to between $1,300 and $1,400. The cost
of the tractors is shown on page 33. The value of the work stock
displaced was obtained by crediting the actual reduction in work
stock as shown in Table 49 at the average value of all work stock as
shown in Table 8.
A record of the number and value of implements for drawbar
work which each owner purchased for use with his tractor and the
number and value of horse-drawn implements which he had sold was
obtained. The averages are shown in Table 55. Practically every
man had purchased some special tractor implements but only 23,
about 7 per cent of the entire number, had disposed of any of their
old horse-drawn implements.
TaBLE 55.—Increase in investment due to purchase of tractor.
Southern] Western Northern
All
Item. area. area. | area. | farms.
MON OUUPACUOD. os 205 See 2 cs ees he ee eee ae $1, 423 $1, 524 $1, 327 $1, 419
Cost offield implements for tractor:-...s..5-1--.2----2 22... 222 265 278 255
a ee Sey OL a Oe Wits. (5 eee 1,645 1,789| 1,605] 1,674
Wialueof work stock displaced: ..¢.a/2.2 SATIN. 2 eae Palate: 260 460 242 340
Value of horse-drawn implements sold.............-...--------- 3 4 2 3
abet oc. dtork ban dae ae oe ee eee 263 464 244 | 343
INeciIMncreasoin investment..\\.. 24. =~ aes gee ne oe ee eee 1, 382 1,325 1,361 1, 331
FARMS ON WHICH NO CHANGES WERE MADE AFTER PURCHASE OF TRACTORS.
As shown in Table 51, only 65 of the 191 men who had not changed
the size of their farms had reduced the amount of labor used. It was
_ found also that only 89 of these 191 had reduced the number of work
stock kept. Ninety-one were still keeping the same number of work
stock, and 11 were keeping more than before the tractors were pur-
chased. Seventy-three of these 102 who were keeping the same or
greater number of work stock on the same acreage had not reduced
the amount of family or regular hired labor used. Ten of the 73 were
using more labor than formerly. Some of these farms where there
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 49
was no reduction in labor had been run by the operator alone even
before the tractor was purchased, and it is possible that on some of them
not enough work stock to carry on the work properly had been kept.
This was not true in most of the 73 cases, however.
Although the use of a tractor may increase the yield by making
possible better tillage practice and more timely work (see p. 46),
and may reduce the amount of time which its owner must actually
spend at farm work, it is obvious that one will not often prove profit-
able unless the owner does at least one of the following: (1) In-
creases the size of his farm; (2) reduces the number of his work
stock; or (3) reduces the amount of paid labor used.
OWNERS’ OPINIONS REGARDING USE OF TRACTORS.
There are a number of more or less intangible factors connected
with the use of tractors which are not directly measurable in dollars
and cents, but which nevertheless must be considered in determining
whether or not a tractor is profitable. Accordingly each tractor
owner was asked a number of questions designed to reveal his opinion
and ideas concerning the use of a tractor on his farm. The replies
to these questions are summarized in Table 56.
TABLE 56.—Owners’ opinions regarding use of tractors.
Southern | Western |Northern All
area. area. area. | farms.
Proportion who consider greatest advantage of tractor to be— | Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent. | Per cent.
GE) Shore AvOlK 1M: arP1VeM time... <5. 32 = =2-.5--<5-s053---22- 65 82 | Ys
(2): oavaneehorses:in hot weather. . = 3. .3.-2.s:-.----+--5s: 28 10 | 27 | 22
(5) JSSU Tey SP Se SE Sas ee et ad ae Sa se fh 8 16 10
Proportion who consider greatest disadvantage to be— |
CDP Rspeos; and depreciation } | 2-3! -5...22Si 2.42.2 565:; 34 27 34 31
2) SLUM OR ONSOs Soe 45 55. o ns yahoos sess web oadee = 25 31 | 31 29
pmeito there reese ll hat es tase de 41 42 35 40
Proportion who use tractors as primary source of power........ 64 74 42 59
Proportion who use tractors as supplemetary to horses.........- 36 26 58 4]
Proportion who believe tractors responsible for increased yield
(PRU GRE SH oe Sa SEG, Ae oe Ce ke a er 29 14 | 20 21
Proportion who believe tractors have no influence on yield per
TG a cecseet eS See el See a eee a 69 82 79 77
Proportion who believe tractors responsible for decreased yield
Duele Pert 3 2, \ey Bee ESS eg Sl ee oe eet Se ee ee 2 4 | 1 | 2
Proportion who had owned other tractors. .............-...-.-- 25 25 24 25
Proportion who believe present tractors will be profitable... ... 78 84 | 65 75
Proportion-whointenG to buy .others..........-.:2.2..-.-+-.-- 75 85 | 59 72
There are, of course, in the minds of these farmers many advan-
tages and disadvantages connected with the use of tractors other than
those listed in the table, but less than 10 per cent of the tractor owners
interviewed considered any other single factor the greatest advantage
or the greatest disadvantage.
Each farmer was asked whether he planned to use his tractor as
the primary source of power for field work, i. e., for all work for which
it was satisfactory and to use his work stock only on operations
where the tractors could not be used satisfactorily, or whether he
planned to use his work stock as the chief source of power and the
tractor only during rush seasons or at times when the horses could
not work satisfactorily. *
50 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
As stated on page 46 the majority of these men made some change
in their tillage practice after the purchase of their machines, and a
great many of them considered that one of the greatest advantages
of the tractor was that it enabled them to do their work at the time
when it should be done. The value of more thorough tillage than
has ordinarily been done and the gains resulting from early prepara-
tion of the seed bed for wheat in these areas are unusually recognized.
However, other factors, especially the weather, have such a pre-
ponderant influence upon yields that it is impossible except over a
long period of years to determine definitely the effect of different
tillage practices and of performing operations at different dates.
Nevertheless each tractor owner was asked whether he considered
that the use of his tractor had resulted in any change in yields per
acre On any crop in any year.
Finally, each tractor owner was asked if he had owned and used
a tractor previous to the one he then had, if he believed his present
tractor would prove profitable, and if he intended to buy another when
it was worn out.
FARMS ON WHICH TRACTORS WERE NOT OWNED.
The size of the farms on which tractors were not owned and the
area in crops are shown in Table 57. The average size of these farms
and the average crop area are slightly less than of the farms on which
tractors were owned. Likewise the proportion of the crop area in
wheat was somewhat less and the proportion in crops planted in the
spring correspondingly greater. For these farms 69 per cent of the
crop area was in wheat, compared with 74 per cent for the farms on
which tractors were owned. The smaller wheat acreage lessens some-
what the requirements of both power and labor during the peak
load period of the wheat harvesting and seeding seasons.
In interpreting the data presented concerning these 85 farms it
must be remembered that they are not at all typical of all the farms
in these areas on which tractors are not owned.
TABLE 57.—Average size of farms without tractors and acres in crops in different areas.
Acres in—
Num- | l | Total he pies
ore heals | Bar- ie ; Oth- Igowed | Oth- aa pede of
~ Wheat. ley, | Oats.| Corn.) ,oy, | Alfalfa. er [pooqi| er > | ped. | farm.
| ~ crops. hay crops.
ieee ea es saniiiaad aula Sea
Acres.| Acres.| Acres
Southern. ... 26 ins los, ee eae 13 15 6 8 5 6 1 250 66 316
Western... . -| 31 323 29 | ~ 10 BJs = OME see Sean 11 8 8 446 333 779
Northern....| 28 164 3 10 SOM esses 7 4 ees 288 88 376
Total..| 85} 232} 11) 11] 50 5 Ba tre 10 3| 334] 170| 504
1 Cane, Sudan grass, etc.
NUMBER OF WORK STOCK.
Table 58 shows the number of work stock, their weight, and value
on these farms. The average weight of the work stock was not
widely different from that on the farms on which tractors were
owned. The value placed on them by the owners was on the average
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. ol
$8 per head greater in the southern area and $21 per head less in the
western area, than on the farms where tractors were being used.
The proportions of mares, geldings, and mules were practically th
same on the two classes of farms. :
TaBLE 58.—Total number of work stock, their weight, and value in different areas on
farms without tractors.
Mares. Geldings. Mules. | Av-
erage! ay.
| Num- num | erage
Area. ber of Av A Aver- | Aver- Aver- | Aver- Pua value
farms.| Num- oe Ng ss Num-| ~ ave’ | stock ee
ber age age | ber. 2 age | ber. pee ag SOCK! head.
* | weight.) value. weight.) value. weight.| value.| per
| farm.|
Pounds Pounds Pounds |
Si 26 | 124) 1,283] $110 69 | 1,277 $86 63 | 1,137] $130} 9.8} $108
. (2372 31 210 1, 219 71 124 1, 215 67 44 979 $2) 122-2 71
Northern... 28 136 1, 334 113 1li 1, 305 104 14 1, 233 148 9.3 111
Topale. =. - 85 470 1,277 94 304 1, 263 85 121 1, 097 E5025 94
Table 59 shows the number of colts on these farms. For the
entire 85 farms there was one colt less than a year of age for each 7.9
head of work stock and one for each 4.1 mares—a somewhat greater
proportion in each case than on the farms where tractors were owned.
There were some horses or mules which had not been broken to har-
ness on four-fifths of these farms and on only a little over half of
the tractor farms.
TaBLE 59.—Number of work stock and number of colts in different areas on farms without
tractors.
| ass tees Other colts. Number of farms.
Nun INSTT ee ee
Area. ber of aes | With
arms colts less se
stock. Horse. | Mule. | Horse. | Mule. than 1 ore WE
year of aay a
age.
SOuLHeIN=-- ==). 2-s52-- 3 26 256 9 19 33 46 14 18 6
DWESiCEH Ae a a2 ese Sa 31 378 4] 26 7 18 21 | 21 2
WNorpneric- == 6) 5s 23>... 28 261 17 2 27 5 7 13 10
cir! ieee es are 85 895 67 47 136 | 69 42 | 52 | 18
HORSE LABOR.
Table 60 shows the hours of horse labor used per farm on each
operation, and Table 61 the hours per head per year, the hours per
crop acre, and the crop area per horse on these farms where tractors
were not owned. The hours of horse labor per farm was somewhat
less than the total power used per farm for drawbar work where
tractors were owned (see Tables 22 and 25) but the crop area was
correspondingly less, so that the power used per crop acre was prac-
tically the same on both classes of farms in each area. On these fe
more horse labor was used for plowing and listing than for any other
class of work. (See fig. 16.)
yo BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
Each farmer was asked how many work stock he considered neces-
sary for the proper operation of his farm, and it was found that there
were only 25 surplus horses on the entire 85 farms. These men
were keeping an average of 10.5 head—one for each 32 crop acres—
and they considered that they needed 10.2 head, one for each 33
crop acres. The crop area per horse is the same on the nontractor
farms in the southern and northern areas as it was on the tractor
farms before the machines were purchased, and about 10 per cent
greater in the western area.
TaBLE 60.—Hours of horse labor per farm on which tractors were not owned.
Average number of hours per farm.
Operation.
Southern | Western | Northern All
area. area. area. farms.
ae DIOWING 2. Sooo ee coe ne nee oe eee 126 234 110 160
SIP IOWINE. Ys 2. ik en eee ee terre ee ee 454 1, 084 850 814
LUTE eae mi ARG MEE RERE NE GTR mi ac 9 2 615 7 0 191
Total plowine and lishing. se sae eee ee 1, 195 1,325 960 1, 165
IDiskineyplowediground =)... Owl. ee ee eee vee 270 0 32 | 93
Disking wmplowedserounds: 47-502. Seek eee ee cee ee 86 Wiea| Pe OG 377
arrOwane ie. 42 3. Aa ciao so sc ek es See ee Pits eae ae 741 68 203 318
ROOT ie Ss oo ens os oe Sent ee eee a Ec a ee ees ee 586 6 0 182
Other: fitting ground:.;.25.. 5s. Yess Eee eee 0 1 4 2
Total fitting ground other than plowing and listing. .....-- 1, 683 850 446 | 972
10 1 11 9 i li A os Pope AE ee bel AS arson 8 511 804 404 583
iDrawine-prainsbinder .«. S-8 5-2 6 as. sh Sse tee eee ae 492 58 258 | 257
AC KIMOO TIE te nn Ree oy SSE ee eR eee 0 44 60 | 36
Drawinep header sore cn io b= etek Woke dr. a Oe Se eee Se 48 656 136 299
iDrawine heaGer wagons: W.,./:2 sac. =e be soe oe eee ee 12 380 90 172
Total harvesting grain crops...... Le PA et rake PE eee 552 1, 138 544 | 764
ehrashing 2.-3sefo0. 22 ths Le Re ee eee eee 791 258 201 402
Planting: row Crops: (2 2u22 see) UE oe yee ee Wot 103 321 370 270
Cultivatin garowCropss: =. 22 3b loaeu. Seba fe ee ee ee 226 306 595 | 377
Drawing row binder. ........... 5 eo orc yo a, ee 16 74 104 66
Eiailinsiensilage; corms: 22082. # sc de on ae ee eee 6 0 9 5
SKN COMIN. (3.2, ste 5. atten ee eR oe, See 96 271 330 | 237
Motgléharvestimeirowicrops ls. se es ose ee eee eee 118 345 443 308
MON ea y: «52 235 beck os Sa Pea A eee ae ae 74 41 58 56
UKIN ORV Ae, 2! eo ee eer mee Loo See Bn ieee See 43 19 34 382
oadime an dthauling hays ots Vite ae eae poe ee oe 73 46 24 47
Sweeping. and stacking hays: (0.. -b-ms- 5 5th a ee eee 28 20 64 37
Total haying operations> = fe se.) seo sehe | ees 218 126 180 172
ailing teed. oe. 2c io ees hae he ee soe eee 262 | ° 493 257 345
PPA IMANNINO S oe Pee 2 oe ee = ete Se oe ee ee 343 86 283 229
Muscellaneous work on farm =... -£%. oo. - 08 Sioa 374 217 167 248
Total miscellaneous work.........-. OE oh eek ‘ 979 796 707 822
Eauling rain on road.2.. 2.3.5.2. St ice cc bnceeee ee: 449 320, 262 | 340
MOpher road hawlines: 2! Fst, 5 tec e Se he a) eee eee 73 95 122 | 97
Polal Toad hatin 2." sc. cache. akan sees cates gee 522 415 384 437
ALOLeL borselaborper farm: 2 Foo. 8 eee cae ee eee 6, 898 6, 684 5, 234 6, 272
Horse Jabor hired for, threshing. 4% - i 2.8). $532.25). eek 461 | 12 0 146
Miner worse labor bired..-.< 5... lac uote eee eee eee 19 48 9 26
Horse labor ‘hiredout..<.. 24 oPeec be: PS ees 401 34 118 141
Total labor by horses owned! . 27> Milos acute es 6,819 6, 658 5, 243 | 6, 241
1 In addition to the horse labor hired out for farm work one farmer used 8,960 hours horse labor during the
year for contract work in connection with road building.
\
.
ee
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 55%
In the southern and western areas the hours of work per horse were
greater on these farms than on the tractor farms, but as stated on
e 26, this was largely due to the large number of surplus work
stock kept on the tractor farms.
TasLE 61.—Horse labor per head, and crop area per horse on farms without tractors.
i
|
= | Horse labor Horse labor} Crop acres | Crop acres
Number of per crop | per horse | per neces-
acre. | kept. sary horse.
Area. per head
farms. per year.
Fic. 16.—Two-bottom lister drawn by six horses. On the farms where tractors were not used, more
horse labor was used for plowing and listing than for any other class of work.
COST OF KEEPING WORK STOCK.
Table 62 shows the annual cost per head of keeping the work stock.
The costs were computed in the same manner as the corresponding
costs on the tractor farms.
TABLE 62.—Annual cost per head of keeping work stock on farms without tractors.
r Cost per head. es Net
eee | Manure olt | cost
Area. | ber of l :
| farms. | Har- | Shoe-| Veteri- | Inter-| Depre- | credit. | credit. | per
Feed. | Chores. ness.| ing. | mary. | est. | ciation. [head.
Southern........._. 26 | $59.34 | $7.41 |$4.35 |$0.01 | $0.80 |$8.86| $7.61] $3.00] $1.85 |$s3.53
Western............ 31| 34.44] 7.02| 4.30|0.00| 0.17] 5.85| 7.05{ 1.50] 3.58| 53.75
Northern........... 23} 42.87] 9.95 | 3.62] 0.19] 0.33 /.9.09) 5.55} 500 1.30 | 65.30
eee eS | eee ee Fae ES ee Pe eee oe ee
Total......... 85 | 44.02 | 7.97 | 4.12 | 0.06 | 0.40 | 7.64 | 6.79| 294| 243 | 65.63
54 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
The annual feed consumption per head is shown in Table 63. In_
the southern and western areas the horses on the non-tractor farms |
did considerably more work per head than on the tractor farms and~
received a correspondingly greater amount of feed. In the southern
area the value of the feed consumed per head on the nontractor
farms was about $10 greater than on the tractor farms, and in the
western area about $5 greater. The time spent per head doing chores
was also greater on the nontractor farms in these areas. The average
depreciation charge per head amounted to about 7 per cent of the
value of the in stock for all nontractor farms, and to between
8 and 9 per cent for all tractor farms. On account of the greater
number of colts, the colt credit per head was somewhat greater on
the nontractor farms.
TABLE 63.—Feed for work stock on farms without tractors.
Average annual consumption per head.
Num-
Area. ber of Straw B leet tick ota .
farms.|Hay.| and | Oats. 1 ios Corn. hay au nas
stover. y- Grass. | Wheat.| Stalk. | Night. oe > | Sa
Tons.| Tons. |Bush.|Bush.|Bush.| Month.| Month.| Month.| Month.|Pounds.| Pounds.
Southern. .... 26 | 1.52 0.06 | 39.8} 0.2) 10.1 2.0 Ae See 3.8] 3,160} 12,073
Western. .... Sh || eS yy E200) Ue Sy SO Sad 2.6 3.6 0. 2 4.0] 3,140 1, 780
Northern. .... 28 | 1.39 14 | 30.5 4] 34.5 1.3 .9 17 3.3 3, 060 2, 927
Total. - 85 | 1.438 ~ 14 | 26.5 TAN) TiE6 2.0 2.9 a0 is 3,140 | 1 2,242
1 In addition to grain shown an average of 3.9 bushels of kafir and milo per head was fed in the southern
area, or 1.2 bushels for all farms. -
COST OF HORSE LABOR.
For the entire 85 farms the cost per hour of horse labor was 11 cents,
compared with 17 cents on the 354 farms on which tractors were
owned. In the southern area the cost per hour was 13 cents on the
nontractor farms and 22 cents on the tractor farms; in the western
area, 10 cents on the nontractor farms and 18 cents on the tractor
farms; in the northern area, 12 cents on the nontractor farms and
13 cents on the tractor farms. As stated on page 32 the annual cost
of keeping a horse does not increase in proportion to the amount of
work it does, and the high cost per hour of horse labor on the tractor
farms was very largely due to the low utilization of the work stock
compared with the utilization on the nontractor farms.
ANNUAL COST OF POWER FOR DRAWBAR WORK.
Since the work stock on the nontractor farms did all the drawbar
work, the cost of keeping them represents the entire cost of power
for drawbar work and is comparable to the combined cost of keeping
the work stock and of using the tractors for drawbar work on the
tractor farms. The average cost on the 85 nontractor farms was
$701, or $2.10 per crop acre, compared with $1,025, or $2.91 per cro
acre, on the 354 tractor farms. Disposal of the surplus work stoc
would have reduced the cost somewhat on the tractor farms, and the
average cost of power for drawbar work on the tractor farms in 1922
and 1923, if no surplus work stock were kept and if tractors pur-
chased at current prices were used, would have been only a few dol-
lars per year higher than the average cost on the nontractor farms.
The average cost per farm of keeping work stock on the nontractor
farms was $838, or $3.35 per crop acre, in the southern area; $670, or
\
'
_
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. ey.
$1.50 per crop acre, in the western area; and $608, or $2.11 per
crop acre, in the northern area. As was the case on the tractor farms,
there were wide variations in the costs on similar farms of the same
size, and the cost could doubtless have been reduced considerably on
many of the farms by more efficient management.
CHANGES BETWEEN 1918 AND 1921.
Farmers who did not own tractors were asked for a record of any
changes in the size of their farms, in the amount of labor used, and
in tillage practice since 1918; that is, during the three years prior to
the investigation. Four of the 85 men had started farming during
that time and their reports are not included in the following discussion.
SIZE OF FARM.
Table 64 shows the changes in the size of the farms. Forty-four,
a little more than half, of the 81 farms had not been changed in size;
31 had been increased in size, and 6 had been reduced. For the
entire number there had been an average increase of 45 crop acres.
As was the case with the farms on which tractors were owned, the
increase had been greatest in the western area and least in the
southern area.
TABLE 64.—Change in size of farm, 1918 to 1921.
| No change. | Increasedin size. Decreased in size. All farms.
_ |S Se | ey ee
Area ber of | Num-| Aver- | Num- | Averagesize. | Num-| Average size. | Average size.
oe (LEG) SPS) a
|farms.| size. farms.| 1918 1921 |farms.| 1918 1921 | 1918 1921
Crop Crop Crop Crop Crop Crop
acres. | acres. acrés. | acres. | acres. | acres.
Southern 24 17 258 5) 145 2 331 206 240 | 249
Western. 30 13 404 14 | 333 3 443 389 375 453
Northern 27 14 278 | |. 28 1 300 206 246 288
Total..... | igi 44| 308 i ey 6| 382 | 297 | 292 | 337
1 Fourfarms notincluded, as they had begun operation during the period covered.
LABOR.
Table 65 shows the change between 1918 and 1921 in the amount of
family and regular hired labor used on the 44 farms which had not
been changed in size. On the average there had been an increase of
0.3 month of regular labor other than that of the operator himself.
The size of these farms was less than the size of the tractor farms
shown in Table 51, and this fact must be borne in mind in comparing
the amount of labor used on the tractor and nontractor farms.
TABLE 65.—Change in family and regular labor on farms not changed in size, 1918 to 1921.
| Family and hired
r ; | labor per farm.
Area. Number | Average |
of farms. size.
1918 1921 |
|
| Cropacres.| Months. | Months.
OTT tlt 8 ee ee 17 | 258 oy 5.1 0.6 decrease
LlUTUTA 22 oe ee eee 13 -| 404 5. 0 6.4 | 1.4increase.
TOFD ECE Tus 5 esi i 14 278 6. 2 6.4 | 0.2 increase.
6 pael goee Ry Slee en alee tin tone ieee 44 | 308 | 5.6 5.9 | 0.3 increase.
|
56 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
CHANGE IN TILLAGE PRACTICE.
These farmers were asked the same questions concerning their
tillage practices as were the tractor owners. It was found, however,
that only 4 of the entire 85 were making it a practice to plow a
greater percentage of their land, plow deeper, or do better seed-bed
preparation other than plowing in 1921 than in 1918.
OPINIONS CONCERNING TRACTORS.
To determine the attitude of men who do not own tractors toward
their use, each man was asked why he did not own a tractor, and —
if he intended to buy one in the future. Of the 85 men, 23 stated —
definitely that they expected to buy tractors in the future, 11 were
undecided, and 51 said that they intended to continue farming with ~
horses only. Ten of the 85 men had previously owned tractors but
had disposed of them, chiefly because they were considered more
expensive than horses.
As a reason for not owns tractor, the first cost or cost of operat- —
ing the machine was given by 42 of the 85 men. Some of these 42
stated that the lack of capital alone had prevented their purchasing
machines. Sixteen of the men thought the tractors would not be
4
paying investments and 8 considered themselves mechanically in- |
competent to operate tractors.
COST OF POWER AND MAN LABOR FOR DIFFERENT OPERATIONS.
The average costs per acre of power, and of power and man labor,
for the different field operations when done with tractors and horses
are shown in. Table 66 both for the farms where tractors were owned
and those where tractors were not owned. Costs for operations per-
formed by less than 20 men are omitted.
TABLE 66.—Cost per acre of power and man labor for different operations when done with
tractors and horses.
(Averages for all farms. )
Farms on which tractors were owned. Farms on which
tractors were not
With tractors 1921. | With horses 1921. | @WPed, with
horses 1921.
Operation. Cost Cost J Cost
Num- Cost |_ Per Num- Cost |. Pet Num- Cost |. Pet
ber acre of | ber acre of | ber acre of
per- wer | per- power | per- :| power
form- i 4s Sand - a cat and | form- ies es ana
ing. |POWer-) man | ing. power! man | ing. |POWe'-| man
labor. labor. labor.
Spring Plowing .2 sc se Aaemee ake ees foe oe 111 | $1.64 | $1.84] 116 | $1.50 | $1.9 54 | $1.12) $1.61
Kall Plowing s.%. < .524..4 as aos ee ule 2 299.) 1.84) 2.504}. 102.) 1.29.) 1. 75 62 93 1.34
LEATS 6 {Re SER Te gee ort e Teme eae OS Be 43 -98 | 1.10 43 -82] 1.03 25 . 4 .74
saan gr 320 oS! oF eee oe cee 24.) 105 Dede 52 - 66 . 88 25 -48 .70
Disking plowed ground:
ingle :Qiski: so. of oe oo ees eee (1) Sics see ele ceeee 30 52 67-| -@) -|nes2eseteoeeee
ANON) OISk 75 An 47. eee aoe eee 61 86 oa ig (62) va | ES ain) RT es QO)» lassotes|seepene
Disking unplowed ground:
INPIO CISKs Jc eae hea eee ont see (2): Be eee ecees 87 - 40 . 55 40 - 30 44
emiem. disk. - 82). oc Us Pe oe ss 102 -79 . 89 30 89°} 1.09) @) |... eee
Diskingin combination....-.......-.-:-. 46 .92 | 1.03 Ot | Stasis elena = Sa O |. <0. 0lbeneeee
ATID ei tg ihe oh os Se enitaae Balas Oe 101 .39 -45 |] 181 24 -32 63 20 . 28
POPU Se ee oo Saou oe bebe dea ete ates 194 . 60 -68 | 273 39 52 85 28 - 40
ASR PCO £25 no Pie am war's 4-dlee 41 -98 | 1.09 | 224 -78 | 1.04 66 . 54 . 78
Drawinies DIN Gr f2c)s5 2S shal ar ee ee 177 - 68 .87 | 188 - 43 e106 67 24 - 43
Drawine mesder) 8207 vo. Psee's 7. =. Stes 22 - 40 SOL |) 108 .33 41 47 24 «Ol
APA COMIN Ours coe etre tect ee 34 HR be . 88 OM sce messlomnan ae ere |e
1 Performed by less than 20 men:
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 57
Costs for power are based upon the costs of using tractors and of
keeping work stock on the individual farms during the year covered
by the investigation. The cost of man labor has been calculated at
the flat rate of 20 cents per hour for man labor on all farms both
when using tractors and when using horses. Costs for the grain
binder, header and combine when drawn with tractors include the
labor of a man on the machine as well as that of the tractor operator.
The labor of only one man is included in the costs of all other opera-
tions shown.
Costs per acre in 1922 of power with tractors were computed on a
basis of 75 per cent of the costs for the year of the investigation, and
the same rate (20 cents per hour) was charged for man labor.
On account of the lower cost per hour of horse labor on the farms
where tractors were not owned the costs per acre of power for the
different operations were in every case lower than the costs for the
/ same operations when done with horses on the farms where tractors
were owned.
FARMS ON WHICH NO HORSES WERE OWNED.
Eleven farms in the western area kept no work stock. On two
of these farms no horse labor was used for planting and harvesting
the one crop, wheat. A combine drawn by the tractor was used in
each case to harvest the crop. On the remaining nine farms horse
labor was hired as needed, usually to harvest wheat, an average of
1,025 hours for the nine farms being used.
These farms were much smaller than either of the other classes
previously discussed—454 acres in total size, and 306 acres in seal
of which 271 acres, about 90 per cent, was in wheat. (See Tables
2 and 3.) On seven farms wheat was the only crop grown. The
_ tractors were used for 82 per cent of the total drawbar work on
these seven farms, compared with 76 per cent on the entire 11.
The drawbar work on the 11 farms amounted to an equivalent of
10 hours of horse labor per crop acre, compared with 15 hours on
the farms where some horses were owned. (See pages 25 and 53.)
TaBLE 67.— Utilization and cost of using tractors on farms on which no horses were owned.
Average | Average
Item. per Item. per
tractor. tractor.
MSISEDOL OMIATING 2! oe oa. sio oe wasos es ss 11 Fuel per year for drawbar work:
SePEIOMLEAChOE-«-4 =. 2s 72-5. months.. 13.8 || Gasoline. ee ree nae gallons. . 349
marst cost of tractor...-.s...-.--- dollars..| 1054 IKiGLOSGNGM eee Seek ee doee:< 219
®stimated total life...-.......... years... 5.8 Oil per year for drawbar work. .... Gdor=2 49
Annual cost of repairs and upkeep Cost of using tractor for drawbar work:
eer te sores << soe wk Be dollars. . 25. 00 Pen yeares 2520226. 5....'... dollars... 399. 00
Tractor work per year: Per NOULSs 66 sae cc wok ceca ces do. 1.36
Drawbar (home farm) ....... hours. . 293.2 ||
+ DE eee eel FOG
Custom (home farm)......... do 90.0 |;
Total (home farm)............ doz. 2 383. 0
Sixty-four per cent of the tractors were of the two-plow size. The
first cost, annual cost of repairs and upkeep, and cost per year and
per hour for drawbar work are less on these farms than on the
_ 1-tractor-and-horse farms on which only 31 per cent of the tractors
were of the two-plow size. More custom work but considerable less
.
58 BULLETIN 1202, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
belt and drawbar work was done than on the farms having one
tractor in addition to horses. The estimated total life was one-half
year less than that of the tractors on the other farms.
Seven of the eleven farmers began farming without horses. The
entire number considered their tractors profitable investments and
five found no disadvantage in using them.
FARMS ON WHICH TWO TRACTORS WERE OWNED.
Two tractors were owned and used for drawbar work on 6 farms
in the southern area, 13 in the western area, and 2 in the northern
area. A summary of the utilization and cost of using the tractors
on these farms in the western area (being the largest group) is given
in Table 68.
TABLE 68.— Utilization and cost of using tractors, farms on which two tractors were owned
(western area).
Average | Average
Item. per Item. per
tractor. tractor.
APOIO! LLACtOr.: -.% 25006 Sos saoe months.. 1 26.4 Fuel per year for drawbar work:
Birsticostiof tractor....2-=-...-: dollars. .| 1 1, 606. 00 Gasoline: 32: 25% 22ers gallons. . 538
Estimated total life. ............. years... 16.3 KGFOSENC See sce oa: oc eee eee dosa 376
Annual cost of repairs and upkeep Oil per year for drawbar work. ...do.... GY
503 eee eee geen eee dollars. . 90.00 || Cost of using tractor for drawbar work:
Tractor work per year: POE YOals se eee eee dollars. - 595. 00
Drawbar (home farm)........ hour. . 315 Per bourse as. sos. cee ccs dosiz: 1. 89
Belpre ees ee ose 19
CHER) 0) (ee SSeS ate ee do 24
STS ah ene och ai ore oe ee sac do 359
1 Five tractors purchased secondhand not included.
The two-tractor farms are more than 300 acres larger than the
one-tractor farms in the same area. The percentage of the total area
in crops likewise is greater (75 per cent and 61 per cent, respectively)
as is the percentage of crop area in wheat (87 per cent and 79 per
cent, respectively). But 3 of the 13 farms have a crop area smaller
than the average crop area for the one-tractor farms.
Of the 26 tractors, of which Table 68 is a summary, 5 were pur-
chased second-hand at an average cost of $760 compared with $1,606
for the new tractors. All aia there were seven 2-plow tractors,
nine 3-plow, five 4-plow, and five larger. On one farm only were two
tractors of 2-plow size used. On six of the farms, however, the two
tractors were of the same size. On seven of the farms at least one
4-plow tractor was owned.
There is no marked difference between the utilization and cost of
using tractors on the two-tractor farms and on the farms on which
one tractor is owned. In the former group the first cost is somewhat
larger because larger sized tractors are used; repairs are slightly more,
ed estimated total life one-half year less; there is a difference of but
17 hours in the total utilization per year. There is a difference of $111
per year in the cost of using tractors for drawbar work (40 cents per
our) in favor of the one-tractor farms. .
It would have required 7,154 hours of horse labor to accomplish
the drawbar work done with the tractors on these farms. This
represents 78 per cent of the total drawbar work compared with 46
ee ee. ae ee ee
“ wate at
TRACTORS AND HORSES IN THE WINTER WHEAT BELT. 59
er cent for the one-tractor farms. On the two-tractor farms nearly
half of the ground seeded to small grain had no preparation previous
to drilling, while only about one-fifth of the ground on the one-
tractor farms had no previous preparation. Consequently, the
equivalent of but 10 hours of horse labor was required for the drawbar
work on each crop acre on the former farms as compared with 14
hours on the one tractor farms.
TABLE 69.— Utilization and cost of keeping work stock.
Average Average
Item. per Item. per
farm, farm.
EN(IMU DOM OMATING = 2 2 5 2< <0 oie cnic