rF

Given By

DEPOSITORY

Vol. Ill - pt. 9 ch. VIII

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION
IN THE UNITED STATES

(A COOPERATIVE REPORT)

Part-time Farming

SPECIAL REPORTS

1954

Census
of

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Agriculture

Mm?*?**

/ft? r^jS-

AUG 2 6 1957 frf

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE

Boston Public Library
Superintendent of Documents

WASHINGTON . 1956

y j

United States

Census

of

Agriculture:

1954

Volume

SPECIAL REPORTS

Part 9

Farmers and Farm Production in the United States

(A Cooperative Report)

U. S. Department of Agriculture

Ezra Toft Benson, Secretary

Agricultural Research Service

Byron T. Shaw, Administrator

U. S. Department of Commerce

Sinclair Weeks, Secretary

Bureau of the Census

Robert W. Burgess, Director

Chapter VIII
Part-Time Farming

CHARACTERISTICS OF FARMERS and FARM PRODUCTION •
PRINCIPAL TYPES OF FARMS •

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS
Robert W. Burgess, Director

AGRICULTURE DIVISION
Ray Hurley, Chief
Warder B. Jenkins, Assistant Chief

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE
Byron T. Shaw, Administrator

FARM AND LAND MANAGEMENT RESEARCH
Sherman E. Johnson, Director

PRODUCTION ECONOMICS RESEARCH BRANCH
Carl P. Heisig, Chief

Iff

l/<3

CM

SUGGESTED IDENTIFICATION

U. S. Bureau of the Census. U. S. Census of Agriculture: 1954. Vol. Ill, Special Reports

Part 9, Farmers and Farm Production in the United States.

Chapter VIII, Part-Time Farming

U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C, 1956.

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington 25, D. C.
or any of the Field Offices of the Department of Commerce, Price 40 cents (paper cover)

PREFACE

The purpose of this report is to present an analysis of the characteristics of farmers and farm production
for the most important types of farms as shown by data for the 1954 Census of Agriculture. The analysis
deals with the relative importance, pattern of resource use, some measures of efficiency, and problems of
adjustment and change for the principal types of farms.

The data given in the various chapters of this report have been derived largely from the special tabula-
tion of data for each type of farm, by economic class, for the 1954 Census of Agriculture. The detailed
statistics for each type of farm for the United States and the principal subregions appear in Part 8 of Volume
III of the reports for the 1954 Census of Agriculture.

This cooperative report was prepared under the direction of Ray Hurley, Chief of the Agriculture Divi-
sion of the Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce, and Kenneth L. Bachman, Head, Produc-
tion, Income, and Costs Section, Production Economics Research Branch, Agricultural Research Service of
the U. S. Department of Agriculture.

Jackson V. McElveen, Agricultural Economist, Production, Income, and Costs Section, Production
Economics Research Branch, Agricultural Research Service of the U. S. Department of Agriculture, super-
vised a large part of the detailed planning and analysis for the various chapters.

The list of chapters and the persons preparing each chapter are as follows:

Chapter I Wheat Producers and Wheat

Production
A. W. Epp,
University of Nebraska.

Chapter II Cotton Producers and Cotton

Production

Robert B. Glasgow,

Production Economics Research

Branch,
Agricultural Research Service,
United States Department of

Agriculture.

Chapter III Tobacco and Peanut Producers

and Production
R. E. L. Greene,
University of Florida.

Chapter IV Poultry Producers and Poultry

Production
William P. Mortenson,
University of Wisconsin.

Chapter V Dairy Producers and Dairy Pro-
duction
P. E. McNall,
University of Wisconsin.

The editorial work for this report was performed by Caroline B. Sherman, and the preparation of the
statistical tables was supervised by Margaret Wood.

Chapter VI Western Stock Ranches and Live-
stock Farms
Mont H. Saunderson,
Western Ranching and Lands

Consultant,
Bozeman, Mont.

Chapter VII Cash-grain and Livestock Pro-
ducers in the Corn Belt

Edwin G. Strand,

Production Economics Research
Branch,

Agricultural Research Service,

United States Department of
Agriculture.

Chapter VIII _ Part-time Farming
H. G. Halerow,
University of Connecticut.

Chapter IX Agricultural Producers and Pro-
duction in the United States —
A General View
Jackson V. McElveen,
Production Economics Research

Branch,
Agricultural Research Service,
United States Department of
Agriculture.

December 1956

UNITED STATES CENSUS OF AGRICULTURE: 1954

REPORTS

Volume I. — Counties and State Economic Areas. Statistics for counties include number of farms, acreage, value, and farm operators;
farms by color and tenure of operator; facilities and equipment; use of commercial fertilizer; farm labor; farm expenditures; livestock and
livestock products; specified crops harvested; farms classified by type of farm and by economic class; and value of products sold by source.

Data for State economic areas include farms and farm characteristics by tenure of operator, by type of farm, and by economic class.

Volume I is published in 33 parts.

Volume II. — General Report. Statistics by Subjects, United States Census of Agriculture, 1954. Summary data and analyses of
the data for States, for Geographic Divisions, and for the United States by subjects.

Volume III. — Special Reports

Part 1. — Multiple-Unit Operations. This report will be similar to
Part 2 of Volume V of the reports for the 1950 Census of Agri-
culture. It will present statistics for approximately 900
counties and State economic areas in 12 Southern States and
Missouri for the number and characteristics of multiple-unit
operations and farms in multiple units.

Part 2. — Ranking Agricultural Counties. This special report will
present statistics for selected items of inventory and agricul-
tural production for the leading counties in the United States.

Part 3. — Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, District of Columbia, and
U. S. Possessions. These areas were not included in the 1954
Census of Agriculture. The available current data from vari-
ous Government sources will be compiled and published in
this report.

Part 4. — Agriculture, 1954, a Graphic Summary. This report will
present graphically some of the significant facts regarding
agriculture and agricultural production as revealed by the 1954
Census of Agriculture.

Part 5. — Farm-Mortgage Debt. This will be a cooperative study
by the Agricultural Research Service of the U. S. Department
of Agriculture and the Bureau of the Census. It will present,
by States, data based on the 1954 Census of Agriculture and a
special mail survey conducted in January 1956, on the num-
ber of mortgaged farms, the amount of mortgage debt, and the
amount of debt held by principal lending agencies.

Part 6. — Irrigation in Humid Areas. This cooperative report by
the Agricultural Research Service of the U. S. Department of
Agriculture and the Bureau of the Census will present data ob-
tained by a mail survey of operators of irrigated farms in 28
States on the source of water, method of applying water, num-
ber of pumps used, acres of crops irrigated in 1954 and 1955,
the number of times each crop was irrigated, and the cost of
irrigation equipment and the irrigation system.

Part 7. — Popular Report of the 1954 Census of Agriculture. This
report is planned to be a general, easy-to-read publication for
the general public on the status and broad characteristics of
United States agriculture. It will seek to delineate such as-
pects of agriculture as the geographic distribution and dif-
ferences by size of farm for such items as farm acreage, princi-
pal crops, and important kinds of livestock, farm facilities,
farm equipment, use of fertilizer, soil conservation practices,
farm tenure, and farm income.

Part 8. — Size of Operation by Type of Farm. This will be a coop-
erative special report to be prepared in cooperation with the
Agricultural Research Service of the U. S. Department of Agri-
culture. This report will contain data for 119 economic sub-

regions (essentially general type-of-farming areas) showing the
general characteristics for each type of farm by economic class.
It will provide data for a current analysis of the differences
that exist among groups of farms of the same type. It will
furnish statistical basis for a realistic examination of produc-
tion of such commodities as wheat, cotton, and dairy products
in connection with actual or proposed governmental policies
and programs.
Part 9. — Farmers and Farm Production in the United States.
The purpose of this report is to present an analysis of the
characteristics of farmers and farm production for the most
important types of farms as shown by data for the 1954 Census
of Agriculture. The analysis deals with the relative importance,
pattern of resource use, some measures of efficiency, and prob-
lems of adjustment and change for the principal types of farms.
The report was prepared in cooperation with the Agricultural
Research Service of the U. S. Department of Agriculture.

The list of chapters (published separately only) and title
for each chapter are as follows:

Chapter I — Wheat Producers and Wheat Production
II — Cotton Producers and Cotton Production
III — Tobacco and Peanut Producers and Production
IV — Poultry Producers and Poultry Production

V — Dairy Producers and Dairy Production
VI — Western Stock Ranches and Livestock Farms
VII — Cash-Grain and Livestock Producers in the Corn

Belt
VIII — Part-Time Farming
IX — Agricultural Producers and Production in the
United States — A General View
Part 10. — Use of Fertilizer and lime. The purpose of this report
is to present in one publication most of the detailed data com-
piled for the 1954 Census of Agriculture regarding the use of
fertilizer and lime. The report presents data for counties,
State economic areas, and generalized type-of-farming areas
regarding the quantity used, acreage on which used, and
expenditures for fertilizer and lime. The Agricultural Research
Service cooperated with the Bureau of the Census in the prep-
aration of this report.
Part 11. — Farmers' Expenditures. This report presents detailed
data on expenditures for a large number of items used for farm
production in 1955, and on the living expenditures of farm
operators' families. The data were collected and compiled
cooperatively by the Agricultural Marketing Service of the
U. S. Department of Agriculture and the Bureau of the Census.
Part 12. — Methods and Procedures. This report contains an
outline and a description of the methods and procedures used
in taking and compiling the 1954 Census of Agriculture.

INTRODUCTION

in

<
W

pa

<

o

z
o
u
w

w

H

<J

fe

Q
Z
<J
t/3

55
O

3

a

m
D

u

a

o

2
O
u

w

INTRODUCTION

Purpose and scope. — American agriculture is exceedingly diverse
and is undergoing revolutionary changes. Farmers and their
families obtain their income by producing a large variety of
products under a large variety of conditions as well as from sources
other than farming. The organization of production, type of
farming, productivity, income, expenditures, size, and character-
istics of operators of the 4.8 million farms in the United States
vary greatly. Agriculture has been a dynamic, moving, adjusting
part of our economy. Basic changes in farming have been occurring
and will continue to be necessary. Adjustments brought by tech-
nological change, by changing consumer wants, by growth of
population, and by changes in the income of nonfarm people, have
been significant forces in changing agriculture since World War II.
The transition from war to an approximate peacetime situation
has also made it necessary to reduce the output of some farm
products. Some of the adjustments in agriculture have not pre-
sented relatively difficult problems as they could be made by the
transfer of resources from the production of one product to another.
Others require substantial shifts in resources and production.

Moreover, a considerable number of farm families, many of whom
are employed full time in agriculture, have relatively low incomes.
Most of these families operate farms that are small when compared
with farms that produce higher incomes. The acreage of land and
the amount of capital controlled by the operators of these small
farms are too small to provide a very high level of income. In
recent years, many farm families on these small farms have made
adjustments by leaving the farm to earn their incomes elsewhere,
by discontinuing their farm operations, and by earning more non-
farm income while remaining on the farm or on the place they
farmed formerly.

One objective of this report is to describe and analyze some of
the existing differences and recent adjustments in the major types
of farming and farm production. For important commodities and
groups of farms, the report aims to make available, largely from
the detailed data for the 1954 Census of Agriculture but in a more
concise form, facts regarding the size of farms, capital, labor, and
land resources on farms, amounts and sources of farm income and
expenditures, combinations of crop and livestock enterprises,
adjustment problems, operator characteristics, and variation in use
of resources and in size of farms by areas and for widely differing
production conditions. Those types of farms on which production
of surplus products is important have been emphasized. The
report will provide a factual basis for a better understanding of
the widespread differences among farms in regard to size, resources,
and income. It will also provide a basis for evaluating the effects
of existing and proposed farm programs on the production and
incomes of major types and classes of farms.

Income from nonfarm sources is important on a large number
of farms. About 1.4 million of the 4.8 million farm-operator
families, or about 3 in 10, obtain more income from off -farm sources
than from the sale of agricultural products. More than three-
fourths of a million farm operators live on small-scale part-time
farms and ordinarily are not dependent on farming as the main
source of family income. These part-time farmers have a quite
different relation to adjustments, changes, and farm problems
than do commercial farmers. A description of and facts regarding
these part-time farms and the importance of nonfarm income for
commercial farms are presented in Chapter 8.

Except for Chapter 8, this report deals with commercial farms
(see economic class of farm). The analysis is limited to the major
types of agricultural production and deals primarily with geo-
graphic areas in which each of the major types of agricultural
production has substantial significance.

Source of data. — Most of the data presented in this report are
from special compilations made for the 1954 Census of Agriculture,
although pertinent data from research findings and surveys of the
U. S. Department of Agriculture, State Agricultural Colleges, and
other agencies have been used to supplement Census data. The
detailed Census data used for this report are contained in Part 8 of
Volume III of the reports of the 1954 Census of Agriculture.
Reference should be made to that report for detailed explanations
and definitions and statements regarding the characteristics and
reliability of the data.

Areas for which data are presented. — Data are presented in
this report primarily for selected economic subregions and for the
United States. The boundaries of the 119 subregions used for the
compilation of data on which this report is based are indicated by
the map on page vi. These subregions represent primarily general
type-of-farming areas. Many of them extend into two or more
States. (For a more detailed description of economic subregions,
see the publication "Economic Subregions of the United States,
Series Census BAE; No. 19, published cooperatively by the Bureau
of the Census, and the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, U. S.
Department of Agriculture, July 1953.)

DEFINITIONS AND EXPLANATIONS

Definitions and explanations are given only for some of the more
important items. For more detailed definitions and explanations,
reference can be made to Part 8 of Volume III and to Volume II of
the reports of the 1954 Census of Agriculture.

A farm. — For the 1954 Census of Agriculture, places of 3 or
more acres were counted as farms if the annual value of agricultural
products, exclusive of home-garden products, amounted to $150
or more. The agricultural products could have been either for
home use or for sale. Places of less than 3 acres were counted as
farms only if the annual value of sales of agricultural products
amounted to $150 or more. Places for which the value of agricul-
tural products for 1954 was less than these minima because of crop
failure or other unusual conditions, and places operated at the time
of the Census for the first time were counted as farms if normally
they could be expected to produce these minimum quantities of
agricultural products.

All the land under the control of one person or partnership was
included as one farm. Control may have been through ownership,
or through lease, rental, or cropping arrangement.

Farm operator. — A "farm operator" is a person who operates
a farm, either performing the labor himself or directly supervising
it. He may be an owner, a hired manager, or a tenant, renter, or
sharecropper. If he rents land to others or has land cropped for
him by others, he is listed as the operator of only that land which
he retains. In the case of a partnership, only one partner was
included as the operator. The number of farm operators is con-
sidered the same as the number of farms.

vn

VIII

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Farms reporting or operators reporting. — Figures for farms
reporting or operators reporting, based on a tabulation of all farms,
represent the number of farms, or farm operators, for which the
specified item was reported. For example, if there were 11,922
farms in a subregion and only 11,465 had chickens over 4 months
old on hand, the number of farms reporting chickens would be
11,465. The difference between the total number of farms and the
number of farms reporting an item represents the number of farms
not having that item, provided the inquiry was answered
completely for all farms.

Farms by type. — The classification of commercial farms by
type was made on the basis of the relationship of the value of
sales from a particular source, or sources, to the total value of all
farm products sold from the farm. In some cases, the type of
farm was determined on the basis of the sale of an individual farm
product, such as cotton, or on the basis of the sales of closely re-
lated products, such as dairy products. In other cases, the type
of farm was determined on the basis of sales of a broader group of
products, such as grain crops including corn, sorghums, all small
grains, field peas, field beans, cowpeas, and soybeans. In order to
be classified as a particular type, sales or anticipated sales of a
product or group of products had to represent 50 percent or more
of the total value of products sold.

The types of commercial farms for which data are shown, to-
gether with the product or group of products on which the classi-
fication is based are:

Product or group of products amount-
ing to 50 percent or more of the
Type of farm value of all farm products sold

Cash-grain Corn, sorghum, small grains, field

peas, field beans, cowpeas, and
soybeans.

Cotton Cotton (lint and seed).

Other field-crop Peanuts, Irish potatoes, sweet-
potatoes, tobacco, sugarcane, sug-
ar beets for sugar, and other
miscellaneous crops.

Vegetable Vegetables.

Fruit-and-nut Berries and other small fruits, and

tree fruits, nuts, and grapes.

Dairy Milk and other dairy products.

The criterion of 50 percent of the
total sales was modified in the
case of dairy farms. A farm for
which the value of sales of dairy
products represented less than 50
percent of the total value of farm
products sold was classified as a
dairy farm if —

(a) Milk and other dairy prod-
ucts accounted for 30
percent or more of the
total value of products
sold, and
(6) Milk cows represented 50
percent or more of all
cows, and
(c) Sales of dairy products, to-
gether with the sales
of cattle and calves,
amounted to 50 percent
or more of the total
value of farm products
sold.

Poultry ,

Livestock farms other
dairy and poultry.

than

Chickens, eggs, turkeys, and other

poultry products.
Cattle, calves, hogs, sheep, goats,

wool, and mohair, provided the

farm did not qualify as a dairy

farm.

Product or group of products amount-
ing to 50 percent or more of the
Type of farm value of all farm products sold

General Farms were classified as general

when the value of products from
one source or group of sources
did not represent as much as 50
percent of the total value of all
farm products sold. Separate
figures are given for three kinds
of general farms:
(a) Primarily crop.
(6) Primarily livestock.
(c) Crop and livestock.

Primarily crop farms are those for
which the sale of one of the
following crops or groups of
crops — vegetables, fruits and
nuts, cotton, cash grains, or other
field crops — did not amount to
50 percent or more of the value
of all farm products sold, but
for which the value of sales for
all these groups of crops repre-
sented 70 percent or more of the
value of all farm products sold.

Primarily livestock farms are those
which could not qualify as dairy
farms, poultry farms, or livestock
farms other than dairy and
poultry, but on which the sale
of livestock and poultry and
livestock and poultry products
amounted to 70 percent or more
of the value of all farm products
sold.

General crop and livestock farms are
those which could not be classi-
fied as either crop farms or live-
stock farms, but on which the
sale of all crops amounted to at
least 30 percent but less than 70
percent of the total value of all
farm products sold.

Miscellaneous This group of farms includes those

that had 50 percent or more of
the total value of products ac-
counted for by sale of horticul-
tural products, or sale of horses,
or sale of forest products.

Farms by economic class. — A classification of farms by eco-
nomic class was made for the purpose of segregating groups of
farms that are somewhat alike in their characteristics and size of
operation. This classification was made in order to present an
accurate description of the farms in each class and in order to
provide basic data for an analysis of the organization of agriculture.

The classification of farms by economic class was made on the
basis of three factors; namely, total value of all farm products
sold, number of days the farm operator worked off the farm, and
the relationship of the income received from nonfarm sources by
the operator and members of his family to the value of all farm
products sold. Farms operated by institutions, experiment sta-
tions, grazing associations, and community projects were classified
as abnormal, regardless of any of the three factors.

For the purpose of determining the code for economic class and
type of farm, it was necessary to obtain the total value of farm
products sold as well as the value of some individual products
sold.

The total value of farm products sold was obtained by adding
the reported or estimated values for all products sold from the
farm. The value of livestock, livestock products except wool and
mohair, vegetables, nursery and greenhouse products, and forest

INTRODUCTION

IX

products was obtained by the enumerator from the farm operator
for each farm. The enumerator also obtained from the farm
operator the quantity sold for corn, sorghums, small grains, hays,
and small fruits. The value of sales for these crops was obtained
by multiplying the quantity sold by State average prices.

The quantity sold was estimated for all other farm products.
The entire quantity produced for wool, mohair, cotton, tobacco,
sugar beets for sugar, sugarcane for sugar, broomcorn, hops, and
mint for oil was estimated as sold. To obtain the value of each
product sold, the quantity sold was multiplied by State average
prices.

In making the classification of farms by economic class, farms
were grouped into two major groups, namely, commercial farms
and other farms. In general, all farms with a value of sales of
farm products amounting to $1,200 or more were classified as
commercial. Farms with a value of sales of $250 to $1,199 were
classified as commercial only if the farm operator worked off the
farm less than 100 days or if the income of the farm operator and
members of his family received from nonfarm sources was less than
the total value of all farm products sold.

Land in farms according to use.— Land in farms was classified
according to the use made of it in 1954. The classes of land
are mutually exclusive, i. e., each acre of land was included only
once even though it may have had more than one use during the
year.

The classes referred to in this report are as follows:

Cropland harvested.- — This includes land from which crops
'were harvested; land from which hay (including wild hay) was
cut; and land in small fruits, orchards, vineyards, nurseries, and
greenhouses. Land from which two or more crops were reported
as harvested was to be counted only once.

Cropland used only for pasture. — In the 1954 Census, the
enumerator's instructions stated that rotation pasture and all
other cropland that was used only for pasture were to be in-
cluded under this class. No further definition of cropland
pastured was given the farm operator or enumerator. Per-
manent open pasture may, therefore, have been included under
this item or under "other pasture," depending on whether the
enumerator or farm operator considered it as cropland.

Cropland not harvested and not pastured. — This item includes
idle cropland, land in soil-improvement crops only, laud on
which all crops failed, land seeded to crops for harvest after
1954, and cultivated summer fallow.

In the Western States, this class was subdivided to show
separately the acres of cultivated summer fallow. In these
States, the acreage not in cultivated summer fallow represents
largely crop failure. There are very few counties in the West-
ern States in which there is a large acreage of idle cropland or
in which the growing of soil-improvement crops is an important
use of the land.

In the States other than the Western States, this general
class was subdivided to show separately the acres of idle crop-
land (not used for crops or for pasture in 1954). In these States,
the incidence of crop failure is usually low. It was expected
that the acreage figure that excluded idle land would reflect
the acreage in soil-improvement crops. However, the 1954
crop year was one of low rainfall in many Eastern and Southern
States and, therefore, in these areas the acreage of cropland not
harvested and not pastured includes more land on which all
crops failed than would usually be the case.

Cultivated summer fallow. — This item includes cropland
that was plowed and cultivated but left unseeded for several
months to control weeds and conserve moisture. No land
from which crops were harvested in 1954 was to be included
under this item.

Cropland, total. — This includes cropland harvested, cropland
used only for pasture, and cropland not harvested and not
pastured.

Land pastured, total. — This includes cropland used only for
pasture, woodland pastured, and other pasture (not cropland
and not woodland).

Woodland, total. — This includes woodland pastured and

woodland not pastured.

Value of land and buildings. — The value to be reported was
the approximate amount for which the land and the buildings on
it would sell.

Off-farm work and other income. — Many farm operators receive
a part of their income from sources other than the sale of farm
products from their farms. The 1954 Agriculture Questionnaire
included several inquiries relating to work off the farm and non-
farm income. These inquiries called for the number of days
worked off the farm by the farm operator; whether other members
of the operator's family worked off the farm; and whether the
farm operator received income from other sources, such as sale
of products from land rented out, cash rent, boarders, old age
assistance, pensions, veterans' allowances, unemployment com-
pensation, interest, dividends, profits from nonfarm business,
and help from other members of the operator's family. Another
inquiry asked whether the income of the operator and his family
from off-farm work and other sources was greater than the total
value of all agricultural products sold from the farm in 1954.
Off-farm work was to include work at nonfarm jobs, businesses,
or professions, whether performed on the farm premises or else-
where; also, work on someone else's farm for pay or wages. Ex-
change work was not to be included.

Specified facilities and equipment. — Inquiries were made in
1954 to determine the presence or absence of selected items on
each place such as (1) telephone, (2) piped running water, (3)
electricity, (4) television set, (5) home freezer, (6) electric pig
brooder, (7) milking machine, and (8) power feed grinder. Such
facilities or equipment were to be counted even though tem-
porarily out of order. Piped running water was defined as water
piped from a pressure system or by gravity flow from a natural
or artificial source. The enumerator's instructions stated that
pig brooders were to include those heated by an electric heating
element, by an infrared or heat bulb, or by ordinary electric bulbs.
They could be homemade.

The number of selected types of other farm equipment was also
obtained for a sample of farms. The selected kinds of farm
equipment to be reported were (1) grain combines (for harvesting
and threshing grains or seeds in one operation); (2) cornpickers;
(3) pickup balers (stationary ones not to be reported) ; (4) field
forage harvesters (for field chopping of silage and forage crops) ;
(5) motortrucks; (6) wheel tractors (other than garden); (7)
garden tractors; (8) crawler tractors (tracklaying, caterpillar);
(9) automobiles; and (10) artificial ponds, reservoirs, and earth
tanks.

Wheel tractors were to include homemade tractors but were not
to include implements having built-in power units such as self-
propelled combines, powered buck rakes, etc. Pickup and truck-
trailer combinations were to be reported as motortrucks. School
buses were not to be reported, and jeeps and station wagons were
to be included as motortrucks or automobiles, depending on
whether used for hauling farm products or supplies, or as passenger
vehicles.

Farm labor. — The farm-labor inquiries for 1954, called for the
number of persons doing farmwork or chores on the place during
a specified calendar week. Since starting dates of the 1954 enumer-
ation varied by areas or States, the calendar week to which the
farm-labor inquiries related varied also. The calendar week was
September 26-October 2 or October 24-30. States with the
September 26-October 2 calendar week were: Arizona, California,
Colorado, Connecticut, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky.
Louisiana, Maine, Massachusetts, Michigan, Minnesota, Montana,
Nebraska, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New Mexico,

423025—57—

X

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

New York, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Oregon, Pennsylvania,
Rhode Island, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Utah, Vermont,
Washington, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. States with the October
24-30 calendar week were: Alabama, Arkansas, Delaware, Georgia,
Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maryland, Mississippi, Missouri, North
Carolina, Ohio, South Carolina, Virginia, and West Virginia.
Farmwork was to include any work, chores, or planning necessary
to the operation of the farm or ranch business. Housework,
contract construction work, and labor involved when equipment
was hired (custom work) were not to be included.

The farm-labor information was obtained in three parts:
(1) Operators working, (2) unpaid members of the operator's family
working, and (3) hired persons working. Operators were consid-
ered as working if they worked 1 or more hours; unpaid members
of the operator's family, if they worked 15 or more hours; and
hired persons, if they worked any time during the calendar week
specified. Instructions contained no specifications regarding age
of the persons working.

Regular and seasonal workers. — Hired persons working on
the farm during the specified week were classed as "regular"
workers if the period of actual or expected employment was 150
days or more during the year, and as "seasonal" workers if the
period of actual or expected employment was less than 150 days.
If the period of expected employment was not reported, the
period of employment was estimated for the individual farm
after taking into account such items as the basis of payment,
wage rate, expenditures for labor in 1954, and the type and
other characteristics of the farm.

Specified farm expenditures. — The 1954 Census obtained data
for selected farm expense items in addition to those for fertilizer
and lime. The expenditures were to include the total specified
expenditures for the place whether made by landlord, tenant, or
both.

Expenditures for machine hire were to include any labor in-
cluded in the cost of such machine hire. Machine hire refers to
custom machine work such as tractor hire, threshing, combining,
silo filling, baling, ginning, plowing, and spraying. If part of the
farm products was given as pay for machine hire, the value of the
products traded for this service was to be included in the amount
of expenditures reported. The cost of trucking, freight, and
express was not to be included.

Expenditures for hired labor were to include only cash pay-
ments. Expenditures for housework, custom work, and contract
construction work were not to be included.

Expenditures for feed were to include the expenditures for
pasture, salt, condiments, concentrates, and mineral supplements,
as well as those for grain, hay, and mill feeds. Expenditures for
grinding and mixing feeds were also to be included. Payments
made by a tenant to his landlord for feed grown on the land rented
by the tenant were not to be included.

Expenditures for gasoline and other petroleum fuel and oil were
to include only those used for the farm business. Petroleum
products used for the farmer's automobile for pleasure or used
exclusively in the farm home for heating, cooking, and lighting
were not to be included.

Crops harvested. — The information on crops harvested refers
to the acreage and quantity harvested for the 1954 crop year. An
exception was made for land in fruit orchards and planted nut
trees. In this case, the acreage represents that in both bearing
and nonbearing trees and vines as of October and November 1954.

Hay. — The data for hay includes all kinds of hay except soy-
bean, cowpea, sorghum, and peanut hay.

livestock and poultry. — The data on the number of livestock
and poultry represent the number on hand on the day of enumera-

tion (October-November 1954). The data relating to livestock
products and the number of livestock sold relate to the sales made
during the calendar year 1954.

LABOR RESOURCES

The data for labor resources available represent estimates based
largely on Census data and developed for the purpose of making
comparisons among farms of various size of operations. The
labor resources available are stated in terms of man-equivalents.

To obtain the man-equivalents the total number of farm opera-
tors as reported by the 1954 Census were adjusted for estimated
man-years of work off the farm and for the number of farm opera-
tors 65 years old and over. The farm operator was taken to rep-
resent a full man-equivalent of labor unless he was 65 years or
older or unless he worked at an off -farm job in 1954.

The man-equivalent estimated for farm operators reporting spec-
ified amounts of off-farm work were as follows:

Estimated
Days worked off the farm in 1954 man-equivalent

1-99 days 0. 85

100-199 days . 50

200 days and over . 15

The man-equivalent for farm operators 65 years of age and older
was estimated at 0.5.

Man-equivalents of members of the farm operator's family were
based upon Census data obtained in response to the question
"How many members of your family did 15 or more hours of farm
work on this place the week of September 26-October 2 (or, in
some areas, the week of October 24-30) without receiving cash
wages?" Each family worker was considered as 0.5 man-equiva-
lent. This estimate provides allowance for the somewhat higher
incidence of women, children, and elderly persons in the unpaid
family labor force.

In addition, the number of unpaid family workers who were
reported as working 15 or more hours in the week of September
26-October 2 was adjusted to take account of seasonal changes in
farm employment. Using published and unpublished findings of
the U. S. Department of Agriculture and State Agricultural Col-
leges, and depending largely upon knowledge and experience with
the geographic areas and type of farming, each author deter-
mined the adjustment factor needed to correct the number of
family workers reported for the week of September 26-October 2
to an annual average basis.

Man-equivalents of hired workers are based entirely upon the
expenditure for cash wages and the average wage of permanent
hired laborers as reported in the 1954 Census of Agriculture.

Value of or investment in livestock. — Numbers of specified
livestock and poultry in each subregion were multiplied by a
weighted average value per head. The average values were com-
puted from data compiled for each kind of livestock for the 1954
Census of Agriculture. The total value does not include the value
of goats. (For a description of the method of obtaining the value
of livestock, see Chapter VI of Volume II of the reports for the
1954 Census of Agriculture.)

Value of investment in machinery and equipment. — The data
on value of investment in machinery and equipment were developed
for the purpose of making broad comparisons among types and
economic classes of farms and by subregions. Numbers of specified
machines on farms, as reported by the Census, were multiplied by
estimated average value per machine. Then the total values ob-
tained were adjusted upward to provide for the inclusion of items
of equipment not included in the Census inventory of farm
machinery.

INTRODUCTION

XI

The estimates for average value of specified machines and the
proportion of total value of all machinery represented by the
value of these machines were based largely on published and un-
published data from the "Farm Costs and Returns" surveys con-
ducted currently by the Agricultural Research Service, U. S.
Department of Agriculture.1 Modifications were made as needed
in the individual chapters on the basis of State and local studies.
The total estimated value of all machinery for all types and
economic classes of farms is approximately equal to the value of
all machinery as estimated by the U. S. Department of Agriculture.

Value of farm products sold, or gross sales. — Data on the
value of the various farm products sold were obtained for 1954 by
two methods. First, the values of livestock and livestock prod-
ucts sold, except wool and mohair; vegetables harvested for sale;
nursery and greenhouse products; and forest products were
obtained by asking each farm operator the value of sales. Second,
the values of all other farm products sold were computed. For the
most important crops, the quantity sold or to be sold was obtained
for each farm. The entire quantity harvested for cotton and
cottonseed, tobacco, sugar beets for sugar, hops, mint for oil, and
sugarcane for sugar was considered sold. The quantity of minor
crops sold was estimated. The value of sales for each crop was
computed by multiplying the quantity sold by State average
prices. In the case of wool and mohair, the value of sales was
computed by multiplying the quantity shorn or clipped by the
State average prices.

Gross sales include the value of all kinds of farm products sold.
The total does not include rental and benefit, soil conservation,
price adjustment, Sugar Act, and similar payments. The total

does include the value of the landlord's share of a crop removed
from a farm operated by a share tenant. In most of the tables,
detailed data are presented for only the more important sources
of gross sales and the total for the individual farm products
or sources will not equal the total as the values for the less impor-
tant sources or farm products have been omitted. (For a detailed
statement regarding the reliability and method of obtaining the
value of farm products sold, reference should be made to Chapter
IX of Volume II of the reports for the 1954 Census of Agriculture.)

Livestock and livestock products sold. — The value of sales for
livestock and livestock products includes the value of live animals
sold, dairy products sold, poultry and poultry products sold, and
the calculated value of wool and mohair. The value of bees,
honey, fur animals, goats, and goat milk is not included.

The value of dairy products includes the value of whole milk and
cream sold, but does not include the value of butter and cheese,
made on the farm, and sold. The value of poultry and products
includes the value of chickens, broilers, chicken eggs, turkeys,
turkey eggs, ducks, geese, and other miscellaneous poultry and
poultry products sold. The value does not include the value
of baby chicks sold.

Crops sold. — Vegetables sold includes the value of all vegetables
harvested for sale, but does not include the value of Irish potatoes
and sweet potatoes.

The value of all crops sold includes the value of all crops sold
except forest products. The value of field crops sold includes the
value of sales of all crops sold except vegetables, small fruits and
berries, fruits, and nuts.

' Farm Costs and Returns, 1955 (with comparisons), Agriculture Information Bulletin No. 158, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, June 1956.

CHAPTER VIII
PART-TIME FARMING

CONTENTS

A. INTRODUCTION

Page

Scope and purposes 7

Classification of farms 8

Definitions used in this study 8

Comparison with other studies 9

Implications to agriculture and to the general economy — 10

B. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION AND PERCENTAGE
DISTRIBUTION

Percentage of farm operators by economic class reporting
other income of family exceeding value of farm products
sold 11

Percentage of farm operators working off their farms in

1954 15

Percentage of farm operators working off their farms, by

economic class, 1954 15

Comparative distribution of Classes V, VI, VII, and VIII

farm operators, 1954 20

Inferences about off-farm income and employment 20

C. INCREASES AND DECREASES IN NUMBER

Farm operators working off farm, 1930, 1940, 1945, 1950,

1954 23

Farm operators working off farm 100 days or more, 1930,

1940, 1945, 1950, 1954 23

Changes in number of farm operators working off farm 100
days or more, by geographic division, by economic
class, 1949 to 1954 24

Changes by geographic divisions: Number of farm opera-
tors reporting other income of family exceeding value of
farm products sold, 1949 to 1954 25

Changes by economic class of farm: Number of farm opera-
tors reporting other income of family exceeding value of
farm products sold, 1949 to 1954 25

Changes by geographic divisions: Part-time and residential

farm operators, 1949 to 1954 26

D. OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS AND FACILITIES
BY CLASS OF FARM, 1949 AND 1954

Land Use and Farm Values 28

Average acreage per farm 28

Cropland harvested 29

Value per farm and per acre 29

Specified Machinery and Equipment, 1950 and 1954 30

Grain combines, corn pickers, and pick-up balers 30

Motortrucks, 1950 and 1954 31

Automobiles, 1950 and 1954 31

Specified Farm Expenditures, 1949 and 1954 31

Machine hire, 1949 and 1954 31

Hired labor, 1949 and 1954 .32

Feed, gas, and oil, 1949 and 1954 32

Fertilizer and lime, 1954 32

D. OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS AND FACILITIES
BY CLASS OF FARM, 1949 AND 1954— Continued

Page
Work Power, Equipment, and Other Specified Expenditures,

1954 34

Farms by class of work power, 1954 34

Other equipment, 1954 35

Workers on farms, specified week, 1954 35

Household facilities by economic class, by five regions. 37

E. ECONOMIC CLASS V FARMS, PART-TIME, AND

COMMERCIAL, 1954

Purpose of analysis 38

Off-farm employment and income 39

Value of land and buildings per farm and per acre 39

Total acreage per farm, part-time, and commercial farms. 39

Cropland harvested 39

Acreage pastured 40

Woodland per farm 40

Summary of land-use comparisons 40

Classification by type of farm 40

Classification by type of farm, by regions 40

Part-time and commercial farms as a percentage of all farms

of same type 41

Distribution of farms by cropland harvested 41

Source of work power: Tractor, horses, and/or mules 42

Family and hired workers: Week of September 26-October

2 or October 24-30 42

Expenditures for machine hire, labor, feed, and fuel 42

Other specified machinery and expenditures 43

Farms by tenure of operator 43

Operators working off farm, by age of operator 44

Farms having specified facilities 44

Summary and conclusion 44

F. OFF-FARM INCOME OF FARM-OPERATOR
FAMILIES

Aggregate off-farm income 46

Distribution of farm operators, sales of farm products, and

off-farm income by class of farm 47

Average off-farm income by source of income, by class of

farm 48

Distribution of sources of off-farm income by class of farm. 49

Off-farm income per farm reporting 50

G. FARM-MORTGAGE DEBT BY ECONOMIC CLASS

Distribution of mortgaged farms and land in farms, by

economic class 52

Percentage of farms mortgaged, by economic class 52

Land in farms, value of land and buildings, and amount of
mortgage debt per farm for mortgaged farms, by eco-
nomic class 52

Ratio of mortgage debt to value, by economio class 53

3

4 CONTENTS

MAPS

Page

Percent of farm operators of Class I farms reporting other income of farmer exceeding value of farm products sold, 1954 12

Percent of farm operators of Class II farms reporting other income of farmer exceeding value of farm products sold, 1954 12

Percent of farm operators of Class III farms reporting other income of farmer exceeding value of farm products sold, 1954 13

Percent of farm operators of Class IV farms reporting other income of farmer exceeding value of farm products sold, 1954 13

Percent of farm operators of Class V farms reporting other income of farmer exceeding value of farm products sold, 1954 14

Percent of farm operators of part-time farms reporting other income of farmer exceeding value of farm products sold, 1954 14

Percent of farm operators of residential farms reporting other income of farmer exceeding value of farm products sold, 1954 15

Percent of all farm operators working off their farms in 1954 16

Percent of all farm operators working 100 or more days off their farms, 1954 16

Percent of operators of Class I farms working off farm 100 days or more, 1954 17

Percent of operators of Class II farms working off farm 100 days or more, 1954 17

Percent of operators of Class III farms working off farm 100 days or more, 1954 18

Percent of operators of Class IV farms working off farm 100 days or more, 1954 18

Percent of operators of Class V farms working off farm 100 days or more, 1954 19

Percent of operators of part-time farms working off farm 100 days or more, 1954 19

Percent of operators of residential farms working off farm 100 days or more, 1954 20

Operators of Class V farms working off farms less than 100 days: 1954 21

Operators of Class V farms working off farms 100 days or more: 1954 21

Part-time farms, number, 1954 22

Residential farms, number, 1954 22

Number of farm operators working off their farms, by number of days worked, for the United States and areas: 1930-1954 23

5 major areas 38

TABLES

Table—

1, — Classification of farms having less than $2,500 value of farm sales, for the United States: 1954 9

2. — Percentage of farms reporting other income of family exceeding value of farm sales, for the United States: 1949 and 1954 9

3. — Classification of farm operators by economic class and degree of dependence on agriculture: 1950 10

4. — Distribution of farms by economic class and percent change, for the United States: Censuses of 1950 and 1954 10

5. — Number of farms by geographic division and by economic class: 1954 11

6. — Percent of farms by geographic division and by economic class: 1954 11

7. — Number of farm operators working off farm 100 days or more, by geographic division, by economic class: 1954 and 1949 24

8. — Percent of farm operators working off farm 100 days or more, by geographic division, by economic class: 1954 and 1949 25

9_ — Number of farm operators working off farm 100 days or more, by geographic division, by economic class: 1954 as percent of 1949_ 25
10. — Total number of farm operators reporting other income of family exceeding value of farm products sold, by economic class of

farm, by geographic division: 1954 and 1949 26

11. — Number of farm operators reporting other income of family exceeding value of farm products sold, by geographic division, by

economic class: 1954 as percent of 1949 26

12. — Percent of farm operators reporting other income of family exceeding value of farm products sold, by geographic division, by

economic class: 1954 and 1949 27

13. — Average iand in farms, cropland harvested per farm, and value of farms (land and buildings) per farm and per acre, by economic

class, for the United States and regions: 1954 and 1950 28

14. — Average land in farms, cropland harvested per farm, and value of farms (land and buildings) per farm and per acre, by economic

class, for the United States and regions: Percent change 1950 to 1954 29

15. — Percent of farms reporting specified machinery and equipment, motortrucks, and automobiles, by economic class, for the

United States and regions: Censuses of 1954 and 1950 30

16. — Specified farm expenditures, percent of farms reporting, and amount per farm, by economic class of farm, for the United States

and regions: Censuses of 1954 and 1950 31

17. — Percentage of part-time and residential farms reporting hired labor: 1954 and 1949 32

18. — Specified farm expenditures, percent of farms reporting, and amount per farm, by economic class of farm, for the United States

and regions : 1954 33

19. — Acreage on which commercial fertilizer was used, percent of total acreage and percent of cropland harvested on which used, by

economic class of farm, for the United States and regions: 1954 33

20. — Farms by class of work power and specified farm equipment, by economic class of farm, for the United States and regions:

1954 34

21. — Workers on farms, specified week, by economic class, for the United States and regions: 1954 35

22. — Percent of farms reporting electricity, telephone, and piped running water, by economic class of farm, for the United States and

regions: 1954 36

23. — Percent of farms reporting television set and home freezer, by economic class, for the United States and regions: 1954_ . 37

CONTENTS 5

TABLES— Continued

Table— Page

24. — Percent of farms reporting telephone and electricity, by economic class of farm, for the United States and regions: Censuses

of L954 and 1950 37

25. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), for the United States and regions: 1954 38

26. — Class V farms, number of operators and percent, by other income exceeding value of farm products sold and work off farm,

for the United States and regions: 1954 39

27. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), by value of land and buildings per farm and per acre, for the United States and

regions : 1954 39

28. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), land use per farm, for the United States and regions: 1954 39

29. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), by type of farm, for the United States and regions: 1954 40

30. — Distribution of Class V farms as part-time and commercial farms for each type of farm, for the United States and regions:

1954 41

31. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), cropland harvested, for the United States and regions: 1954 41

32. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), by class of work power, farm labor, and specified farm expenditures, for the United

States and regions: 1954 42

33. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), specified farm expenditures per farm reporting, for the United Slates and regions:

1954 42

34. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), percent reporting specified farm machinery and equipment, for the United States

and regions : 1954 43

35. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), by tenure of operator, for the United States and regions: 1954 43

36. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), by tenure of operator, for the United States and regions: 1954 44

37. — Class V farms by tenure, by type of farm, for the United States and regions: 1954 44

38. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), by days operator worked off farm, by age of operator, for the United States and

regions : 1954 45

39. — Class V farms (part-time and commercial), percent reporting specified facilities, for the United States and regions: 1954 45

40. — Off-farm income of farm-operator families, by source of income, by class of farm, aggregate for the United States: 1955 46

41. — Percent distribution of off-farm income of farm-operator families from each source of income, by class of farm, for the United

States: 1955 47

42. — Average off-farm income of farm-operator families by source of income, by class of farm, for the United States: 1955 48

43. — Percent distribution of off-farm income of farm-operator families by source of income, by class of farm, for the United States:

1955 . 1 49

44. — Average off-farm income of farm-operator families by farms reporting specified sources, bj- class of farm, for the United States:

1955 . '. 50

45. — Farm operators by age, number of persons in family, education, and family income after taxes, for the United States: 1955 50

46. — Percent distribution of farm operators by age, number of persons in family, education, and family income after taxes, for the

United States: 1955 50

47. — Farm operators of Class VI, part-time, and residential farms, by age, number of persons in family, education, and family income

after taxes, for the United States: 1955 51

48. — Percent distribution by economic class of farm of operators of Class VI, part-time, and residential farms, by age, number of

persons in family, education, and family income after taxes, for the United States: 1955 51

49. — Percent distribution of operators of Class VI, part-time, and residential farms, by age, number of persons in family, education,

and family income after taxes, for the United States: 1955 51

50.-*— Percent distribution of number of mortgaged farms and land in mortgaged farms, of full owners and part owners, by economic

class of farm, for the United States: 1956 52

51. — Percent of farms mortgaged, for farms operated by full owners and by part owners, by economic class of farm, for the United

States: 1956 52

52. — Average size of mortgaged farms, for full owners and part owners, by economic class of farm, for the United States: 1956 52

53. — Value of land and buildings, per farm and per acre for mortgaged farms of full owners and part owners, by economic class of

farm, for the United States: 1956 52

54. — Value of land and buildings and amount of mortgage debt per farm, for mortgaged farms operated by full owners and part

owners, by economic class of farm, for the United States: 1956 ' 53

55. — Ratio of farm mortgage debt to value for mortgaged farms of full owners and part owners by economic class of farm, for the

United States : 1 956 53

423025—57-

PART-TIME FARMING

H. G. Halcrow

A. INTRODUCTION

Farm operators who work at other occupations simultaneously
with some farming have increased substantially in terms of per-
centages. This is true in most areas of this country. This
trend has been most pronounced in the last decade but it has
been in evidence since 1930, at least. According to the Census
of Agriculture of April 1930, approximately 3 out of 10 of the farm
operators reported that they had worked off their farms one or
more days during the preceding calendar year. In 1954, almost
half were working off their farms that often.

The more noteworthy change is not that a larger proportion
were working off their farms for a few days but that a larger
percentage were so working at least a third of the year — 100 days
or more.

To be precise, in 1929 about 1 out of 10 farm operators (1 1.5
percent) worked off their farms 100 days or more, whereas in 1954
almost 3 out of 10 (28.5 percent) spent 100 days or more in working
elsewhere than on their farms.

The increase in off-farm employment and income continued
during 1949-54. In 1949, according to the 1950 Census of Agri-
culture, about 1 out of 4 farm operators (23.3 percent) worked
off farm 100 days or more, as compared with 3 out of 10 farm
operators (28.5 percent) working off farm 100 days or more in
1954. In 1949, about 1,255,000 farm operators reported working
off their farm 100 days or more as compared with 1,334,000 in
1954. This was an increase of 79,000 between the two Census
years during which time the total number of farm operators
declined by 600,000.

One of the most significant or important shifts during 1949-54
was an increase in the number and percentage of commercial
farm operators (especially Classes I to IV) working off farm 100
days or more and a marked decrease in the number of part-time
(Class VII) and residential (Class VIII) farms. In 1949, only
9.1 percent of the commercial farm operators were working off
farm 100 days or more as compared with 13.0 percent of the total
number in 1954. Stated another way, the number of commercial
farm operators working off farm 100 days or more in 1954 was
28.8 percent larger than in 1949; the number of Class I farm oper-
ators was 25.3 percent larger; Class II was 37.6 percent larger;
Class III was 42.4 percent larger; Class IV was 35.1 percent larger;
and Class V was 19.3 percent larger. In comparison, the number
of part-time (Class VII) farm operators working off farm 100
days or more in 1954 increased by only 3.4 percent, whereas the
number of residential (Class VIII) operators decreased by 5.9
percent.

The total number of farm operators reporting other income of
the family that exceeded the value of farm products sold declined
from 1,566,000 in 1949 to 1,424,000 in 1954, a decline of 9.1
percent. However, the number of commercial farms in Economic
Classes I to V with other income of the family exceeding the value
of farm sales increased from 336,000 in 1949 to 359,000 in 1954,
an increase of 7.1 percent. The number of operators who had
other income exceeding the value of farm sales in the part-time

and residential groups declined sharply in contrast to the substan-
tial increases among the commercial farmers. The increases
among the commercial farms ranged from 29.8 percent for Class
I to 13.3 percent for Class IV and to a slight decline of 0.4 percent
for Class V. In comparison, the total number of commercial
farms declined by 379,000 farms— 3,706,000 farms in 1949 to
3,328,000 farms in 1954— a decline of 10.2 percent.

The general pattern is that of a continuing migration of farm
families out of agriculture into other occupations and an increasing
participation of commercial farmers in nonagricultural employ-
ment. In some cases, off-farm earnings of the farm operator and
his family appear to be a continuing supplement to receipts from
farm sales, while in other cases off-farm employment is an interme-
diate or transitional step in moving from agriculture to nonfarm
employment. Also, part-time farming is an intermediate step in
moving into commercial agriculture.

There is every indication that the trends toward greater partici-
pation of farm people in nonfarm employment will continue. This
raises important questions in regard to national economic policy
and has significant implications concerning the relationships
between agriculture and other groups. As the data will show,
a larger proportion of the farm operators work off their farms in
metropolitan counties than in nonmetropolitan counties, and the
percentage of farms with nonfarm family income that exceeds
farm income is also larger in the metropolitan counties. As the
industrial sector of the national economy expands and as industry
becomes increasingly interspersed into areas that were formerly
rural, the farm people have increased opportunities for off-farm
employment and for income from nonfarm sources. Farm
operators and other members of farm families are competing more
directly with nonfarm employable males and females in the non-
agricultural labor market.

To what extent does this trend offer a means for "solving" the
problem of underemployment and low income in agriculture?
Under what types of agriculture and in what types of economic
conditions have these trends been most prevalent? What is the
continuing role of part-time farming in American agriculture?

Scope and purposes. — The purposes of this chapter are to
identify, so far as possible, the major characteristics of part-time
farms and to compare these farms with commercial farms in similar
farm-size groups. Farms are classified in various regions according
to economic class of farm, age of operator, tenure, years of school-
ing, etc., and some data are given on a national basis for sources of
nonfarm income. Data are presented on location of part-time
farms by county, on increases and decreases in number of farms
between 1950 and 1954, and on number of farms having specified
facilities, such as telephones, piped running water, and central-
station electricity. The plan is to break down the data on overall
sales and on income distribution in order to arrive at conclusions
concerning the place of part-time farms in the American economy,
to show the important trends in respect to off-farm earnings and
employment, and to indicate some of the possibilities and poten-
tials or policy alternatives.

7

8

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

There is little question that off-farm employment with nonfarm
income is becoming more important to farm people in the adjust-
ments that can be made within agriculture and between agriculture
and the rest of the economy. Improved highways and automo-
biles, and other improvements in transportation and communica-
tions, have brought farm people closer to industry and other jobs,
and have made them more familiar with urban life and other
occupations. Expansion in industry and in the national economy
has brought an increase in the kinds of services demanded and has
multiplied the number and kinds of occupations.

Industry has become widely dispersed in many areas that were
largely rural a few years ago. This dispersion appears to have
started in the Northeastern Region of the United States and to
have spread more recently into the rural parts of the South and
West. The conversion of formerly largely rural areas into a more
mixed type of agricultural and industrial development appears to
be continuing in all of our major regions. New employment oppor-
tunities are influential in the increased off-farm employment by
farm people and in the migration out of agriculture. These
combine to bring an overall reduction in the number of farmers.

Information on the types of farms and sources of income on
which part-time farming is conducted builds up data that are vital
in learning definitely the types of adjustments that are being made
within agriculture and between agriculture and the nonagricultural
economy. From the standpoint of economic policy, these data are
useful in showing the adjustments being made and in suggesting
the changes that can be brought about through various types of
programs or through national farm policy. Thus, an overall pur-
pose of this chapter is the development of data and information on
part-time farming that will provide a basis for policy.

Classification of farms. — The merging of farm and nonfarm
economies has raised a problem of classification that should be
clarified at the outset. Data on farm sales alone do not indicate
the relative importance of farm and nonfarm enterprises, because
a considerable quantity of farm produce is used on farms where
grown and does not become a part of reported farm sales. Part-
time farming, therefore, is relatively more important as a source of
family living and as a component of the gross national product,
than is suggested by data on value of farm sales. Then too, data
on farm sales are inadequate to appraise the problems of the dis-
tribution of income in agriculture, since the income from off-farm
jobs and businesses adds to the income from farming. Pensions,
old-age assistance, and incomes from rents and other sources are
important, especially for older people. The primary need in an
analysis of part-time farming, therefore, is the tabulation of all
sources of income. In this study, although several limitations are
recognized, the attempt is made to identify the major sources of
farm income and to compare farm and nonfarm income.

Part-time farms fall into a variety of classes: (1) Many farm
operators, who formerly had little or no work off the farm, have
obtained off-farm work but have continued to live on the farm and

to carry on some farming enterprises. In some cases, this farming
has continued for many years at about the earlier level. In other
cases, the farming has been reduced, either as a result of a change
in family composition or as an outgrowth of increased nonfarm
income and the diminished time available for farmwork. (#)
Expansion of industry into agricultural areas has created work for
members of farm families other than the operator. In such cases,
the operator continues to farm while the earnings of other mem-
bers of the family supplement the family income. (3) People who
have occupations in cities or in industry have moved to rural
areas where they have supplemented their work income by farm
enterprises while enjoying the advantages of country living.
(4) Part-time and residential farms appear in many cases as
transitional types. In some areas, for example, poultry farms are
started by one who has another job. As the poultry enterprise
grows, a point is reached when the other job is discontinued and
farming becomes the major or sole enterprise. Part-time farming
also serves as a transitional phase in the migration out of agri-
culture; in these cases the farm enterprises are discontinued after
a while.

The concept of what constitutes a part-time farm has varied
considerably from time to time.1

Generally, a part-time farm is considered to be one that offers
something less than full employment to a farm family, and the
family supplements the resulting income to some degree with
income from other — usually nonfarm — sources. This suggests a
combination of agriculture and industry. Not all definitions
involve income from outside agriculture, however, as income
from work on other farms is sometimes involved. Also, income
from farm customwork, or from operating a roadside stand or a
filling station, are sources of outside income. Maintaining
lodging or boarding places to supplement the income qualifies
a farm to be classified as part-time. Thus, part-time farming is
thought of in terms of the amount of money received from farm
sales versus the family income from other sources.

Definitions used in this study. — The definition or classification
of part-time farming used in this study is somewhat broader
than that generally used in Census tabulations, or in most other
studies.

The usual Census procedure is to list six classes of "commercial"
farms. Economic Classes I to V include all farms (other than
abnormal 2) with value of farm sales of $1,200 or more.

Economic Class VI farms include those farms with value of
farm sales of $250 to $1,199, provided the operator did not work
off farm as much as 100 days and income from other nonfarm
sources was less than value of farm sales. Farms outside this
category are classed as "other." These include part-time farms,
defined as those with value of farm sales of $250 to $1,199, provided
the farm operator reported 100 or more days of work off the farm
in the previous year and/or the nonfarm income received by him

' Cf. Part-time Farming in the United States, United States Census of Agriculture, United States Government Printing Office, 1937, pages 5 and 6. The definition used In this
report designated part-time farmers as "those operators of farms who spent one or more days ofl their farms at work for pay or income during the calendar year immediately preced-
ing the Census date" (p. 7). This definition was used for convenience only and with knowledge that such agreement does not exist in the generally accepted view of part-time farm-
ing. Farms and Farm People: Population, Income and Housing Characteristics by Economic Class of Farm, A Special Cooperative Study (U. S. Department of Agriculture, Bureau of
Agricultural Economics and Bureau of Human Nutrition and Home Economics, U. S. Department of Commerce, Bureau of the Census), United States Oovernment Printing Office,
1953. Farms with a value of sales of $250 to $1,199 were classed as part-time provided the operator reported (1) 100 or more days of work off the farm in 1949, or («) the nonfarm income
received by him and members of his family was greater than the value of farm products sold. For further discussion sec Leonard A. Salter, Jr., A Critical Review of Research in Land
Economics, Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1948, pages 153-56.

' Abnormal farms include public and private institutional farms, community enterprises, experiment station farms, grazing associations, Indian reservations, etc.

PART-TIME FARMING

and the members of his family was greater than the value of farm
products sold. Farms with a total value of sales of farm products
of less than $250 3 were designated in Census tabulations as resi-
dential farms. Some of these residential farms represent farms on
which the operator worked off farm more than 100 days in 1954.
Some represent farms on which the income from nonfarm sources
was greater than the value of sales of agricultural products. Others
represent subsistence and marginal farms of various kinds.

This study does the following: (/) It shows location, percentage
distribution, and increases and decreases in all classes of farms
where the operator worked off farm 100 days or more, or where
income of the family from nonfarm sources exceeded the value of
farm sales. (2) It compares certain operation and expenditure
characteristics of the various classes of farms. (3) It presents
for the first time a tabulation of Economic Class V farms, with
value of farm sales of $1,200 to $2,499, dividing them into part-time
farms (those farms where the operator worked off farm 100 or
more days or other income of the family exceeded the value of
farm sales) and commercial farms (those farms where the operator
did not work off farm as much as 100 days and the value of farm
sales exceeded the other income of the family). Detailed farm-
operation characteristics of part-time and commercial farms are
given, and some items that enter into the level of living — such as
electricity, telephone, and piped running water — are compared
between the two groups. (4) On the basis of a special restricted
sample, the study lists sources of off-farm income for all classes
of farms. (.5) It gives the results of special survey data of farm-
mortgage debt for part-time, residential, and Class V and Class
VI farms.

Detailed comparisons, based on Census data for part-time
farms, are largely drawn from the farms with value of farm sales
of less than $2,500 in 1954. This group of 2,679,374 farms, or
56 percent of the total number of farms tabulated in the 1954
Census of Agriculture, is classified according to Census tabulations
as follows:

Table 1. — Classification of Farms Having Less Than $2,500
Value of Farm Sales, for the United States: 1954

Economic class

Gross sales

Total

Part-time

Commer-
cial

Class V .....

$1. 200 to $2, 499

' 769. 080
462, 442
574. 579
879, 094

'233,780

i 535. 300

Class VI

$250 to $1,199 ..

462, 442

$250 to $1,199 ..

574, 579
590, 397

Less than $250

288,697

Total

2, 685, 195

1,311s, 756

1, 286. 439

I Estimate based on a sample of approximately 1 percent of all farms. The total
number of Class V farms shown by the Census was 763.000.

Certain inferences are drawn in respect to the Economic Class I
to Class IV farms with value of farm sales of $2,500 or more
when the nonfarm income exceeds the value of farm sales, or when
the operator reported 100 or more days of work off the farm in
1954 although tabulations have not been made comparing opera-
tion characteristics of these farms with the commercial farms
where operators did not work off farm 100 days and other income
of family did not exceed the value of farm sales. Information
is given on the location of these farms and on the increases and
decreases in number.

In summary, the percentages of farms that reported other
income exceeding the value of farm sales in 1949 and 1954 are as
follows:

Table 2. — Percentage of Farms Reporting Other Income
of Family Exceeding Value of Farm Sales, for the United
States: 1949 and 1954

Economic class

1949

1954

Class I

Percent

4.6

4 2

5.3

11.0

20.7

S6. 2

65 9

Percent
4.6

Class II

4.4

Class III

6.4

Class IV

12.6

Class V

24.3

82.5

67.2

This study is not limited, therefore, to the part-time farms.
It includes comparison among all economic classes as to farm
organization and living facilities by regions. It emphasizes those
comparisons that seem important in assessing the status of
part-time farming and the impact of off-farm income. Part-time
farms are generally regarded as those farms on which the operator
works off farm 100 days or more and/or the income of the family
from off-farm sources exceeds the value of farm products sold.

Comparison with other studies. — Previous studies based on
data of the 1950 Census have classified farm-operator households
into three groups according to their degree of dependence on
agriculture: (1) Wholly dependent on agriculture, (2) partly
dependent on agriculture with agriculture as the major source
of family income, and (3) partly dependent on agriculture with
nonagriculture as the major source of income.4 In 1950, out of
5,341,000 farms, about 2 million farms (2,031,000), or 3S.0 percent
of the total, were classed as wholly dependent on agriculture.6
The remainder of the farm operators — those partly dependent
on agriculture — were divided between those who listed agriculture
as the major source of family income ( 1.444,000 or 27.1 percent of
the total) and those who listed nonagriculture as the major source
(1,615,000 or 30.2 percent of the total). A small number (251,000
or 4.7 percent) were not classifiable.

3 For the 1954 and the 1950 Censuses of Agriculture, places of 3 or more acres were counted as farms if the annual value of agricultural products, exclusive of home-garden products,
amounted to $150 or more. The products could be either for home use or for sale. Places of less than 3 acres were counted as farms only if the value of sales of agricultural products
amounted to $150 or more. Places for which the value of agricultural products for 1954 was less than these minima because of crop failure or other unusual conditions, and places
that were being operated for the first time at the time Census was taken, were counted as farms if normally they could be expected to produce these minimum quantities of
agricultural products.

* See Farms and Farm People: Population, Income and Housing Characteristics by Economic Class of Farm, U. S. Government Printing Office, Washington, D. C, June 1953:
Louis J. DueofT, "Classification of the Agricultural Population of the United States," Journal of Farm Economics, Vol. XXXVII, Xo. 3, August 1955, pp. 511-523.

s This classification was more restrictive than the criterion of dependency on agriculture implies. The Census data do not permit separation of ofT-farin work into farm and non-
farm work, and income from off-farm work on other farms would be classified simply as nonfarm income. The classification understates the size of the groups labeled "completely
dependent on agriculture" by an estimated 200,000 farm operators in 1950. cf. Ducoff, Ibid., pp 512 ami 513

10

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

The breakdown of these groups by economic class gives the
following tabulation for 1950:6

Table 3. — Classification of Farm Operators by Economic
Class and Degree of Dependence on Agriculture: 1950

Total

Wholly

depend-
ent on
agricul-
ture

Partly dependent
on agriculture

Economic class

Agricul-
ture
major
source

Nonagri-
culture
major
source

Unclassi-
fied

Percent
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0

Percent
38.0

50.5
55.4
53.4
49.1
41.7
67.3

8.0
1.2
12.5

Percent
27.1

34.7
34.0
36.7
36.2
32.5
34.2

8.6
7.4
9.3

Percent
30.2

9.6
3.6
4.7
10.6
21.0
3.0

79.8
90.0
73.1

Percent
4.7

5.2

7.0

Class III

5.2

Class IV

4.1

Class V

4.8

Class VI --

5.5

3.6

Part-time and abnormal

1.4
5.1

The relative proportion in the Census classes did not change
greatly between 1950 and 1954. Although data indicating degree
of dependence on agriculture among the partly dependent groups
are not available, the inference is that the most significant change
is a general increase in income from nonagricultural sources.

Implications to agriculture and to the general economy. — The
total number of farms listed by the Census has declined at each
enumeration since 1929 (excluding 1935 when a different definition
was used). Meanwhile the number of part-time (Class VII) and

residential (Class VIII) farms almost doubled in 20 years from
1929 to 1949. Between 1949 and 1954 the number of part-time
farms declined, whereas the percentage of operators working off
their farms 100 days or more increased and the percentage of
farm families with income from off-farm sources exceeding income
from farm sales also increased. The trend toward more off-farm
income and employment is particularly marked in the case of the
commercial farms of higher income. Suggested inferences or hy-
potheses are (1) that in all major regions of the United States
opportunities of farm families for off-farm work and income have
improved over the last 25 years, especia'ly since 1949, (2) that a
progressively smaller percentage of the "farm population" is
wholly dependent, or largely dependent, on agriculture as a source
of income, and (8) that further opportunities in off-farm employ-
ment and income will mean a smaller number and proportion of
farm families who depend wholly on agriculture.

Table 4. — Distribution of Farms by Economic Class and
Percent Change, for the United States: Censuses of
1950 and 1954

Number of farms
(000)

Percent distribu-
tion

Percent
change

1950

1954

1950

1954

1950 to
1954

5,379

4,783

100.0

100.0

-10.2

Class I

103
381
721
882
901
717
639
1,029
4

134
449
707
812
763
462
575
878
3

1.9
7.1
13.4
16,4
16.8
13.3
11.9
19.1
.1

2.8
9.4

14.8
17.0
16 0
9.7
12.0
18.4
.1

+30.1

Class II

+17.8

Class III

-2.0

Class IV

-8.0

Class V

-15.4

Class VI

-35.6

Part-time (Class VII)

-10.0

Residential (Class VIII)

-14.8
-25.0

« Ibid., p. 515.

PART-TIME FARMING

11

B. GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION AND PERCENTAGE

DISTRIBUTION

Data on geographic location and percentage of distribution of
farm operators, presented in maps 1 to 15, are on an economic area-
unit basis. They show the percentage of farm operators whose
families have other income exceeding the value of farm products
sold. They also show the percentage of farm operators who worked
off their farms 100 days or more in 1954. Both are shown by eco-
nomic class.

Attention is invited first to the distribution of farm operators
by geographic division and by economic class in Tables 5 and 6.
These tables show that about 84 percent of the total number of
farms are located in the four central divisions and the South
Atlantic Division and that the distribution by classes varies con-
siderably from division to division. For example, in the North,
Northeast, and Pacific divisions there are relatively higher per-
centages of Classes I, II, and III farms than in the South. The
South Atlantic and East South Central divisions contain relatively
high percentages of Classes IV, V, and VI farms. These relative
distributions should be kept in mind when the data in the follow-
ing maps are compared.

Percentage of farm operators by economic class reporting other
income of family exceeding value of farm products sold. — Maps
1 to 7, inclusive, compare the percentage of farm operators by
economic class who report other income that exceeds the value of
farm products sold in 1954. In maps 1 to 5, corresponding to
Economic Classes I to V, the distribution changes markedly from
class to class.

The highest percentages of Classes I, II, and III farms with
other income exceeding value of farm sales is found in the South.
Here, there are concentrations of 40 percent and more of the
operators in these classes who report other income exceeding the

value of farm sales. The higher incidence of other income in the
South is influenced by the tenure system. Sharecropping is
prevalent in the South and proceeds to a landlord from the sale
of his share of the crops or livestock on other farms may be
greater than sales of products from the farm he operates himself.
It will be noted, however, that the highest concentration of
Classes I, II, and III reporting other income exceeding sales
are in areas where cropper farms are less numerous. Conversely,
very few of these farms report other income exceeding that from
farm sales in areas, such as the Mississippi Delta, where share-
croppers are most numerous. Outside of the South, only a few
scattered areas report more than 5 percent of Class I farms as
having operators who have other income exceeding the value of
farm sales. Significantly these areas are usually close to metro-
politan centers, and a few are in regions where other resources,
such as coal and oil, are prevalent. There are areas of concen-
tration, for example, along the East and West coasts and around
the Great Lakes. Other areas of concentration — around south-
central Illinois, eastern Oklahoma, and Texas — suggest income
derived from oil.

As one goes down the scale from Class I to Class IV farms, the
percentage of farm operators with other income exceeding the
value of farm sales generally increases. The areas of concentra-
tion first spread across the southern part of the United States
and along both coasts. Finally, with Class V farms, the largest
percentage concentrations are found in the West and the North-
east, whereas a relatively low percentage is found in the Great
Plains, the West North Central Division, and the South. This
pattern for Class V farms illustrates the chief areas of close inte-
gration of farm and urban economies in the Western parts of
the country and throughout the industrial Northeast.

Table 5. — Number of Farms by Geographic Division and by Economic Class: 1954

Geographic division

All farms

Commercial
farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

United States

4. 783, 021

3, 327, 617

134, 003

448,945

706,929

811,965

763, 348

462, 427

574, 575

878, 136

2,693

81,816
257, 199
799. 065
905, 195

858. 675

rs'.i. r,i',7
668,954

179. 871
242, 579

50,371
176. 754
619, 665
781, 093

508, 837
490.881
405, 617

136. 439
157. 960

3.872
8,348
20. 176
26,228

10. 898
4,157
20.058

13.229
27, 037

10, 627
34,235
110.613
143. 168

30, 076
13,892
43, 770

28,292
34. 272

12,911
48, 194
169, 456
236, 214

70. 469
38. 167
64,523

34,166
32,839

10. 983
42, 043
158, 182
200, 112

142, 617
105, 956
93,290

29. 536
29,216

8,081
30. 070
113,685
119,870

152,093
181.883
110,014

21,654
26. 098

3,897
13,864
47,653
55,501

102, 654
146,826
73, 962

9,572
8,498

10, 181
33, 139
86, 262
57.324

117. 135
115,882
103, 573

18.007
33, 072

21,090
47, 030
92.685
66,382

232, 296
182, 700
159, 603

25. 063
61,287

174

Middle Atlantic

276

453

West North Central

396

South^Atlantlc

407

20

West South Central

16

362

Pacific

26

Table 6. — Percent of Farms by Geographic Division and by Economic Class: 1954

[Geographic division as percent of United States]

Geographic division

All farms

Commercial
farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnorma

United States

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

100.0

1.7
5.4
16.7
18.9

18.0
16.6
14.0

3.8
6.1

1.5

5.3

18.6

23.5

16.3

14.8
12.2

4 1

4.7

2.9
6.2
15.0
19.6

8.1
3.1
16.0

9.9
20.1

2.4

7.6

24.6

31.9

6.7
3.1
9.7

6.3
7.6

1.8

6.8

24.0

33.4

10.0
6.3
9.1

4.8

4.6

1.3

5.1

19.4

24.6

17.6
13.1
11.4

3.6
3 6

1.0
3.9
14.9
15.7

19.9
23.8
14.4

2.8
3.4

.8
2.9
10.3
12.0

22.1
31.8
16.0

2.0
1.8

1.8
5.8
15.0
10.0

20.3
20.1
18.0

3.1

5.8

2.4
5.3
10.6
7.6

26.4
20.8
18.1

2.9

5.8

6.4

Middle Atlantic

10.2

16.8

West North Central

14.7

16.1

East South Central _.

7.6

West South Central

6.9

13.4

9.

12

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

PERCENT OF FARM OPERATORS OF CLASS I FARMS REPORTING OTHER INCOME OF FARMER

EXCEEDING VALUE OF FARM PRODUCTS SOLD. 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

LEGEND

PERCENT
CD UNOER 5 ES 20 TO 29

ESI 5 TO 9 SSJS 30 TO 39

10 TO 19 | 40 AND OVER

J S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NO AS4 -352

BUREAU Of THE CENSUS

Figure 1.

PERCENT OF FARM OPERATORS OF CLASS II FARMS REPORTING OTHER INCOME OF FARMER

EXCEEDING VALUE OF FARM PRODUCTS SOLD, 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

JS DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NO A54-353

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 2.

PART-TIME FARMING

13

Figure 3.

PERCENT OF FARM OPERATORS OF CLASS IV FARMS REPORTING OTHER INCOME OF FARMER

EXCEEDING VALUE OF FARM PRODUCTS SOLD, 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

US OCPAflTMEKT OF

WAP NO AB4-30A

8Uflf.AU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 4.

423025—57

14

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

PERCENT OF FARM OPERATORS OF CLASS V FARMS REPORTING OTHER INCOME OF FARMER

EXCEEDING VALUE OF FARM PRODUCTS SOLD, 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

LEGEND

PERCENT
I I UNDER 5 ESSa 20 TO J9

r~~l 5 TO 9 g£gj 30 TO 39

] I 10 TO 19 m| 40 AND OVER

US DEPARTMENT Of COMMERCE

MAP NO AS4-J56

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 5.

PERCENT OF FARM OPERATORS OF PART-TIME FARMS REPORTING OTHER INCOME OF FARMER
EXCEEDING VALUE OF FARM PRODUCTS SOLD, 1954
(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

. U S DEPARTMENT OP COMMERCE

MAP NO A54-3ST

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 6.

PART-TIME FARMING

15

**_ PERCENT OF FARM

OPERATORS

OF RESIDENTIAL FARMS

REPORTING OTHER

INCOME OF

FARMER

w'^SB^*^

EXCEEDING VALUE OF

rARM PRODUCTS SOLD, 1954

JRMSph

ir

1

(ECONOMIC AREA U

MIT BAS
Hi

IS)

P*-

5

1 i

US "r

]

SSL

It w§3

LEGEND
PERCENT

CU UNDER 40 MM 60 TO 69
OUT] 40 TO 49 SSS 70 TO 79
M%A 50 TO 59 ■■ 60 AND OVER

JNITED STATES AVERAGE

^^

67 2 PERCENT

^*g

JS OCPARTMEMT OF COMMERCE

MAP NO A54-356

-

BUREAU OF TmE

CENSUS

Figure 7-

Maps 6 and 7, of part-time and residential farms, Classes
VII and VIII, show that the Class VII, or part-time farms, usually
do have more income from off-farm sources than from farming;
the pattern for residential farms is much more scattered. A
careful study of map 7 reveals, however, that the residential
farms in the metropolitan counties are generally receiving more
income from nonfarm sources than from farm sales, whereas the
nonmetropolitan counties have larger percentages that fail to
get a larger income from nonfarm sources than from farm sales.
Generally, in metropolitan counties more than 60 percent of the
residential farm operators report other income exceeding the
value of farm products sold in 1954.

Percentage of farm operators working off their farms in 1954. —
Maps 8 and 9 illustrate that the percentage of farm operators
working off their farms and the amount of off-farm work are
relatively low in the Great Plains and in the West North Central
Division, and in most areas where a high percentage of land is
under cultivation, as in the nonmetropolitan counties along the
Mississippi River and in the coastal plains of the Southeast.
On the other hand, relatively high percentages work off farm in
the more industrialized or urbanized counties, and in the cutover
areas of the Great Lakes, the Appalachian Highlands, and the
Rocky Mountains. These maps show that off-farm work is
closely related to industrial and other opportunities.

Percentage of farm operators working off their farms, by
economic class, 1954. — The pattern over the United States shows
that the highest percentages working off farm 100 days or more

in each class is found under somewhat predictable circumstances.
The conducive conditions are found most commonly in areas of
metropolitan or urban-industrial development; in sharecropper
farming areas as among Classes I, II, and III in the South; in
cutover areas as in some of the Lake States in the case of Class V
farms; and in areas where other resources are available, as oil
developments in Texas and Oklahoma. In each area where a
high percentage of farm operators work off the farm, this fact is
associated with some specific type of urban or industrial resource
or other source of employment that is readily available (figs. 10 to
16). The percentage of farm operators working off farm 100
days or more increases consistently from Class I through Class V.

Perhaps one of the most striking characteristics by economic
classes is that off-farm employment of farm operators in Classes
I to III is spread rather generally over the United States, with
some concentration in the South. Among Class IV farms a new
concentration is developing in the Northeast and the Pacific
Region, indicating that many of these low-income farm operators
have substantial off-farm sources of income. Among Class V
farms this concentration in the Northeast and the West becomes
more pronounced.

In the case of part-time or Class VII farms, again the Great
Plains and the South are the two regions with the lowest percent-
ages working off farm 100 days or more. This indicates a rela-
tively poorer economic status for Class VII farms in these regions.
This tendency is further emphasized in the case of residential
or Class VIII farms.

16

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

PERCENT OF ALL FARM OPERATORS WORKING OFF THEIR FARMS IN 1954

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS)

LEGEND

V./. v :*% ..«•:

PERCENT

%Kj v. .;' 1. ~

1 1 UNDER 15

BaSS 45 TO 59

fr^

E223 15 TO 29

KU 60 AND OVER

t£M 30 TO 44

NO FARMS

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

MAP NO 454 -060

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 8.

PERCENT OF ALL FARM OPERATORS WORKING 100 OR MORE DAYS OFF THEIR FARMS, 1954

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS)

LEGEND

PERCENT

1 1 UNDER 10

HS 30

TO 39

IBiSfl 10 TO 19

IS 40

ANO OVER

WM 20 TO 29

• NO FARMS

U & OCPARTMENT Of CO**IERC£

MAP NO A34-022

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 9.

PART-TIME FARMING

17

PERCENT OF OPERATORS OF CLASS I FARMS WORKING OFF FARM
IOO DAYS OR MORE, 1954
(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

U S DEPARTMENT Of COMMERCE

MAP NO A54-34Z

t-«-t ■'■ v" 11* i I >< .W

Figure 10.

PERCENT OF OPERATORS OF CLASS II FARMS WORKING OFF FARM

100 DAYS OR MORE, 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

LEGEND

PERCENT

I I UNDER 5 tr:: -3 20 TO 29

E13 5 TO 9 ESS 30 TO 39

10 TO 19 ■■ 40 AND OVER

US DEPARTMENT Of COMMERCE

MAP NO A54S43

BUREAU Of THE CENSUS

Figure 11.

18

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

PERCENT OF OPERATORS OF CLASS III FARMS WORKING OFF FARM

100 DAYS OR MORE, 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

LEGEND

PERCENT
CD UNDER 5 E&33 20 TO S9

EH3 5 TO 9 Kfigg 30 TO 39

10 TO 19 ^H 40 AND OVER

U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

AP NO A!* 544

BUREAU Of THE CENSUS

Figure 12.

PERCENT OF OPERATORS OF CLASS IV FARMS WORKING OFF FARM
100 DAYS OR MORE, 1954
(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

J S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

P NO AM-MS

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 13.

PART-TIME FARMING

19

PERCENT OF OPERATORS OF CLASS V FARMS WORKING OFF FARM

100 DAYS OR MORE, 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

US DEPORTMENT Qf COMMERCE

> NO AS4J46

BUREAU C* THE CENSUS

Figure 14.

PERCENT OF OPERATORS OF PART-TIME FARMS WORKING OFF FARM

100 DAYS OR MORE, 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

LEGEND
PERCENT

I I UNDER 40 MM 60 TO 69

EuiH 40 TO 49 SSS 70 TO 79

i""~ 50 TO 59 ■■ 60 AND OVER

'; CEF&KTMEN' OF COMMCjjCj

MAP NO A54-347

BUREAU Of THt CENSUS

Figure 15.

20

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

PERCENT OF OPERATORS OF RESIDENTIAL FARMS WORKING OFF FARM
100 DAYS OR MORE, 1954
(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

LEGEND

PERCENT

CD

UNDER 40 E5S3

60 TO 69

EM!

40 TO 49 S3S8

70 TO 79

W//A

50 TO 59 Mi

80 AND OVER

U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

MAP MO AM- MS

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 16.

Comparative distribution of Classes V, VI, VII, and VIII farm
operators, 1954. — Maps 17 to 20 give the location of Classes V to
VIII farm operators and provide a basis for the following general-
izations: (1) In case, of Class V farms the number of operators
working off farm less than 100 days is mostly concentrated in the
South. The number of operators working off farm 100 days or
more is more generally concentrated primarily over the eastern
half of the United States. (2) There is a heavy concentration of
Class VI farms in the South. (3) Part-time (Class VII) farms
are more generally distributed over the eastern half of the United
States than are the Class VI farms. (4) Residential (Class VIII)
farms exhibit heavy concentrations in eastern Kentucky and in the
Appalachian area of the Carolinas, Tennessee, and Georgia.

In summary, the heaviest concentrations of part-time farming
are found in the eastern half of the United States. They are in
the largely metropolitan counties and in specified areas, such as
the Appalachian coal and industrial areas and in the more heavily
populated or industrialized areas throughout the eastern half of
the United States.7 These concentrations make a different
geographic pattern than that of low-income commercial (Class VI)
farms. The low-income commercial farms are concentrated more
largely in nonmetropolitan counties around the Mississippi River
in Mississippi, Alabama, and Tennessee, and in the coastal plains
of the Southeastern States.8 A larger percentage of total farms
are classed as part-time and residential farms in metropolitan
counties than in the nonmetropolitan counties.

Inferences about off-farm income and employment. — Several

inferences are suggested by these data. Among them are the
following:

(1) The relatively low-income farm operators in Class IV
and Class V, generally classed as commercial farm operators,
actually differ substantially in economic status when broad areas
of the country are compared. Throughout the South, in the
Great Plains, and in scattered other areas, a large proportion
are actually low-income families that have virtually a subsist-
ence status and have only minor sources of off-farm income.
On the other h;md, in the Northeast, in the nine or ten most
westerly States of the country, and in parts of Texas, Okla-
homa, and Florida, the so-called low-income commercial farm
operators have more readily available sources of off-farm work
and they have substantially larger incomes.

(2) A smaller percentage of Classes I to III farm operators
work off farm than is the case of Classes IV and V operators.
Apparently off-farm employment — although as readily avail-
able— has a higher opportunity cost for them and does not
attract as many operators.

(S) Among the Classes VII and VIII farms, the evidence
suggests that off-farm income is more substantial outside the
South and outside the Great Plains.

(4) Throughout the economic classes the importance of urban-
industrial development in providing off-farm income and em-
ployment is evident. This probably indicates that urban-
industrial development is an influential factor in providing
extra income in areas of low farm income.

7 Cf. Otis Dudley Duncan, "Note on Farm Tenancy and Urbanization," Journal of Farm Economics, November 1956.

• Cf. Vernon W. Ruttan, "The Impact of Urban Industrial Development on Agriculture in the Tennessee Valley and the Southeast," Journal of Farm Economics, Vol. XXXVII,
No. 1, February 1955, pp. 38-56. The data for the 19S0 Census of Population indicated that, "in both the Tennessee Valley region, the Southeast, and the Nation as a whole, the
(median) income level achieved rural-farm families (from farm and nonfarm sources) does bear a direct and positive relationship to the relative level of urban-industrial development in the sa me
general area." Pp. 40, 42.

PART-TIME FARMING

21

OPERATORS OF CLASS Y FARMS WORKING OFF FARMS, LESS THAN 100 DAYS: 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

UNITED STATES TOTAL
I48.ISI

J 5 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

= NO A5A-J66

• BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 17.

OPERATORS OF CLASS Y FARMS WORKING OFF FARMS 100 DAYS OR MORE: 1954

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS)

UNITED STATES TOTAL
186,572

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

MAP NO AS4-367

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

423025—57 5

Figure 18.

22

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

U&

PART-TIME FARMS

JGROSS SALES $250 TO $I.I99-FARM PRODUCTS MINOR SOURCE OF INCOME*)

NUMBER, 1954

UNITED STATES TOTAL
574, 575

^OPERATOR WORKING OFF FARM 100 OR MORE DAYS

AND/OR FAMILY INCOME FROM OTHER SOURCES GREATER
THAN SALES OF FARM PRODUCTS

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

IDOT= 100 FARMS

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS)

MAP NO A54-04I

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

uv

UNITED STATES TOTAL
878, 136

U. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Figure 19.

RESIDENTIAL FARMS

(GROSS SALES LESS THAN $250)
NUMBER, 1954

I DOT=IOO FARMS

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS)

MAP NO A54-039

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS

Figure 20.

PART-TIME FARMING
C. INCREASES AND DECREASES IN NUMBER

23

Farm operators working off farm, 1930, 1940, 1945, 1950,
1954.— Data tabulated for the Census dates of 1930, 1940, 1945,
1950, and 1954, presented in Figure 21, show that the number of
farm operators working off farm in the United States declined
from 1930 to 1945, increased sharply from 1945 to 1950, and in-
creased again from 1950 to 1954. As shown in Figure 21, the total
number working off farm was about 1,900,000 in 1930, a little
more than 1,500,000 in 1945, and almost 2,200,000 in 1954. The
largest percentage increases in number working off farm between
1945 and 1954 occurred in the broad belt of States that runs
from the Northern Plains and Lake States through to the Southeast
Region. Relatively little increase occurred in the Pacific Region
or in the Northeast.

In the Northeast, the total number working off farm remained
remarkably steady from 1930 through 1954. The aggregate
number of farms in the region continued to decline, of course, and
therefore the percentage of farm operators working off farms
continued to increase. Evidently, increased mechanization and
improved highways and transportation facilities made it possible
for more farmers to enter the nonfarm labor market; this com-
pensated for those who were discontinuing farming or migrating
out of agriculture.

The general additional inference is that in other regions the
number of farm operators working off farm will reach a maximum
level as the farm economies reach a certain level of development.
When this level will be reached in the several regions is of course
a matter of conjecture. It depends on the economies made in

the use of labor, on the pace of mechanization, and on the relative
terms of trade between farm and nonfarm employment.

Farm operators working off farm 100 days or more, 1930, 1940,
1945, 1950, 1954. — Striking evidence of the impact of technology —
farm and nonfarm — on the off-farm labor market is found in the
Census figures. The number of farm operators who worked off
farm 100 days or more has increased steadily. There were about
700,000 in 1930, a little more than 1,000,000 in 1945, and 1,334,000
in 1954. Not only has mechanization and related development
paved the way for a pronounced migration out of agriculture, but
in the short space of 25 years there has been almost a doubling
of the number of farm operators who work off farm 100 days or
more. In parts of the United States, past trends have been so
strong as to suggest that this development has considerable
distance yet to go. This is true particularly in the Lake States,
in the Corn Belt, in the Appalachian Region, and the Southeast.

Increases in off-farm work have been general in each of the
major regions with the notable exception of the Northeast. The
trend has been only slight in the Mountain Region. In the
Northeast the number of farm operators working off farm 100
days or more actually declined from 1945 to 1954. Table 7,
however, shows that between 1949 and 1954 the number of com-
mercial farm operators so working increased substantially and the
net decline in numbers between these two dates was due entirely
to the decline in the number of part-time (Class VII) and
residential (Class VIII) farms. This suggests decided differences
in trends among economic classes.

NUMBER OF FARM OPERATORS WORKING OFF THEIR FARMS, BY NUMBER OF DAYS WORKED,
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1930-1954

NUMBER OF DAYS
"1 1 TO 49
50 TO 99

UREAU OF TH£ CENSUS

Figure 21.

24

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Changes in number of farm operators working off farm 100
days or more, by geographic division, by economic class, 1949
to 1954. — Between 1949 and 1954, farm operators working off
farm 100 days or more increased from 1,254,610 to 1,333,725, or
about 6.3 percent (Table 7). Increases occurred in each geo-
graphic division except in the Middle Atlantic and New England
divisions.

The pattern differed sharply, however, by economic class of
farm. Increases occurred in each region among the commercial
farm classes as a group, accompanied by net declines in most
regions for part-time (Class VII) and the residential (Class VIII)
farms. Substantial increases occurred among Class I farms in

all divisions except the Mountain Division. Among Classes II.
Ill, and IV, increases occurred in all regions. The changes for
Class V farms were more mixed, with substantial increases in
number in the East North Central, West North Central, South
Atlantic, and East South Central divisions. Also the pattern for
part-time farms (Class VII) and residential farms (Class VIII)
was mixed. Substantial declines occurred among part-time farms
in the New England, Middle Atlantic, East North Central, and
Pacific divisions. In contrast, substantial increases took place
in the South Atlantic, East South Central, and West South
Central divisions. For residential farms large decreases occurred
in the New England, Middle Atlantic, East North Central, South
Atlantic, and East South Central divisions.

Table 7- — Number of Farm Operators Working off Farm 100 Days or More, by Geographic Division, by Economic Class:

1954 and 1949

Geographic division and year

All farms

Commercial
farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

United States

1954-
1949-

1, 333, 725
1, 254, 610

433, 746
336, 796

10, 478
8,365

33, 183
24, 120

72, 263
50,742

131. 250
97. 163

186, 572
150, 406

408. 690
395, 029

490. 979
521, 962

310
823

New England

1954-
1949-

33. 252
38,811

10, 719
9,672

383
272

1,374
1,011

2.377
1,817

3,080
2,940

3,505
3,632

7,860
10. 301

14, 654
18, 822

19
16

Middle Atlantic

1954..
1949..

93, 134

98, 857

35. 461

28. 829

737
557

3,197
2,153

6, 655
5,192

11,488
8,941

13. 384
11,986

26, 534
30. 990

31,115
38.950

24

83

East North Central

1954..
1949..

235. 187
220, 394

105. 393
74, 160

1,208
800

6,337
3,473

18, 042
10, 531

36, 095
23, 620

43,711
35, 736

69, 990
75. 151

59. 762
70, 991

42
92

West North Central...

1954..
1949..

139, 958
125, 48R

64,011
49, 407

1,276
1,204

5,118
3,884

11,951
8,623

20, 771

14, 607

24, 895
21. 089

40, 975

41, 059

34, 919
34. 885

53
135

South Atlantic -.

1954..
1949..

270. 656
252, 276

62, 402

45,988

1, 722
ll 121

4,581
3,134

8,816
5,428

17. 299
12,645

29, 984
23.660

79, 805
71. 713

128, 418
134, 447

31
128

East South Central

1954-
1949..

204, 175
192. 643

44, 181
31, 809

554
384

1,818
1,413

4,319
3,080

11, 224
7,649

2fi, 266
19,283

73, 898
67. 575

86, 065
93, 179

31
80

West South Central

1954..
1949-

209, 647
184, 233

55. 448
47,689

1,717
1,647

5. 031
4,360

9,031
7,446

15, 062
12. 474

24,607
21, 762

70, 8S7
57, 130

83, 295
79, 343

17

71

Mountain

1954..
1949-

50, 472
46, 394

20, 851
17, 668

826
885

1.670
1,656

3,868
3,125

6,404
5,306

8.083
6,696

13, 738
13. 795

15, 843
14, S50

40

81

1954-
1949..

97, 244
95, 516

35.280
31.574

2,055
1,495

4,057
3,036

7.204
5,500

9,827
8,981

12, 137
12. 562

25, 003
27,315

36, 908
36, 495

53
132

When the data are arranged to show percentage of farm opera-
tors working off farm 100 days or more, by geographic division,
by economic class, as in Table 8, the relatively greater increase
in the percentage of commercial farmers (Classes I to V) working
off farm is clearly evident. For the United States the percentage
of commercial farm operators working off farm 100 days or more
rose from 9.1 percent to 13.0 percent. This was an increase from
1949 to 1954 (Table 9) of 28.8 percent in total number.

By economic class, the percentage of Class I farmers working
off farm 100 days or more did not increase although there was an
increase of 25.3 percent in total number. At the other end of
the scale, neither the percentage of part-time and residential farm
operators (Table 8), nor the number working off farm 100
days or more, increased substantially between 1949 and 1954
(Table 9).

Changes in number of farm operators working off farm 100 days
or more by economic class are closely related to the stage of

agricultural and industrial development of the division involved.

Although the data given here are not conclusive, the following

inferences are suggested relative to farm operators who work off

farm 100 days or more.

(1) Among Class I operators the numbers increased sub-
stantially in two different situations, (a) among the more
industrially advanced divisions — New England, Middle Atlantic,
East North Central, and Pacific divisions and (b) among the less
developed divisions, namely the South Atlantic and the East
South Central divisions. Increases were smaller in the West
North Central and West South Central divisions. In the
Mountain division the numbers decreased slightly.

{2) In general, the increases among Classes II, III, and IV
operators were relatively consistent among divisions with those
of Class I, except that no division had a net decrease. The
largest percentage increases among Class II farms occurred in
the New England, Middle Atlantic, East North Central, South
Atlantic, and Pacific divisions.

PART-TIME FARMING

25

Table 8. — Percent of Farm Operators Working off Farm ICO Days or More, by Geographic Division, by Economic Class:

1954 and 1949

Geographic division and year

United States 1954..

1949..

New England _ 19M..

1949..

Middle Atlantic 19M._

1949..

East North Central 19.14..

1949

West North Central ....1954..

1949..

South Atlantic.. ...1954..

1949..

East South Central... 1954..

1949-

West South Central 1954..

1949..

Mountain .1954—

1949-

Paciflc 1954-

1949..

AH farms

27.9
23.3

40.6
37.6

36.2
33.4

29.4
25.8

15.5
12.8

31 5
26.3

25.9
21. 1

31 3

23.6

28.1
23.8

40.1
35.8

Commercial
farms

13.0
9.1

21.3
15.3

20 1
13.7

17.0
9.7

8.2
5.2

12.3
9.6

9 0
7.5

13 7

9 7

15 3
10.2

22 3
18.1

Class I

7.8
8.1

6.0
6.4

4.9
5.7

15.8
14.8

13.3
11.9

S. 6
9.5

6.2
7.4

Class II

7.4
6.3

12 9
9.2

9.3
7.1

5.7
4.2

3 6
3 2

15.2
14.9

13.1
12.2

11.5
9.5

5.9
6.0

Class III

10 2
7.0

18.4
12.4

13.8
9.9

10.6
5.9

5.1
3 4

12.5
10.9

11.3
10.4

14 0
10.4

11 3
8.3

21.9
14.9

Class IV

16 2
11.0

28.0
21.4

27.3
18.1

22.8
12.3

10.4
6.3

12.1
9.3

10 0
9.3

16 1
11.8

21.7
15.1

33.6
24.4

Class V

24 4
17.4

43.4

34.4

44 5
32.9

38.5
26.1

20.8
14.3

19.7
12.7

14.4
10.6

22 4
15.4

37.3
26 3

46. 6

36.6

Part-time

71.1
61.8

77.2
72.1

80.1
75. 1

81.1
75.5

71 5
64.5

lis 1
57.1

63 8
51.3

54.4

76.3
70.2

75.6
71.1

Residential

55. 9
50.7

69.5
63.8

66.2
64.7

64 5
62 4

52.6
49.2

55.3
49.6

47.1
40.1

52.2
46.3

63 2
59.4

72.0
66.6

11.5
19.5

10.9
6.5

9.3

15.3

13.4
20.7

7.6
22.5

15.2
22.9

10.6
19.3

11.0
15.9

20.4
28.1

Table 9. — Number of Farm Operators Working off Farm 100 Days or More, by Geographic Division, by Economic Class:

1954 as Percent of 1949

Geographic division

AH farms

Commercial
farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

106.3

128.8

125.3

137.6

142.4

135.1

119.3

103.4

94.1

37.7

85 7
94.2
106.7
111.5

107.3
106.0
113.8

108.8
101.8

110.8
123.0
142.1
129.6

135.7
138.9
116.3

118.0
111.7

140.8
132.3
151.0
106.0

153.6

144.3

• 104.2

93.3
137.4

135.9
148.5
182. 5
131.8

146.2

128.7
115.4

100.8
133.6

130.8
128.2
171.3
138.6

162.4
140.2
121.3

123.8
131.0

104.8
128.5
152.8
142.2

136.8
146.7
120.7

120.7
109.4

90 5
111.7
122.3
118.0

126.7
136.2
113.1

120.7
96.6

76.3
85.6
93.1
99.8

111.3

109.4
124.1

99.6
91.5

77.8
79.9
84.2
100.1

95.5
92.4
105.0

106.7
101.1

118.8
27.3
45.6
39.2

24.2
38.8
23.9

49.4
40.2

East North Central

South Atlantic

West South Central

Changes by geographic division: Number of farm operators
reporting other income of family exceeding value of farm products
sold, 1949 to 1954. — The number of farm operators in the United
States reporting other income of the family exceeding the value
of farm products sold has declined in recent years in every major
geographic division (Tables 10 and 11). Numbers decreased from
1,566,000 in 1949 to 1,424,000 in 1954, or 9.1 percent. The
relatively largest declines occurred in the eastern part of the United
States in the New England and in the Middle Atlantic and the
East South Central divisions. The relative declines were, respec-
tively, 26.0 percent, 15.2 percent, and 17.5 percent (Table 11).
The South Atlantic Division had a decline of 8.3 percent. The
Pacific Division's decline was 7.3 percent. The Midwest and
Western divisions had relatively small declines ranging from 5.7
percent in the East North Central to 3.1 percent in the West
South Central.

These declines were generally greatest in areas of rapid popula-
tion growth and in places where industrialization is also rapid.
This suggests that part-time farming is often a transitional stage;
the part-time farmers discontinue farming as industrial or other
nonfarm work becomes available.

Changes by economic class of farm: Number of farm operators
reporting other income of family exceeding value of farm products
sold, 1949 to 1954. — An important change by economic class of
farm took place, between 1949 and 1954. There was a consider-
able increase in number of Classes I, II, III, and IV farm operators
who had other income in the family that exceeded the value of
farm products sold and this was accompanied by little change in
the number of Class V farm operators in this category, and by
substantial declines in the number of part-time and residential
farmers who had other income exceeding the value of farm sales
(Tables 10 and 11).

In other words, between 1949 and 1954, there was (/) a move-
ment of the farm operators, who had other income exceeding the
value of farm sales, from a lower economic class to a higher class,
which would be accomplished by expanding farm operations and
increasing the value of farm sales, and/or (2) an increase in the
off-farm earnings of a number of farmers within the higher eco-
nomic classes.

The inferences to be drawn from these two possibilities are
quite different in respect to the economic status of agriculture
and the welfare of farm people. They merit careful appraisal.

26

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Table 10. — Total Number of Farm Operators Reporting Other Income of Family Exceeding Value of Farm Products Sold,

by Economic Class of Farm, by Geographic Division: 1954 and 1949

Geographic division and year

All farms

Commercial
farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

United States

1954..
1949. .

1, 424, 233
1, 566, 154

359, 356
335, 547

6,194
4,773

19, 799
15, 855

45, 578
38, 377

102, 295
90, 249

185, 490

186, 293

474, 145
550, 872

590, 397
678, 736

335

999

New England

1954..
1949..

31,820
42,794

8,703
9,060

243
158

785
672

1,355
1,553

2,460
2,616

3,860
4,061

8,321
12, 251

14, 780
21, 457

16
26

Middle Atlantic

1954..
1949..

87,983
103, 802

28,618
26, 577

381
335

1,776
1,474

4,075
4,250

8,837
7,792

13,449
12, 726

27, 316
35,338

32, 137
41, 790

12

97

East North Central

1954..
1949..

213, 258
226, 254

80, 048
65, 034

635
413

2,908
1,895

9,553
6,674

26,042
19, 698

41, 010
36, 354

71, 336

84, 507

61,842
76, 567

32
196

West North Central

1954..
1949..

138, 827
143, 253

48, 007
44,302

660

581

2,359
2,267

5,585
5,802

14,541
12, 485

24, 862
23, 167

47, 662
53, 845

43, 090
44, 970

68
136

1954..
1949..

307, 889
335, 638

58, 780
53,722

1,286
715

3,764
2,439

7,665
5,271

15, 409
13, 905

30, 656

31, 392

95, 503
107, 467

153, 552
174,294

54
165

East South Central

1954..
1949..

243, 806
295, 433

38,463
41, 174

410
260

1,183
1,114

3,025
2,736

8,592
8,533

25, 253
28,531

91, 787
113, 608

113, 622
140, 552

34
99

West South Central

1954..
1949. .

250, 793
258, 946

48,868
49, 049

1,130
929

3,337
2,620

6,502
5,298

12, 600
12, 299

26, 299
27, 903

88, 002
91, 548

113,899
118,238

24
111

....1954-,

48, 583
50,836

16, 154
15, 257

418
499

955
1,128

2,368
2,131

4,595
4,210

7,818
7,289

15, 114

17, 344

17,282
18,128

33

1949. .

107

1954..
1949..

101, 274
109, 198

31,815
31,372

1,131
883

2,732
2,246

5,450
4,662

9,219
8,711

13,283
14, 870

29, 104
34,964

40,293
42,740

62
122

Table 11. — Number of Farm Operators Reporting Other Income of Family Exceeding Value of Farm Products Sold, by

Geographic Division, by Economic Class: 1954 as Percent of 1949

Geographic division

All farms

Commercial
farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

90.9

74.0
84.8
94.3
96.9

91.7
82.5
96.9

95.6
92.7

107.1

96.0
107.3
123.1
108.4

109.4
93.4
99.6

105.9
101.4

129.8

153.8
113.7
129.6
113.6

179.9
157.7
121.6

83.8
128.1

124.9

116.8
120.5
153.6
104.1

154.3
106.2
127.4

84.7
121.6

118.8

87.3
95.9
143.1
96.3

145.4
110.6
122.7

111.1
116.9

113.3

94.0
113.4
132.2
116.5

110.8
100.7
102.4

109.1
105.8

99.6

96.1
105.7
112.8
107.3

97.7
88.5
90.7

107.3
89.3

86.1

67.9
77.3
84.4
88.5

88.9
80.8
96.1

87.1
83.2

87.0

68.9
76.9
80.8
95.8

88.1
80.8
96.3

95.3
94.3

33.5

61.5

Middle Atlantic - -

12.4

16.3

50.0

34.8

34.3

21.6

30.8

50.8

In respect to Class I and Class II farm operators, the percentages
of the total number that had other income exceeding the value of
farm sales were almost the same in 1954 as in 1949 although there
had been substantial increases in the numbers of farmers in these
classes (Table 12). In other words, the increase in the number of
these operators who had other income of the family exceeding the
value of farm sales was almost directly proportional to the increase
in total number. At the same time relatively small increases in the
number of Class III and Class IV farm operators with other
income exceeding the value of farm sales is contrasted with the
larger percentages these operators comprise of farms in each class.
In the case of Class V farms, the total number of such farmers
remained about the same and the percentage increased decidedly.

The logical explanation of these changes seems to be that there
was a general movement up the economic class scale as farm
operators increased their size of business and at the same time
there was a general shift toward more off-farm employment and
income among all of the Classes from I to V. The sharp declines
in the number of part-time (Class VII) and in residential (Class
VIII) farm operators suggest that a few of these operators moved
into higher economic classes by increases in size of farm operations,

while in general their off-farm earnings remained large enough to
be in excess of the value of farm sales. The decline in the per-
centage of part-time operators who had other income of the
family exceeding the value of farm products sold suggests that the
more aggressive in this group (those with the largest off-farm
income) were moving out of this class faster or in greater relative
numbers than those whose off-farm income did not exceed the
value of farm products sold.

Changes by geographic divisions: Part-time and residential
farm operators, 1949 to 1954. — A sharp downward shift has
occurred in recent years in the number of part-time and residential
farm operators in the New England and Middle Atlantic divisions
(Tables 10 and 11). These are the two divisions of the United
States where industrial employment is most easily or readily
available to farmers. The number of part-time (Class VII) farm
operators dropped by almost one-third (32.1 percent) in New
England and by almost one-fourth (22.7 percent) in the Middle
Atlantic Division. The number of residential (Class VIII)
farmers also dropped by almost one-third (31.1 percent) in New
England and by almost one-fourth (23.1 percent) in the Middle
Atlantic States.

PART-TIME FARMING

27

Table 12. — Percent of Farm Operators Reporting Other Income of Family Exceeding Value of Farm Products Sold, by

Geographic Division, by Economic Class: 1954 aND 1949

Geographic division and year

All farms

Commercial
farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

United States

1964..
1949- .

31.9
29.1

10.8
7.6

4.6
1.6

4.4
4.2

6.4
5.3

12.6
10.2

24.3
20.7

82.6
86.2

67.2
65.9

12.4
23.7

1954..
1949..

38.9
41.5

17.3
14.0

6.3
4.5

7.4
6.1

10.5
10.6

22.4
19.1

47.8
38.4

81.7

85.7

70.1
72.8

9.2
10.6

Middle Atlantic

1954..
1949..

34.2
35.0

16.1

12.4

4.6
6.1

5 2
4.9

8.5
8.1

21.0
15.8

44.7
34.9

82.4
86.6

68.3
69.4

4.3
21.4

East North Central -

1954..
1949..

26.7
26.6

12 9

8.8

2.7
3.3

2.6
2.3

5.6
3.7

16.5

10.3

36.1
26.6

82.7
84.9

66.7
67.3

7.1
24.3

West North Central

1951..
1949. .

15 3
14.6

6.1
4.S

2.5
2.7

1.6

1.9

2 4
2.3

7.3
5.4

20.7
15.7

83.1
84.6

64.9
63.4

17.2
20.9

1949..

35.9
35.0

11.6

7.5

11.8

9.5

12.5
11.6

10.9
10.6

10.8
10.2

20.2
16.8

81.5
85.6

66. 1
64.3

13.3
27.3

East South Central

1954..
1949..

30.9
32.4

7.8
5.2

9.9
8.1

8.5
9.6

7.9
9.2

8.1
10.4

13.9
15.7

79.2
86.2

62. 1
60.4

16.7
28.3

West South Central

1954..
1949..

37.5
33.2

12 .0
7.9

5.6
5.3

7.6
5.7

10.1
7.4

13.5
11.6

23.0
19.7

85.0
87.2

71.4
68.9

14.9
30.2

...1954..
1949-.

27.0
26.1

11.8

9.4

3 2
4.2

3.4
4 1

6.9
5.7

16.6
12.0

36.1
28.6

83.9
88.3

69.0

72.5

9.1
20.9

1954..
1949..

41.7
41.0

20.1
16.7

4.2
4.6

8.0

7.2

16.6
12.6

31.6
23.7

50.9
43.4

88.0
91.0

78.6
78.0

23.8
26.0

The next largest relative declines among part-time and residen-
tial farms were in the East South Central, East North Centra!,
and Pacific divisions. The two latter divisions generally are
regarded as coming next after New England and the Middle
Atlantic States in regard to off-farm opportunities for farm people.
In contrast to these declines, there were relatively large increases in
numbers among the Classes I and II farm operators in some of
these divisions, although the increases were not all consistent with
the declines.

Enough evidence is available to suggest the hypothesis that in
areas where off-farm employment opportunities are most readily
available sharp declines will occur in the number of part-time and
residential farms, and farm operators in the higher economic classes
will take advantage of these opportunities to the extent of increas-
ing the percentage of farmers in these classes who have off-farm
income exceeding the value of farm products sold. This also sug-
gests that many part-time farmers engage in farming activities
primarily for the additional income rather than as a "way of life."
Those in the lower economic classes — such as from Class V through

Class VIII — discontinue farming when off-farm employment and
income reach a certain level.

Those in the higher income classes — especially those in Classes I
and II — take advantage of off-farm employment to a greater
extent when it becomes available. The evidence suggests that
these men continue to farm, and at least in some cases the off-farm
earnings of the family are used to help expand the earning capacity
of the farm. This inference derives from the fact that the number
of farm operators in the higher income classes with off-farm income
exceeding the value of farm products sold increased relatively
more in the more industrialized regions, which implies either of
two things: (1) Members of the farm-operator family in these
classes were seeking outside employment in greater numbers in
1954 than in 1949, and finding it most readily in the industrialized
areas, or (2) the earnings of the members of the farm-operator
family were being used in such a way as to move the classifica-
tion of a number of farms, on which off-farm income exceeded the
value of farm products sold, from a lower economic class into a
higher one.

28 FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

D. OPERATING CHARACTERISTICS AND FACILITIES BY CLASS OF FARM, 1949

AND 1954

Discussion in this section centers around several comparisons.
They include comparisons of farms by economic class and by
region. Phases considered are acreage and land use, machinery
and other operating facilities, farm expenditures for such items as
feed and tractor fuel, days work off farm, and specified home and
living facilities. These comparisons provide valuable information
on use of resources and on levels of living both by economic class
and by region. They also form the basis for additional inferences
as to trends in commercial and part-time farming.

Land Use and Farm Values

In general, the trends between 1949 and 1954, discussed in this
section, show that farms have been upgraded (moved upward
from one economic class to another), that values per farm and per
acre have increased, that size of farm has continued to increase,
and that the extent of cultivated or harvested acreage required to
establish a farm in a given economic class has declined. This
decline is attributed to the increase in yields that took place
between 1949 and 1954. Values per acre increased substantially
more for farms in Class I and Class II than for those in Classes III,
IV, V, and VI. Although this may reflect a growing advantage on
the part of Classes I and II farms in taking advantage of new capi-
tal and innovations, it indicates the increasing numbers in these
classes of such farms as fruit-and-nut and cash-grain. These
farms characteristically have high values per acre. Residential

farm values increased more per acre than did the values of the
lower commercial classes, thus reflecting the effects of suburban
expansion and population growth in the country as a whole.

Part-time and residential farms, as defined in the 1949 and 1954
Censuses, seem to be declining in relative importance in the total
agricultural picture. The number of part-time and residential
farms decreased sharply between 1950 and 1954. The evidence
suggests that many of the operators who moved out of these
classes have discontinued farming, others have reduced their
farming operations. At the same time, a large number of com-
mercial farmers are working off the farm 100 days or more.
Inferences that part-time and residential farms have moved into
higher economic classes do not appear to be well-grounded.

Average acreage per farm. — Acreage figures suggest two inter-
esting trends. (/) Farms in general have continued to grow
larger, according to acreage per unit, and (2) farms have moved
up from one economic class to a higher one. Between 1950 and
1954, the average of all land in farms increased from 215.6 acres
to 242.5 acres, an average increase of about 12.5 percent per farm
in that 4-year period. This trend was in the same direction in
each of the three regions given in Tables 13 and 14. The change
in the North was from an average of 194.6 acres per farm to 213.2
acres, or 9.6 percent; in the South, from 148.7 acres to 167.0 acres,
or 12.3 percent; and in the West, from 703.0 acres to 798.9 acres,
or 13.6 percent.

Table 13. — Average Land in Farms, Cropland Harvested per Farm, and Value of Farms (Land and Buildings) per Farm and-
per Acre, by Economic Class, for the United States and Regions: 1954 and 1950

All land in farms, average
per farm

Cropland harvested per
farm

Value of farms (land and buildings)

Region and economic class

Average

per farm

Average per acre

1954

1950

1954

1949

1954

1950

1954

1950

UNITED STATES

Acres

242.5

1,939.1

537.8

311.9

201.0

134.3

97.1

81.1

47.7

14, 502. 4

213.2

773.6

369. 5

263 9

200. 7

142.4

99.5

67. 6

42.5

857.2

167.0

2, 286. 3
691.7
311.2
162. 0
112.0

87.4

86.4

49.3

1, 325. 5

798.9

3, 333. 3
1,125.3

648. 7

429.1

289.9

256. 0

96.0

51.1

69, 353. 9

Acres
215.6
2,421.7
566.8
298.2
191.2
122.8
84.9
75.6
50.0
9, 178. 9

194.6

909.8

383.8

252.7

188.5

134.6

98.7

68.6

46.2

857.5

148.7

2, 910. 8

706.5

314.0

162.0

103.4

75.2

77.4

51.4

1, 694. 9

703.0

4, 096. 9

1,144.2

567.9

341.9

223.1

184.6

90.3

50.7

35, 623. 3

Acres

81.1

397.6

201.1

12,8.8

75.6

41.0

23.2

17.8

7.3

290.1

113.4

347.5
209.5
143.7
97.5
58.8
34.9
22.0
9.1
283.3

44.6

444.1

187.8

95.1

50.0

30.3

19.0

15.8

6.7

298.1

115.0

434.6

176.8

107.3

69.5

42.3

32.2

15.5

6.0

296.0

Acres

72.8

442.2

209.6

131.0

77.8

42.4

24.9

19.6

9.2

250.5

101.5

368.9

212.7

141.1

94.7

58.0

35.6

23.0

10.7

226.5

42.0

515. 6

207.2

105. 1

54.1

32.8

21.6

18.1

8.7

268.1

105.6
484.8
199.0
114.1
69.6
41.9
29.3
15.2
7.4
287.8

Dollars

19, 761

134, 169

51,510

27, 992

15,880

9,829

6,096

7,781

5,784

160,601

23, 647
92, 787
49, 356
27, 9S6
17,293
11,577
7,883
8,149
6,788
112, 139

11, 972

151,009

61,685

24, 544

12,398

7,631

4,960

6,587

4,618

119,885

41, 791
180, 705
61,239
35, 986
25, 175
19, 606
15, 339
13,888
11,243
365, 421

Dollars

13,911

110,008

41,318

22,918

13, 162

7,829

4,648

6.117

4,675

105, 795

17, 152
75, 352
39, 674
22,908
14, 177
9.331
6,390
6,812
5.780
77, 540

8,495
126, 448
41,713
20,435
10. 367
6,046
3,749
4,932
3,678
101,743

28,807

145, 191

47. 709

27,901

18,685

14. 630

11.520

10, 922

9. 346

175,648

Dollars
84.82
73.30
97.03
89.87
79.23
73.89
62.48
96.86
127. 34
30.22

107. 76
120.37
131.73
104.88
84.42
78.66
72.33
117.04
155. 53
161.70

74.97
66.73
74.62
80.60
78.93
70. 62
58.33
78.13
93.67
90.45

62.46
69.82
58. 47
57.69
62.25
71.49
61.63
151.76
262. 01
14.28

Dollars
66.75

45.65

74.85

Class III

77.68

68.90

63.57

54.79

80.90

96.36

25.91

THE NORTH

86.94

81.41

THE SOUTH

58.30

66.63

50.22
63.93

60.03

THE WEST

46. 51

43.85
50.99
56.28

64.60
123. 86
190. 49

11.55

PART-TIME FARMING

29

Table 14. — Average Land in Farms, Cropland Harvested
per Farm, and Value of Farms (Land and Buildings) per
Farm and per Acre, by Economic Class, for the United
States and Regions: Percent Change 1950 to 1954

Region and economic class

UNITED STATES

All farms -

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time.

Residential

Abnormal... ...

THE NORTH

All farms.

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV.

Class V.

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal .- ...

THE SOUTH

All farms.

Class I

Class II

Class III

Cbss IV

Class V.

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

THE WEST

All farms

Class I

Class II

Class III.

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

All land in
farms, aver-
age per farm

1950 to 1954 1949 to 1954

Cropland
harvested

per farm

Value of farms (land
and buildings)

Average per

farm

1950 to 1954

Percent
+42.1
+22 0
+24.7
+22.1
+20.6
+25.5
+31.2
+27.2
+23.7
+51.8

+37.9
+23.1
+24.4
+22.2
+22. 0
+24. 1
+23 4
+19.6
+17.4
+44.6

+40.9
+19.4
+23.9
+20.1
+19.6
+26. 2
+32.3
+33.6
+25.6
+17.8

+45.1
+24. 5
+28.4
+29.0
+34.7
+ 34.0
+33.2
+27.2
+20.3
+ 102 3

Average per

acre

1951) to 1954

J'trcent
+27.1
+60. 6
+29.6
+15.7
+15.0
+16.2
+ 14.0
+19.7
+32. 2
+16.6

+23 9
+47.9
+27.1
+ 11.6
+ 13 5
+15.6
+15.6
+ 19.3
+26.4
+57.2

+28.6
+58.5
+22.8
+20.8
+21.6
+19.6
+16.1
+22.2
+30. 9
+30,9

+34.3
+65. 4
+33.3
+ 13.1
+10. 6
+8 2
-4.6
+22.5
+32.3
+23 6

The smaller relative increase in the North in comparison with
the South and the West suggests that consolidations are taking
place more slowly in the more industrialized North. The expan-
sion in average size of farm in the South suggests a continuation
of the trend toward reorganization within management units and
a continuation of the trend toward more mechanized farming.
This also implies a decrease in the number of cropper units and a
continuation of the shift toward types of farming requiring less
labor per unit of product. The larger increase in the West is
associated with trends toward fewer operating units rather than
with development of more land for agricultural uses. As seen
below, the increase in the West was associated with increases in
grazing land per unit, with relatively little change in cropland.

The trends by economic class are more mixed. In general, the
average size of Classes I and II farms decreased. This reflects
increased yields and movement from lower classes into Classes I
and II. For Classes III to VII, average size increased slightly
for the country at large; but the changes varied from relatively

little in the South to sharp increases in the West. Outside of the
West, this increase in size of unit was largely offset by a shift
upward from one economic class to another, while the increase in
size in the West appeared to be largely the result of increases of
pasture or range land in the unit between 1949 and 1954. Aver-
age size of part-time (Class VII) farms, which increased from
75.6 acres to 81.1 acres for the United States, was due to increases
in the South and the West.

Cropland harvested. — Cropland harvested increased from an
average of 72.8 acres per farm for all farms in 1949 to 81.1 acres
per farm in 1 954, an increase of more than 1 1 percent. However,
in each of the economic classes in the country as a whole, cropland
harvested per farm decreased during these same years, as shown
in Tables 13 and 14. This is further evidence of the shift of
farms from a given economic class into a higher economic class.

Thus, a two-way shift is in progress: (1) Individual farms are
increasing iii total acreage of cropland harvested through consoli-
dation of land and additional units into a given farm unit. (#)
Farms moving up from one economic class to another have fewer
acres of cropland harvested than the farms already in the higher
class. So, although the individual farm exhibits an increase in
crop acres harvested as well as in total acres, the advance in in-
tensity of cultivation and the improvements in farm operations
in general are such that the crop acreage required to support a
farm in a given economic class was generally less in 1954 than in
1949.

Value per farm and per acre. — Increases in value per farm of
all farms, averaging 42.1 percent between 1949 and 1954, were
substantially larger than the average of the increases by economic
class. Class I farms increased in value by 22.0 percent, for exam-
ple, as compared with an increase of 24.7 percent for Class II,
22.1 for Class III, 20.0 for Class IV, 25.5 for Class V, 31.2 for
Class VI, and 27.2 for part-time (Class VII), and 23.7 for resi-
dential (Class VIII) farms; or an unweighted average for all
eight classes of 24.6 percent. This is further evidence of the
shift upward of farms from one economic class to another.

The substantially higher values placed on part-time (Class VII)
farms, as compared with Class VI commercial farms, suggest some
advantages in location, buildings, etc., for part-time farmers
(Class VII) as compared with the commercial operators in Class
VI. This suggestion applies particularly in the South. The
reverse appears evident in the West.

Increases in value per acre were uniform among regions between
1950 and 1954, but rather remarkable differences are shown in
respect to changes in value per acre by class of farm. Increases
were more general and greater for the farms in the higher eco-
nomic classes, such as Classes I and II than for the lower classes,
such as Classes III to VI. Part-time (Class VII) and residential
(Class VIII) farms showed a greater increase in value per acre.
This suggests that urban expansion and the demand for land
arising out of residential and industrial expansion, were affecting
the values for these farms more than the values of other farms
in Classes III to VI.9

The sharp increases in value per acre among the higher class
commercial farms suggests two developments. They are (/) a
more rapid rate of capital accumulation per farm and per acre
resulting in a relatively greater capital investment in the higher
economic classes than in the lower and (2) a more rapid shift
upward in economic class of those farms that are relatively more
valuable per acre. The relatively slight increases in value per
acre among farms in Classes III, IV, and V in the West and the
decline in Class VI, as compared with increases in value per acre
in part-time and residential farms, suggest that part-time and
residential farms did not shift into the other commercial classes
in large numbers during 1950-54.

' The assumption underlying this statement is based on the fact that in metropolitan counties, the percentage of part-time and residential farms is higher than in nonmetropolitan
counties and that the growing demand for farmland for residential or industrial use affected land prices moro strongly during 1949-54 in the metropolitan counties than in the non-
metropolitan counties.

30

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Specified Machinery and Equipment, 1950 and 1954

Data on number of farms reporting specified machinery and
equipment in 1950 and 1954 attest to the increasing mechanization
of commercial agriculture in all classes. The data also point to
the fact that relatively few part-time (Class VII) and residential
(Class VIII) farms have the machines reported. Generally, a
smaller proportion of Classes V and VI farms have the machines
than is the case among Classes I to IV.

Grain combines, corn pickers, and pick-up balers. — The per-
centage of farmers reporting grain combines, corn pickers, and
pick-up balers, increased substantially between 1950 and 1954
(Table 15). The increases were from 12.4 percent reporting grain
combines in 1950 to 19.3 percent in 1954; from 8.3 percent report-
ing corn pickers in 1950 to 14.1 percent in 1954; and from 3.6 per-
cent reporting pick-up balers in 1950 to 9.3 percent in 1954.

Percentage changes were similar in direction in each of the three
major regions.

For the United States, since the number of Class I and Class II
farms increased between 1950 and 1954, the increase in number
of Classes I and II farms having this machinery is greater than
the percentage changes alone would suggest. Conversely the
percentage changes — which were relatively larger for the lower
commercial classes than for the higher classes — were less meaning-
ful for the lower economic classes, because of the decline in total
numbers among these classes. Substantial increases in percentages
occurred among all economic classes; but the weighted average
of the increases by classes is less than the percentage increase
for all farms, since many farms moved from a given economic
class to a higher one and the percentage having this machinery
is closely correlated bv class.

Table 15. — Percent of Farms Reporting Specified Machinery and Equipment, Motortrucks, and Automobiles, by Economic

Class, for the United States and Regions: Censuses of 1954 and 1950

[Data are based on reports for only a sample of farms. See test]

Grain combines

Corn pickers

Pick-up balers

Motortrucks

Automobiles

Region and economic class

Farms reporting

Number per farm
reporting

Farms reporting

Number per farm
reporting

1954
(percent)

1950
(percent)

1954
(percent)

1950
(percent)

1954
(percent)

1950
(percent)

1954
(percent)

1950
(percent)

1954
(number)

1950
(number)

1954
(percent)

1950
(percent)

1954
(number)

1950
(number)

UNITED STATES

19.3

60.1
55.7
42.0
23.0
10.1
3.9
3.6
.8
26.4

33.9

63.8

65.9

61.8

34.4

18.7

7.9

6.0

1.4

30.5

6.7

45.6

36.8

21.3

9.8

4.6

2.1

2.0

.5

26.4

17.8

34.0

33.2

26.9

20.6

12.6

9.5

3.7

1.4

17.8

12.4
40.9
44.0
31.1
16.1
6.3
2.2
1.8
.5
16.7

20.9

50.2

50.6

35.8

21.3

10.0

4.2

2.5

.7

18.6

4.8

38.9

32.9

19.2

8.4

3.6

1.3

1.3

.4

18.4

14.1

29.5

31.2

23.9

15.6

8.5

6.1

2.2

.7

10.7

14.1

30.4

44.0

33.7

16.2

6.1

1.9

1.7

.3

16.0

30.0

59.7

61.4

47.3

28.5

14.6

5.6

4.4

1.0

26.3

2.5

14.0

14.7

9.3

3.9

1.4

.6

.5

.1

10.4

1.1

2.1

1.8

2.0

1.2

.6

.6

.1

(Z)

1.8

8.3

22.5

33.8

24.5

9.7

2.6

.7

.5

.1

6.7

18.6

46.8

50.0

34.3

16.5

6.2

2.5

1.3

.3

10.8

.8

7.9

7.0

3.9

1.4

.5

.1

.1

(Z)

5. 1

.7
1.4
1.7
1.3
.8
.4
.1
(Z)
(Z)
.9

9.3

29.4

28.6

19.6

9.7

4.4

1.8

1.9

.4

33.1

15.5

38.5

33.3

23.4

13.4

6.8

3.0

2.7

.7

41.3

3.7

23.5

19.5

11.1

5.3

2.7

1.3

1.4

.3

32.6

9.9
21.2
19.0
14.9
9.8
6.4
3.7
2.4
.5
16.6

3.6

18.2

14.1

7.8

3.8

1.8

.8

.7

.2

16.8

6.4

22.5

15.9

8.5

4.3

2.1

.9

.8

.3

18.3

1.9

16.3

12.2

6.8

3.2

1.6

.7

.6

.2

19.4

3.9

14.0

8.8

5.5

3.2

2.1

1.0

.8

.3

10.6

46.3

89.5
77.9
63.9
50.4
40.3
29.5
37.3
25.3
71.1

50.4
86.3
74.5
61.2
50.1
40.4
28.2
34.3
24.8
68.9

38.8
89.9
82.5
65.2
47.1
38.0
28.6
37.0
23.4
75.4

67.3
93.8
87.5
79.1
71.3
62.1
64.1
50.5
41.0
59.0

34.2
84.4
70.2
62.5
39.0
29.7
19.4
27.0
17.6
56.6

38.4
80.1
66.4
49.3
37.5
30.2
21.2
26.1
19.1
63.2

26.9
85.2
72.9
54.4
36.9
27.0
17.7
25.9
15.5
47.9

55.8
89.6
82.5
69.7
58.6
49.4
41.6
37.7
29.9
54.9

1.2
2.4
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
5.6

1.2
1.9
1.3
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.3

1.2
2.4
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.1
1.0
3.7

1.6
2.9
1.7
1.4
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
16.5

1.2
2.3
1.3
1.2

3^0
1.2

70.9
94.1
92.9
87.4
76.1
63.9
46.0
68.8
58.6
69.4

86.1
96.3
95.7
92.6
87.4
81.8
67.5
82.0
73.5
75.1

55.3
90.4
83.9
73.6
61.6
51.5
36.9
59.5
50.2
68.8

83.5
94.4
92.3
87.8
81.8
77.8
65.0
81.8
77.2
58.4

63.0

89.2
89.1
84.8
74.3
58.9
39.3
60.0
47.9
55.4

80.8
91.2
92.3
89.6
84.8
77.4
62.9
75.6
65.4
58.9

46.4
85.1
80.1
70.1
58.2
45.2
30.5
48.3
38.2
51.7

76.7
90.2
87.4
82.4
76.4
73.0
59.3
74.3
69.2
53.2

1.3
2.4
1.4
1.3
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.2
1.1
4.9

1.3
2.1
1.4
1.3
1.2
12
1.1
1.2
1.2
4.3

1.2
2.6
1.5
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
1.1
4.2

1.4
2.7
1.6
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.3
1.3
7.6

1.2

Class I

2.2

Class II

1.4

Class III

1.3

Class IV

1.2

Class V

1.1

Class VT-

1.1

1.2

Residential . _ ...

Abnormal

THE NORTH

1.2
3.4

1.3

Class 1

2

9
3

6

2.0

Class II

1.4

Class HI

1.3

Class IV

1.2

Class V .-.

1.2

Class VI --. .

1.1

1.2

1.2

3.4

THE SOUTH

1.2
2.3
1.4
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.0
1.1
1.1
3.3

1.4
2.6
1.5
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.1
1.1
1.1
3.6

1.2

Class I .

2.2

Class II .

1.4

Class III...

1.2

Class IV.

1.1

Class V. .

1.1

Class VI.

1.1

1.1

1.1

3.1

THE WEST

1.4

Class I

2.6

Class II .

1.5

Class III .

1.3

Class IV

1.2

Class V.

1.2

Class VI

1.2

1.3

1.3

4.1

Z Less than 0. 05 percent.

PART-TIME FARMING

31

Motortrucks, 1950 and 1954. — In contrast to the situation above,
a considerable proportion of the part-time farms had motortrucks.
All classes in each major region showed an increase in the per-
centage having motortrucks between 1950 and 1954 and more than
one-third (37.3 percent) of the part-time (Class VII) farm opera-
tors had motortrucks by 1954. Of some significance is the fact
that considerably more of the part-time (Class VII) operators had
motortrucks than was the case with Class VI farm operators,
who had equal returns from farm sales.

Automobiles, 1950 and 1954. — A substantially higher percentage
of part-time (Class VII) farm operators had automobiles than did
the Class VI commercial operators. This gives evidence of a
higher income and a higher level of living among the part-time
farmers than among the commercial farmers who have equal
returns from farm sales. A high percentage of each class of farm
operators had automobiles and the percentage increased for each

class. Also the percentage was correlated with economic class.

Specified Farm Expenditures, 1949 and 1954

Practically all farms reported certain specified farm expenditures
in 1954. But these expenditures varied widely by economic class
in respect to such items or categories as machine hire, hired labor,
and feed for livestock and poultry (Table 16).

Machine hire, 1949 and 1954. — The percentage of farms re-
porting machine hire increased from 39.7 percent in 1949 to 45.3
percent in 1954 for part-time farms, and from 19.2 percent to
23.9 percent for residential farms. In contrast, the percentage
of Classes I, II, III, and IV farms reporting machine hire declined
somewhat for each class. For most of the Classes I through VIII
the amount expended for machine hire was slightly higher in
1954 than in 1949 per farm reporting.

Table 16. — Specified Farm Expenditures, Percent of Farms Reporting, and Amount per Farm, by Economic Class of Farm,

for the United States and Regions: Censuses of 1954 and 1950

[Data arc based on reports for only a sample of farms. See text]

Region and economic
class

Machine hire

Percent of all
farms

1954
(per-
cent)

1949
(per-
cent)

Average amount
expended per
farm reporting

19S4

(dollars)

1949
(dollars)

Hired labor

Feed for livestock and poultry

Percent of all
farms

1954
(per-
cent)

1949
(per-
cent)

Average amount
expended per
farm reporting

1954
(dollars)

1949
(dollars)

Percent of all
farms

1954
(per-
cent)

1949
(per-
cent)

Average amount
expended per
farm reporting

19.54
(dollars)

1949
(dollars)

Gasoline and other petroleum fuel
and oil

Percent of all
farms

1954
(per-
cent)

1949
(per-
cent)

Average amount
expended per
farm reporting

1954
(dollars)

1949
(dollars)

UNITED STATES

All farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV...

Class V

Class VI

Part-time _ _.

Residential

Abnormal

THE NORTH

All farms.

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

THE SOUTH

All farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V..

Class VI....

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

THE WEST

All farms. __.

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V..._

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

53.2
61.7
66.6
68.5
65.5
59.7
47.8
45.3
23.9
35.0

60.9
62.3
68.6
71.1
70.5
65.2
47.3
49.1
24.6
38.7

47.0
63.3
64.5
64.7
61.3
57.2
48.3
43.3
23.0
32.3

49.9
59.5
59.9
60.0
55.7
51.2
40.6
44.2
28.9
30.7

51.3
62.9
73.1
75.5
69.2
57.3
40.4
39.7
19.2
29.5

63.4
68.2
78.2
80.6
76.5
65.3
43.5
43.4
21.6
36.6

41.1
60.3
66.3
65.9
60.7
52.7
39.4
37.0
17.1
23.0

50.1
57.7
60.9
60.7
58.5
52.5
40.8
42.7
28.7
24.0

251

1,676

455

289

202

138

82

89

52

893

223
607
339
254
199
150
101
''I
53
486

209

2,215

713

345

190

121

72

80

47

505

626
2,805
698
421
305
225
161
128
80
2,348

222

1,496

460

276

189

127

78

80

59

605

206
682
345
244
180
130
92
83
54
318

192

2,132

750

354

186

117

69

71

54

469

459
2, 243
652
392
276
194
155
117
95
1,117

46.4
93.2
78.2
65.7
58.4
48.9
33.9
30.7
11.1

45.4
90.0
74.1
69.3
47.5
35.8
21.6
21.0
7.9
72.4

46.0
94.9
87.0
80.5
71.6
57.2
38.6
36.2
12.3
68.8

53.8
96.3
85.7
71.9
68.4
46.3
33.3
29.7
11.7
52.6

49.6
93.4
88.0
79.7
68.0
52.5
32.9
32.6
14.0
63.5

55.3
92.2
87.3
78.6
65.4
48.3
27.7
26.2
10.0
58.6

43.6
93.9
90.2
83.5
72.0
55.2
34.5
36.4
15.6
51.7

56.6
94.5
88.4
79.3
67.6
52.7
35.0
32.8
14.6
45.8

1,026

8,972

1,491

642

366

217

126

149

121

13,948

813

5.298

1,093

470

177

197

155

159

174

14, 295

753

9,712

2,160

865

395

209

110

135

91

12, 551

3,181

3,333

2,182

984

599

401

326

229

248

15,218

906

10.065

1,781

703

374

228

139

163

153

11,583

701

6,254

1,243

515

285

201

159

179

218

12, 292

735

11,067

2, TS2

1,077

439

218

122

141

116

11,717

2, 646

371

2,628

1,138

644

462

363

263

331

9.582

76.4
74.7
85.5
84.8
76.4
69.1
69.2
74.5
76.4
72.6

84.4
86.2
90.8
90.2
86.1
80.7
78.1
75.7
74.9
77.0

70.6
71.0
79.5
75.5
65.7
62.1
65.9
74.4
77.6
79.1

69.4
61.2
.68.7
71.3
69.7
68.1
iw.u
70.7
72.6
65.3

72.0
78.0
87.5
88.2
81.3
70.3
59.5
69.3
68.5
57.4

82.6
85.8
92.4
92.7
88.9
82.2
71.0
73.1
59.6
64.6

63.6
75.6
81.7
80.1
72.1
62.9
55.7
67.3
58.0
57.2

68.5
69.3
74.9
74.5
71.3
67.6
60.4
67.9
59.4
43.2

1,069

10,883

2,802

1,332

706

401

220

266

131

10,454

1,304

9,730

2,602

1,307

787

505

304

314

154

10, 995

632

10, 597

3.48S

1,341

539

295

174

225

116

8,204

2,127

13. 534

2,953

1,522

922

604

374

365

186

12, 879

780

8.707

2,243

1,065

666

333

173

236

135

8,950

960

8.187

2.212

1,069

628

420

255

287

162

9,900

420

7,151

2,219

944

403

230

129

182

115

7,175

1,633
11.138

2, 436

1,296
777
658
352
358
205

9,207

68.3
96.0
96.6
94.0
85.6
69.7
47.2
54.4
32.5
75.3

84.2
96.7
96.9
96.5
93.4
84.8
63.1
67.9
45.8
80.6

52.6
94.4
91.9
87.5
75.8
59.2
40.0
45.7
25.9
76.6

77.7
96.5
94.8
93.2
88.5
80.7
70.0
62.0
42.5
62.7

55.5
93.3
94.4
92.6
81.0
67.6
30.4
37.2
16.3
67.7

74.9
93.8
96.1
95.5
90.0
75.1
48.1
49.6
26.7
65.6

36.4
92.4
90.8
84. 7
67.2
44.5
23.2
27.3
10.9
52.5

69.8
93.5
92.2
89.4
83.2
72.2
56.0
52.3
29.6
48.6

418
2,005
814
514
327
201
134
108
59
1,551

446

1,442

777

524

360

227

149

110

57

1,412

317
2,605
927
471
270
171
116
102
56
1,753

648
2,315
839
539
374
253
221
128
81
1,620

380
1,836
755
460
292
187
134
108
85
1,269

388
1,387
721
464
307
201
143
105
68
1,096

307
2,216
811
426
251
164
123
106
97
1,64s

481
2.129
825
497
336
230
178
123
98
1,198

32

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Several inferences are suggested: (1) The increasing mechan-
ization of agriculture in this country makes machine hire less and
less necessary and/or profitable among the larger commercial
farms. (2) On part-time and residential farms increasing
employment off farm makes it increasingly necessary and/or
profitable to hire machines to do work that the farmer or members
of his family did formerly. This suggests that as off-farm oppor-
tunities for earning increase, part-time and residential farming
will continue to decline in importance.

Hired labor, 1949 and 1954. — The percentage of farms reporting
hired labor decreased for each economic class between 1949 and
1 954. Then there was an increase in the average amount expended
per farm; but in more cases than not there was a decline by class
of farm from 1949 to 1954. The chief inferences suggested are
(/) that farm wage rates were increasing, (2) that mechaniza-
tion— both hired and owned — was displacing hired help, and
(3) that the decline in use of hired he!p on part-time and resi-
dential farms was part of the general trend in farms in other classes.
In the North, especially, the downward trend in percentage of
part-time and residential farms (as well as other farms) that
employed hired labor suggests that growing industrial employment
has had an increasingly strong influence.

The percentage of part-time and residential farms employing
hired labor appears to be significantly smaller in the North than
in the South or West (Table 17).

Table 17. — Percentage of Part-Time and Residential Farms
Reporting Hired Labor: 1954 and 1949

Part-time

Residential

Region

1954

1949

1954

1949

30.7

21.0
36.2
29.7

32.6

26.2
36.4
32.8

11.1

7.9
12.3
11.7

14.0

The North

10.0

The South

15.6

The West...

14.6

The lower percentage in the North, together with the declines
in percentages between 1949 and 1954, suggests that hiring labor
for part-time farms has become less and less profitable as chances
for off-farm industrial work increase. The percentage of farms
employing hired labor and the average amount expended per
farm reporting are strongly correlated with class of farm (Table 16) .
Both increase significantly from class to class beginning with
residential farms in Class VIII and moving upward to Class I.

The percentage of Class I farms reporting hired labor stayed
about the same between 1949 and 1954. The percentage for
Classes II, III, and IV dropped sharply. For Class V, the
percentage dropped somewhat less, and that for Class VI farms
increased.

What can be inferred from these data, assuming the shifts are
significant? One postulate is that increasing mechanization

among the farms in the middle classes (Classes II, III, and IV)
has reduced the need for hired labor. Among Class V and VI
farms, on the other hand, mechanization has not proceeded as
rapidly, so the percentage that hires labor has not fallen during
recent years. Among Class I farms, although the percentage
employing hired labor held about steady between 1949 and 1954,
the average amount expended per farm reporting declined by a
significant amount in each of the major regions listed in Table 16.
This suggests substantial increases in mechanization for Class I
farms, plus the effects of the upgrading of Class II and III farms
into Class I.

Feed, gas, and oil, 1949 and 1954. — A remarkable uniformity
from class to class is found in the percentage of farms buying
feed for livestock and poultry. The amounts expended per farm
reporting, however, vary widely by class as is the case with
expenditures on hired labor and machine hire (Table 16). In
nearly all cases the amounts expended increased from 1949 to
1954, both for all farms and for farms by economic class. The
percentage of farms reporting purchases also generally increased.

Nearly three-fourths of the part-time and residential farms
bought feed in 1954. The amounts expended averaged slightly
over $200 per farm.

These data support the inference that, between 1949 and 1954,
farms generally became more specialized — more "commercialized"
in the sense that by economic class larger quantities of feed were
bought per farm reporting in 1954 than in 1949.

The amount expended for gasoline and oil per farm reporting
increased relatively more among the farms in the higher economic
classes than among the part-time or residential farms, or the
commercial farms in Class VI (Table 16).

Fertilizer and lime, 1954. — The percentage of farms reporting
commercial fertilizer purchases in 1954 is correlated with economic
class but the differences are not great, ranging from 71.7 percent
for Class I farms to 55.8 percent for part-time (Class VII) farms
and to 34.1 percent for residential (Class VIII) farms. A much
greater difference occurs among farms in amount expended per
farm reporting, in tons bought per farm, and in acres on which
used (Table 18).

In the South the acreage fertilized on part-time farms was
equal to more than half the cropland harvested acreage. In the
West it amounted to only about one-tenth the cropland harvested
acreage on part-time forms. In the North it was about one-
fourth. Similar variations exist on residential farms but a lower
percentage of the acreage was fertilized.

When the data are arranged according to average acreage per
farm by economic class on which commercial fertilizer is used
(Table 19), a distinct correlation by size of farm for Classes I
through VI emerges for both the North and the West. Percent-
age of total land on which commercial fertilizer is used, and total
acres fertilized as a percent of the acreage of cropland harvested
are positively correlated with size of farm or economic class. No
such correlation emerges in the case of the South. There, these
percentages are correlated inversely with size of farm.

PART-TIME FARMING

33

Table 18. — Specified Farm Expenditures, Percent of Farms Reporting, and Amount per Farm, by Economic Class of Farm,

for the United States and Regions: 1954

[Data :ire based on reports for only a sample of farms. See text]

Specified

farm
expendi-
tures other
than for
fertilizer
and lime:
percent of
all farms

Machine

hire

and/or

hired

labor:

percent of

all farms

Commercial fertilizer and fertilizing materials

Lime and liming materials

Region and economic
class

Percent
of all
farms

Amount
expended

per farm
reporting

Tons pur-
chased
per farm
reporting

Acres on

which used

per farm

reporting

Pounds
per acre

Percent
of all
farms

Amount
expended

per farm
reporting

Tons pur-
chased
per farm
reporting

Acres on

which used

per farm

reporting

Pounds
per acre

UNITED STATES

98.2
99.9
99.9
99.9
99.8
99.3
98.2
98.7
93.0
93.2

99.2
99.9
100,0
100.0
99.9
99.8
99.1
99.2
94.4
95.3

97.3
99.9
99.9
99,8
99.6
99 0
97 9
98.4
92.3
98.4

98.7
100,0
99.9
99.9
99.8
99.7
98.8
99.1
94,3
82.5

68.7
96.2
90.0
86.0
83.0
76 9
62.5
57 7
29.7
73 9

72.6
94.9
89. 1
84.7
80.6
73.4
54.4
55.6
28.5
79.8

65.0

96.7
92.3
90.3
86.9
79.9
65.9
59.1
29.6
76.3

70.4
97.6
91.6
84.7
77.0
69.3
55.7
66.6
34.4
58.8

61.0
71.7
72.6
69. 1
68.2
69, 1
65.4
55. 8
34.1
67 (i

58.3
79.5
78.3
70.1
61.3
54.1
38.4
46.0
230
72 4

68.3
68.6
67.9
76.3
82.6
82.9
78.1
66.5
41.6
83 0

33.6
63 0
52.1
43.7
33.6
26.9
17.6
21.0
10 2
35.9

370

2, 637

769

436

297

200

122

111

53

1.928

405

1,758

709

389

249

175

115

107

57

1,789

300

3.666

1,087

678

345

211

124

US

52

2.318

864
3,274
620
328
220
140
125
80
60
1,390

6.5
41.0
12.9
7.6
6.6
3,9
2.5
2.3
1. 1
37.8

6.6

28.4

11.4

6.3

4.2

3.1

2.1

2.0

1. 1

34 8

6.0

66.9

21.5

11.7

7.0

4.3

2.6

2.6

1.1

494

10.5
39.5
7.8
4.3
2.9
1.9
1.7
1.1
1.0
17 2

42

227

93

56

35

23

15

13

6

201

54
175
93
57
38
26
17
14
7
181

30

302

112

68

27

23

16

13

6

262

73
252
63
35
23
16
14
8
6
136

309
361
276
273
315
336
334
342
349
376

246
325
245
222
222
238
241
282
304
383

397
443

384
401
409
382
355
368
362
392

289
314
246
247
256
256
239
278
290
262

10.9
18.3
21.6
18.2
13. 1
9,0
5.6
7.1
3.2
24.4

17.6
30.6
27.0
22.2
17.7
14.2

8.9
11.4

5.6
35.0

6.7

16.0

17. 1

13.9

9.6

6.7

4.6

6.7

2.6

24.6

1 3
2,4
1.9
1.6
1. 1
1.0
1.0
1.1
.5
1.9

326
433
198
134

99
84
69
68
48
469

135

333

189

131

100

86

75

69

65

467

125

691

238

145

98

81

64

67

43

436

273
776
284
169
102
107
71
90
37
1,067

33.2
96.2
50.2
34.6
25.6
21.1
17.1
15.5
10.7
100.9

36.5
87.9
61.4
35.9
27.4
23.1
19.9
16.4
12.6
102.0

25.5
117.1
45.3
29.8
21.6
18.6
15.1
14.7
9.4
98.2

37.3

127.4
31.4
18.8
11.0
10.3
7,0
9 1
3.8
103.1

20
64
28
20
15
14
12
11
8
72

19
47
27
19
14
13
12
10
7
66

22
116
39
25
18
15
13
13
8
83

23

65

20

14

13

9

7

8

4

97

3,290

Class I

3,021

Class II

3,528

Class III

3,478

Class IV....

3,314

Class V...

3,042

Class VI

2,824

2,781

2,731

2,820

THE NORTH

3,784

Class I

3,717

Class II

3.870

Class III

3, 843

Class IV....

3,790

Class V. ...

3,643

Class VI

3.448

3.426

3,353

Abnormal..

THE SOUTH

3,086
2,302

ClassI

2,025

Class II

2,304

Class III

2,343

Class IV..

2,409

Class V

2,408

Class VI

2,413

2,264

2,267

2.362

THE WEST

3,253

ClassI

3,903

Class II

3. 096

Class III

2,624

Class IV....

1.633

Class V

2,235

Class VI

1.972

2,199

1.857

2,133

Table 19. — Acreage on Which Commercial Fertilizer was Used, Percent of Total Acreage and Percent of Cropland
Harvested on Which Used, by Economic Class of Farm, for the United States and Regions: 1954

Region and economic
class

Total

acres

per farm

Acres on
which

com-
mercial
fertilizer

used
per farm

Percent
of total
acreage
on which
used

Acres of
cropland
harvested
per farm

Acres on
which

com-
mercial
fertilizer

used
per farm

Percent
acreage
on which
fertilizer
was used

is of
cropland
harvested

Region and economic
class

Total

acres

per farm

Acres on
which

com-
mercial
fertilizer

used
I»er farm

Percent
of total
acreage
on which
used

Acres of
cropland
harvested
per farm

Acres on
which

com-
mercial
fertilizer

used
per farm

Percent
acreage
on which
fertilizer
was used

is of
cropland
harvested

UNITED STATES

All farms

ClassI

242.5

1, 939. 1

537. 8

311.9

201.0

134.3

97.1

81.1

47.7

14, 502. 4

213.2
773.6
369.5
263.9
200.7
142.4
99,5
67.6
42.5
857.2

25.6
162.8
67.6
38.7
23.9
15.9
9.8
7.3
2.0
134.7

31.5

139.1

72.8

40.0

23.3

14.1

6.6

6.4

1.6

131.0

10.6
8.4
12.6
12.4
11.9
11.8
10.1
9.0
4.2
.9

14.8
18.0
19.7
15.2
11.6
9.9
6.5
9.5
3.8
15.3

81.1

397.6

201 1

128.8

75.6

41.0

23.2

17.8

7.3

290.1

113.4
347.5
209.5
143 7
97.5
58.8
34.9
22.0
9.1
283.3

25.6
162.8
67.5
38.7
23.9
15.9
9.8
7.3
2.0
134.7

31.5

139.1

72.8

40.0

23 3

14,1

6.5

6.4

1.6

131.0

31.6
40.9
33.6
30.0
31.6
38.8
42.2
41.0
27.4
46.4

27.8
40.0
34.7
27.8
23.9
24.0
18.6
29.1
17.6
46.2

THE SOUTH

All farms

Class I

167.0

2, 286. 3
691.7
311.2
162.2
112.6

87.4

86.4

49.3

1, 325. 5

798.9

3, 333 3
1,126.3

648.7
429.1
289.9
256.0
96.0
51.1
59, 353. 9

20.6

207.2

76.0

44.3

22.3

19.1

11.7

8.6

2.5

209.2

24.6

168.8

32.8

15.3

7.7

4.0

2,5

1.7

.6

.6

12,3
19.1
11.0
14.2
13.7
17.0
13.4
10.0
5.1
16.8

3 1
4.8
2.9
2.3
1.8
1.4
1.0
1.8
1.2

44.6

444.1
187.8
95.1
50.0
30.3
19.0
15.8
6.7
298.1

115.0
434.6
176,8
107.3
69.5
42 3
32 2
15.6
6.0
296.0

20.5
207.2
76.0
44 3
22.3
19.1
11.7
8.6
2.5
209.2

24.5

158. 8

32.8

15.3

7.7

4.0

2.5

1.7

.6

.6

46.0

46.7

Class II

Class II

40.6

Class III

Class III

46.6

Class IV

Class IV

44.6

Class V.-

Class V

63.0

Class VI-

Class VI

61.6

Part-time

54.4

Residential

Abnormal

THE WEST

All farms

37.3

70.2

THE NORTH

All farms

Class I

21.3
36.5

Class II--.

Class II

18.6

Class III

Class III

14.3

Class IV

Class IV

11.1

Class V._

Class V

9.5

Class VI

Class VI

7.8

Part-time

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

11.0
10.0

.2

34

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Work Power, Equipment, and Other Specified Expenditures, 1954

This section summarizes additional data on work power and
other equipment and specified expenditures in 1954, by economic
class of farm, by major regions.

Farms by class of work power, 1954. — A sharp difference is
found among the economic classes in facilities for work power
(Table 20). This is to be expected. About one-third of the
part-time (Class VII) farm operators did not have tractors, horses, ■
or mules, in 1954. These percentages were remarkably consistent
in each of the three major regions. An additional 11.3 percent
of the part-time farmers and 16.5 percent of the residential (Class
VIII) farmers had only one horse or mule each. Only 12.7 percent
of the part-time farmers and 5.0 percent of the residential farmers
had a tractor and horses and/or mules. However, 41.9 percent
of the part-time and 18.8 percent of the residential farms had a
tractor in contrast to 90.9 percent of the Class I farms and 92.3

percent of those in Class II. As was shown in Table 16, however,
almost one-half of the part-time farms (45.3 percent) and almost
one-quarter of the residential farms (23.9 percent) reported
machine hire in 1954. The amounts expended per farm were
relatively small — $89 per farm for part-time farms and $52 for
residential farms.

Many part-time and residential farmers were apparently
limited to small plots of cultivated land, to a few head of livestock
such as two or three cows, or to a flock of poultry. On the other
hand, 6.8 percent of the Class I farms and 5.5 of Class II did not
have a tractor, or horses, or mules. Sales of farm products in
excess of $10,000, under these conditions, would suggest either
hiring of tractors and machines on a custom basis and/or pre-
dominance of such an enterprise as a commercial poultry opera-
tion, a highly mechanized dairy farm, or a feeding operation in
which all or nearly all feed is purchased and there is little field work.

Table 20. — Farms by Class of Work Power and Specified Farm Equipment, by Economic Class of Farm, for the United

States and Regions: 1954

Percent of farms reporting

Class of work power

Specified farm equipment

Region and economic class

No

tractor,

horses, or

mules

No

tractor

and only

1 horse or

mule

No

tractor

and 2 or

more

horses and/

or mules

Tractor

and horses

and/or

mules

Tractor
and no

horses or
mules

Electric

pig
brooder

Power

feed

grinder

Milking
machine

Field

forage

harvester

Artificial

ponds,

reservoirs,

and earth

tanks

UNITED STATES

24.7
6.8
6.5
6.7
13.2
22.7
29.2
34.4
65.3
18.3

15.4
5.8
4.0
4.0
6.4
13.4
30.3
31.2
53.9
15.0

32.6

7.6
8.2
11.7
20.9
28.1
28.6
35.2
55.5
11.3

26.0
7.5
9.4
11.8
16.8
24.8
32.2
41.3
67.8
33.8

7.2

.6

.6

1.0

2.6

5.6

13.3

11.3

16.5

1.6

1.5

.3

.2

.3

.5

1.5

3.6

3.1

5.6

.8

13.1

1.1

1.9

2.7

5.2

8.4

17.5

16.9

22.1

3.4

2.8
.6
.6
1.1
1.5
2.9
3.7
4.7
6.6
1.0

10.1

1.7

1.6

3.1

8.2

15.4

25.1

12.3

9.4

6.2

4.0

.6

.6

1.2

2.9

6.6

14.7

5.6

6.7

3.9

16.4
2.5
3.7
8.2
15.1
21.8
29.7
16.8
10.5
7.0

5.7
2.4
2.2
2.9

4.8
7.2

12.9
7.7
9.5

10.1

20.4
36.4
29.5
30.0
28.9
21.9
13.6
12.7
5.0
40.4

21.3
29.6
24.5
26.0
26.9
22.2
16.0
11.4
5.8
38.6

18.8
46.1
41.9
39.4
30.9
21.6
12.8
13.3
4.4
63.9

25.1
38.0
36.4
34.0
31.1
23.4
18.6
13.9
6.7
27.3

37.6
54.5
62.8
59.3
47.1
34.4
18.8
29.2
13.8
33.6

57.8
63.7
70.7
68.6
63.2
66.4
30.4
48.7
28.0
41.7

19.2

42.6
44.3
37.9
28.0
20.2
11.5
17.9
7.5
24.5

40.4
51.5
51.4
50.2
45.8
41.6
32.6
32.3
19.3
27.8

2.4

7.4

8.4

4.9

2.1

1.0

.5

.7

.4

11.7

4.7

14.0

11.6

6.6

3.3

1.8

.8

1.2

.5

16.0

.6

2.6

2.2

1.5

.7

.6

.3

.5

.3

7.9

1.3
1.9
2.0
1.9
1.5
1.0

.9
1.0

.4
7.2

14.8

35.7

37.5

30.2

18.1

9.4

4.4

4.5

1.3

35.7

24.6
49.0
43.8
35.9
25.3
15.8
8.1
6.4
2.0
41.6

6.6

30.9

28.4

18.9

9.8

5.4

2.9

3.4

.9

38.6

12.8
20.5
20.3
19.8
16.0
11.1
8.0
4.6
1.6
19.8

14.9

18.1

34.7

35.7

21.7

8.7

2.4

3.1

.8

37.8

27.7
23.8
41.6
44.9
35.4
18.5
6.0
5.8
1.5
50.0

3.4

12.4

19.4

13.6

5.0

1.9

.8

.9

.4

32.0

16.0

14.9

23.5

28.7

23.4

16.4

7.8

7.2

1.9

19.3

4.1

19.7

15.7

8.7

3.2

1.0

.4

.4

.1

22.7

7.6

30.2

19.4

11.3

5.0

1.7

.8

.4

.2

30.6

1.0
12.0
8.0
3.0
1.0
.4
.3
.3
.1
19.3

4.1
11.3
8.6
5.7
3.1
1.8
1.5
.6
.2
11.4

19.0

Class I

27.4

Class II

22.9

Class III

21.9

Class IV.

21.1

Class V

20.0

Class VI

17.6

19.1

10.9

30.1

THE NORTH

18.2

Class I

24.7

Class II _.

19.4

Class III. -..-

18.9

Class IV

19.1

Class V

19.6

Class VI

17.9

16.2

11.3

29.3

THE SOUTH

20.3

Class I .

33.1

Class II

36.0

Class HI

31.6

Class IV....

24.4

Class V

21.0

Class VI

17.8

22.1

11.3

35.8

THE WEST

15.3

Class I..

26.6

Class II

21.3

Class III

17.7

Class IV

16.3

Class V

13.7

Class VI

13.4

10.2

6.4

24.9

PART-TIME FARMING

35

Other equipment, 1954. — Relatively few of the part-time and
residential farms have such equipment as an electric pig brooder,
power feed grinder, milking machine, or field forage harvester
(Table 20). This generalization applies in each of the major
regions where, in most cases, close correlations are found between
the percentage of farm operators having such equipment and the
economic class of farm.

Workers on farms, specified week, 1954. — Relatively small per"
centages of the part-time and residential farms had hired workers-
Only 6 percent of the part-time farms reported any hired workers
at the time of the Census in 1954. Less than 2 percent of the
residential farms reported hired workers.

In general, the picture in respect to workers on farms is one of
a relatively heavy concentration of hired workers among the larger
farms contrasted with a relatively even distribution of family
workers per farm by economic class (Table 21). The percentage
of farms using hired laborers is closely and positively correlated
with size of farm, or with economic class. Except for Class I,
the number of regular workers per farm reporting does not vary
widely although the number of seasonal workers per farm report-
ing is again closely correlated with size or economic class. This
contrasts with the distribution of family laborers in agriculture
which does not vary widely per farm by economic class.

Table 21. — Workers on Farms, Specified Week,' by Economic Class, for the United States and Regions: 1954

[Data are based on reports for only a sample of farms. See test]

Region and economic
class

UNITED STATES

All farms

Class I

Class II

Class III .

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time

Residential __.

Abnormal

THE NORTH

AU farms

Class I...

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time...

Residential

Abnormal

THE SOUTH

All farms

Class I

Class II. ,

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

THE WEST

All farms

Class I..

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

Family and/or hired
workers

Percent
of all
farms

98.0
97.1
96.2
94.5
92.0
89.3
85.7
76.6
84.0

93.3
98.7
97.8
96.9
95.3
92.9
90. 0
S8.0
81.2
88.5

86.6
96.7
95.2
94.8
93.7
91.6
89.1
84.1
74.1
89.5

91.1
98.1
96.2
95.2
93.1
90.5
87.6
87.3
82.1
67.8

Number
of persons
per farm
reporting

2.2
8.1
3.1
2.5
2.3
2.0
1.6
1.6
1.3
7.0

2.0
5.4
2.6
2.1
1.9
1.7
1.4
1.5
1.3
7.1

2.3
11.5
4.4
3.4
2.8
2.2
1.7
1.6
1.3
7.6

2.9
9.2
3.5
2.6
2.2
1.9
1.6
1.6
1.4
6.0

Percent

distri-
bution

100. 0
11.1
13.9
17.6
18.4
14.8
7.0
8.1
9.0
.2

103. 0
8.1
19.6
24.9
19.6
11.2
4.0
6.4
6.0
.2

100.0
8.4
8.0
12.1
19.3
19.6
10.7
10.0
11.8
.1

100.0

32.2

18.5

14.9

10.6

7.3

2.3

6.5

7.6

.2

Family worker (operator and/or unpaid members
of his family)

Percent
of all
farms

88.7
91.3
94.8
94.9
93.4
91.1
88.9
84.0
76.2
69.7

92.4
94.6
96.4
96.1
91.6
92.3
89.7
87.4
80.9
74.6

85.4
87.3
91.0
92.5
92.4
90.7
88.6
82.8
73.7
72.3

88.7
90.3
92.9
93.1
91.0
88.6
86.9
86.0
81.5
56.1

Number
of persons
per farm
icportlng

1.6
1.6
1.7
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.2
1.6

1.6
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.4
1.2
1.6

1.6
1.4
1.6
2.0
2.0
1.8
1.5
1.5
1.2
1.6

1.5
1.5
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.8

Percent of
operators
working
1 or more
hours

86.6
90.1
93.4
93.4
91 8
89.2
87.2
81.4
73.3
67.9

90.6
93.2
94.9
94.6
92.9
90.4
88.1
84 7
78.4
72.6

83.1

86.1
89.6
9a. 8
90.8
88.9
87.0
79.4
70.6

SO. 4
89.0
91 4
91.4
89.1
86.2
84.8
82.6
78.0
65.9

Unpaid members
of operator's fam-
ily working 15 or
more hours

Percent
of farms
reporting

36.3
32.9
44.2
47.4
46.7
41.9
31.4
29.2
17.0
9.6

39.7
42.8
47.2
48.6
46.0
39.0
27.0
l".i. 6
15.9
10.5

33.8
24.8
35.9
45.9
48.8
44.4
33.2
28.7
16.4
10.0

34.2
30.6
41.3
42.9
39.6
34.8
28.6
30.6
22.0
7.2

1.6
1.6
1.6
1.6
1.7
1.6
1.4
1.4
1.3
4.8

1.5
1.6
1.6
1.5

1.7
1.6
1.7
2.0
2.0
1.7
1.5
1.5
1.3
4.4

1.5
1.6
1.5
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.3
6.2

Hired workers

All hired workers

Percent

of all

farms

15.7

75.5

42.5

24.2

15.9

10.5

5.3

6.3

1.8

58.2

16.7

71.0

38.3

20.4

12.6

7.8

3.6

4.4

1.4

65.9

13.3

79.0

54.0

33.6

19.7

11.9

5.7

7.3

1.8

61.4

24.5

79.2

46.5

26.9

18.0

12.9

7.8

7.5

2.9

38.3

Number
of persons
per farm
reporting

Percent
distri-
bution

3.6
8.6
3.2
2.8
2.9
2.8
2.4
2.1
1.6
8.2

2.4
5.3
2.2
1.8
1.8
1.8
1.7
1.7
1.6
7.8

4.5
12.4
6.1
4.2
3.8
3.2
2.6
2.1
1.6
9.2

3.8
3.5
3.1
2.8
2.4
2.5
1.6
7.9

100. 0
31.8
22.1
17.6

14.0
8.2
2 2

2.7
.9
.5

100. 0
26.9
31.2

100.0

25.1

17.5

17.9

18.4

12.2

3.6

3.8

1.2

.3

100. 0

55.8

20.2

11.4

6.1

3.2

.6

1.7

.6

.3

Regular workers
(to be employed
150 or more days)

i'l irrnt

of all
farms

7.0
62.3
26.2
10.1

4.2

1.8
.6

1.0

.3

53.2

8.4
67.9
23.6
9.1
4.0
1.7

.3

61.4

4.5
65. 3
34.5
13.1

4.2

1.8
.5

1.0

.2

54.9

13.3

06.3

26.9

10.1

5.0

2.8

1.9

1.3

.7

31.1

Number
of persons
per farm
reporting

2.1
4.0
1.5
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.2
7.2

1.6
2.8
1.3
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.2
1.3
6.9

2.5
5.4
2.0
1.6
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.2

2.8
4.2
1.4
1.3
1.3
1.2
1.4
1.2
1.2
6.9

Seasonal workers
(to be employed
less than 150 days)

Percent
of all
farms

10.5

36.0

23.0

16.1

12.6

9.0

4.7

5.5

1.5

14.8

10.0
32.0
19.8
12.6
9.1
6.3
3.0
3.8
1.1
15.6

10.1
39.8
31.1
24.4
16.5
10.5
5.3
6.4
1.6
16.7

15.3
38.6
27.2
19.1
14.0
10.5
6.3
6.4
2.3
10.9

Number
of persons
per farm
reporting

4.0
11.1
4.1
3.4
3.3
3.0
2.5
2.1

6^4

2.6
6.6
2.7
2.1
2.0
1.9
1.8
1.7
1.6
5.7

4.7
15.8
6.5
5.0
4.1
3.3
2.7
2.2
1.7
7.7

6.1
12.4
5.1
4.2
3.6
3.1
2.5
2.7
1.7
6.1

1 Sept. 26-Oct. 2, or Oct. 24-30.

36

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Table 22. — Percent of Farms Reporting Electricity, Telephone, and Piped Running Water, by Economic Class of Farm, for the

United States and Regions: 1954

Percent of farms

Region and economic class

Electricity and
telephone

Electricity and no
telephone

Telephone and no
electricity

No elec-
tricity, no
telephone,
and piped

running
water

Not
reporting

Electricity

Telephone

Piped

Piped

running

water

No piped

running

water

Piped

running

water

No piped

running

water

Piped

running

water

No piped

running

water

running
water

UNITED STATES

39.5
81.6
73.3
56.6
37.2
26.5
15.1
35.8
30.5
88.1

45.1
93.0
85.1
70.7
50.8
34.7
18.5
41.2
30.9
100.0

16.7
68.0
46.0
23.9
13.6
10.0
7.3
21.1
20.1
94.4

53.1
88.3
79.4
63.1
46.5
40.7
26.3
44.6
38.5
91.4

39.7
74.5
62.1
51.0
36.7
27.9
16.2
34.3
30.1
60.0

65.0
80.9
75.3
67.0
60.2
56.2
41.3
64.6
61.5
71.0

8.0

1.8

6.1

10.5

10.6

8.5

6.7

7.2

6.4

.7

6.7
1.2
2.7
5.2
8.2
8.4
6.9
7 2
7^2

18.7
11.4
14.1
17.5
20.3
19.0
17.6
20.5
20.6

25.5
1.5
3.8
11.3
25.1
36.1
43.8
27.7
32.0

0.1
.1
. 1
. 1
.1
.1
(Z)
.1
.1

0.4
.1

'3

.5
.4
.5
.3
.3
.7

.4

0.4
.3
.3
.5
.4
.4
.6
.2
.3

7.4
3.2
2.2
3.2
5.8
9.0

15.8
8.2
9.8

10.5

6.6
2.0
1.2
2.8
4.2
7.0
14.7
6.9
8.9

91.7
96.3
97.3
95.9
93.2
90.1
83.2
91.2
89.5
88.8

92.6
98.0
98.2
96.6
95.2
92.3
84.0
92.0
90.3
100.0

89.0
94.1
95.4
96.0
93.0
88.2
81.6
89.3
88.6
94.4

94.2
97.9
97.9
96.5
94.2
92.4
86.2
93.6
90.2
91.4

90.6
94.6
96.6
94.3
90.6
88.6
81.9
89.2
87.4
66.7

93.9
96.1
96.6
95.6
93.0
90.6
86.5
93.8
93.7
71.0

48.0
83.6
79.6
67.5
48.4
35.5
22.3
43.4
37.3
89.5

52.3

94.2
87.8
76.1
59.4
43.5
26.3
49.1
38.6
100. 0

19.8
68.4
47.7
25.1
16.3
12.6
10.2
25.0
24.3
94.4

68.3
92.1
88.6
78.3
65.5
58.8
45.2
57.9
53. 1
91.4

51.0
77.2
70.0
65.7
51.1
42.3
23.8
43.8
37.2
66.7

67.8
81.7
76.8
70.4
64.3
68.6
44.8
69.0
63.8
71.0

58.7

Class I

93.4

Class II

87.8

Class III

74.7

Class IV

58.0

Class V

46.0

Class VI

33.2

56. 6

51.5

88.1

EASTERN REGION

15.6
3.5
8.3
14.3
17.1
16.1
16.1
18.4
16.7

25.1
.3
2.1
6.4
19.1
33.1
42.5
25.2
35.5

.1

.4

61.1

Class I

96.5

Class II

.6
.4
.2
.3
.4
.4
.3

94.0

Class III

.1
.1
.1

.1

.3
.3

.9
.5
.5

85.5

Class IV

68.2

Class V. ... __.

51.2

Class VI

36.0

.2

60.2

47.9

100.0

SOUTHERN REGION

3.0
.1
1.4
1.2
2.7
2.6
2.8
3.8
4.0

24.8
22.5
39.1
37.9
27.1
21.3
18.2
25.7
24.8

44.5
3.5
8.9
33.0
49.6
54.3
53.3
38.7
39.7

.1
.2

.3

10.6
5.6
4.0
3.8
6.7
11.5
17.9
10.6
10.9
5.6

4.8
1.8
1.7
2.6
4.6
6.2
12.4
5.7
9.0
8.6

8.3
4.4
2.9
4.4
8.1
10.1
16.0
9.9
11.8
33.3

4.8
3.3
2.7
3.6
5.0
8.2

10.6
4.9
5.5

25.8

41.7

Class I

.1
.3

90.6

Class II

.3

.2
.3
.3
.4

85.7

Class III

62.0

Class IV

41.0

Class V

31.6

Class VI

.1

.1
.1

25.9

46.8

.1

.3

45.3

94.4

CENTRAL REGION

14.5
3.8
9.1
14.8
18.1
16.9
17.8
12.6
13.8

12.2
5.4
6.4
11.6
15.7
13.6
11.9
13.5
13.3

14.4

.4

3.0

7.0

13.9

21.2

30.2

22.9

24.6

.1

.6

.3
.3
.3
.5
.3
.2
.3

65.6

Class I

94.0

Class II .

.1
.4
.8
1.1
1.1
.6
.7

86.1

Class III...

75.2

Class IV.

.1

.1

62.6

Class V

64.6

Class VI

38.5

.1

68.2

51.9

91.4

GREAT PLAINS REGION

10.6
2.6
7.8
14.0
13.6
13.6
6.2
9.3
6.6
16.7

2.4
.5
1.1
3.1
3.8
2.3
2.5
3.6
2.0

20.7
15.1
21.3
17.6
20.7
23.2
21.9
21.7
22.2

19.6

2.4
6.4
11.7
19.6
23.9
37.6
23.9
28.5

.1

.5
.1

(Z)

.6
.7
.7

.5
.9
.4
.6
.5
.5
.7
.7
.3

61.1

Class I ..

90.5

Class II

.1

.2
.2
.1

83.9

Class III

69.4

Class IV

58.1

Class V

51.7

Class VI

.2

39.0

.2
.3

56.7

Residential

.2

62.8
60.0

WESTERN REGION

All farms

Class I

20.5
13.4

18.0
20.3
21.1
23.8
28.8
19.4
22.6

6.1
1.3
2.2
5.2
7.9
8.2
13.9
6.2
7.6

.2
.3
.2
.2
.1
.1
.5
.4
.3

.2

.8
.3
.3
.5
1.7
1.2
1.9
.5
.5

86.5
94.9

Class II

.2
.1
.2

93.8

Class III

88.0

Class IV

83.1

Class V

81.3

Class VI

.5
.4

3.2

72.5

84.9

84.9

71.0

Z 0. 05 percent or less.

PART-TIME FARMING

37

Household facilities, by economic class, by five regions. — The
percentage of farms that reported electricity, telephone, and piped
running water is directly related to economic class (Table 22).
Classes I, II, and III generally have a higher percentage with the
facility than is the case with the lower commercial classes. Part-
time farms (Class VII) ranked significantly higher than those in
Class VI, indicating relatively higher levels of living among the
part-time farms. The residential (Class VIII) farms are generally
somewhat lower in percentage than the part-time group, espe-
cially in the East.

Comparisons by regions show that the South ranks considerably
lower than the others. However, almost as large a percentage
of southern farms (89.0 percent) have electricity as in the United
States as a whole (93.0 percent). The percentage of farms in the
South (41.7 percent) having piped running water is lower than
that of any other region and is significantly lower than the United
States average (58.8 percent). Telephones show the widest or
greatest difference. Only 19.8 percent of the Southern farms have
telephones as compared with 48.8 percent for the United States,
and a high of 68.3 percent in the Central Region.

Data on television sets and home freezers give evidence of con-
siderable differences by economic class in levels of living (Table
23). For the United States, for example, 63.1 percent of Class I
farms have television sets as compared with only 16.2 percent of
Class VI farms. The variation in percentage having home
freezers is even wider from 65.4 percent of Class I farms to 16.6
percent of Class VI. The percentage of part-time farms having
these items is about twice that for Class VI. The relationship or
percentages are remarkably consistent among the major regions.

Table 23. — Percent of Farms Reporting Television Set and
Home Freezer, by Economic Class, for the United
States and Regions: 1954

Region and economic
class

UNITED STATES

All farms

Class I

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI.

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

THE NORTH

All farms

ClassI

Class II...

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time

Residential ,

Abnormal

Tele-
vision
set,
1954

Home

freezer,

1954

Percent

Percent

35.5

32.2

63.1

65.4

56.4

58.9

45.3

46.2

33.2

32.6

26.3

23.5

16.6

14.7

36.2

27.4

32.4

21.9

52.9

63.6

46.8

41, 1

68.1

68.1

60.5

61.1

48.9

48.7

40.4

37.3

37.5

30.8

26.6

20.3

51.4

33.9

48.3
58.6

28.3

57.7

Region and economic
class

THE SOUTH

All farms

ClassI

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

THE WEST

All farms

ClassI

Class II

Class III

Class IV

Class V.

Class VI

Part-time

Residential

Abnormal

Tele-

vision

set,

1954

Percent

25.2

62. 3

52.5

39.2

24.9

19. 0

12.6

27.4

25.1

57.3

37.8

56.5

42.3

35.5

31.2

30.2

22.0

38.5

39.5

35.5

Home

freezer,

1954

Percent
22.5
63.1
53.7
40.0
25.8
17.8
11.9
22.4
17.8
57.4

42.3
63.4
55.2
44.9
38.6
34.6
26.8
36.2
33.8
40.2

The percentage of farms reporting telephone and electricity
increased sharply between 1950 and 1954 (Table 24). In 1950
only 38.2 percent had a telephone. In 1954, 48.8 percent had one.
As to electricity, 78.3 percent had it in 1950, whereas 93.0 percent
had electricity in 1954. Substantial changes occurred in each of
three major regions — the North, the South, and the West.

Substantial and rather remarkable changes occurred in some
regions and classes. In the South, for example, only 70.5 percent
of the farms had electricity in 1950, whereas 90.4 percent had it in
1954. Only 57.5 percent of Class VI farms in the South had
electricity in 1950 as compared with 82.9 percent in 1954.

Table 24. — Percent of Farms Reporting Telephone and
Electricity, by Economic Class of Farm, for the United
States and Regions: Censuses of 1954 and 1950

Region and economic class

Telephone

Electricity

1954

1950

1954

1950

UNITED STATES

All farms

ClassI....

Class II

Percent
48.8
84.0
80.1
68.3
49.2
36.2
25.0
43.6
37.9
83.2

70.6
92.7
87.4
78.7
67.8
. 59.9
51.0
64.0
59.7
90.0

26.2
70.9
57.7
39.7
24.2
19.1
14.0
28.8
26.3
88.9

67.2
82.6
76.9
69.9
63.7
59.9
47.9
66.5
61.0
61.9

Percent
38.2
71.1
71.1
63.2
45.1
29.4
16.7
32.5
25.6
60.0

61.5
84.4
81.7
73.7
61.7
62.1
40.8
54.0
47.9
72.5

16. 1
51.9
44.2
32.6
19.3
12.7
8.0
17.0
14.6
47.8

50.9
69.7
62.9
56.0
49.5
46.1
33.1
IS 3
42.6
51. 1

Percent
93.0
97.8
98.1
97.4
95.3
91.4
84.2
92.6
90.3
89.1

95.7
99.0
98.7
97.8
96.2
93.5
87.3
95.3
93.1
93.6

90.4
96.5
97.0
96.9
94.4
90.1
82.9
90.8
88.8
96.8

94.5
97.0
96.8
95.7
94.5
92.0
87.3
94.3
93.7
70.4

Percent
78.3
90.8
93.7

Class III .

91.7

Class IV

85.2

Class V

75.5

Class VI

60.8
78.5

70.8

71.8

THE NORTH

81.4

ClassI

93.1

ClassII

95.0

Class III

92.7

Class IV

87.1

Class V

80.3

Class VI

68.5

84.8

80.0

77.6

THE SOUTH

70.5

Class I

87.5

Class II

91.3

Class III .

89.4

Class IV .

82.0

Class V

71.3

Class VI

57.5

73.3

65.6

69. 2

THE WEST

86.5

Class I

90. 6

Class II

91.1

Class III

89.6

Class IV . ..

86.6

Class V

85.1

Class VI ..

75.9

86.9

83.2

63.8

38 FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

E. ECONOMIC CLASS V FARMS, PART-TIME, AND COMMERCIAL, 1954

A special tabulation is presented in this section of Economic
Class V farms having value of farm sales from $1,200 to $2,499.
The tabulation divides these farms into part-time and commercial
groups. Out of 769,080 farms, 233,780, or 30.4 percent of the total,
are classed as part-time, where the operator worked off farm 100
days or more, or other income of the family exceeded the value of
farm products sold. About 535,300 farms, 69.6 percent of the
total, are classed as commercial, where the operator did not work
off farm as much as 100 days and the value of farm sales exceeded
other income of the family.

The United States is divided into five regions for analysis of
these farms in Figure 22, and the distribution of farms among
these regions is given in Table 25. The size of the regions varies
from 40.7 percent of total farms in the South to only 6.0 percent in
the West; and from a proportion of 21.0 percent part-time and

79.0 percent commercial in the South to 53.5 percent part-time and
46.5 percent commercial in the Western Region.

Purpose of analysis. — Class V farms are near the lower end of a
distribution of commercial farms and almost one-third of the
operators work off the farm 100 days or more. Therefore, they
illustrate notable characteristics and possibilities in adjustments
between farm and nonfarm employment. The purpose of this
tabulation and analysis is to ascertain how part-time and com-
mercial farms in the Class V group differ as to size of farm, operat-
ing characteristics, type of farm, use of land, living facilities,
geographic location, and other factors. Accompanying discussion
also brings out important differences among the regions, suggests
directions for necessary adjustments in size and type of farm to
increase farm income and labor efficiency, and gives some indica-
tion of the extent to which off-farm employment serves as an
alternative to farming.

Table 25. — Class V Farms, (Part-Time and Commercial), for the United States and Regions: 1954

Region

Number of farms

Part-time and commercial as
percent of all farms

Region as percent of United States

All farms

Part-time

Commercial

All farms

Part-time

Commercial

All farms

Part-time

Commercial

769, 080

116,780
313, 180
187, 800
105, 240
46, 080

233, 780

36, 140
65,800
74,360
32, 740
24, 740

635, 300

80,640

247, 380

113,440

72, 500

21, 340

100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0
100.0

30.4

30.9
21.0
39.6
31.1
63.7

69.6

69.1
79 0
60 4
68.9
46.3

100.0

15.2

40.7

24.4

13.7

6.0

100.0

15.5
28.1
31 8
14.0
10.6

100.0

15.1

46.2

21.2

13.5

4.0

%M

5 MAJOR AREAS

GRJ E A T

W

<T

S, T

e R

N

EN T R A L

P L A I N S

SOUTHERN

US DEPARTMENT OF CO

MAP NO. A5U-556

#fc^

auREUI OF TIC CENSUS

Figure 22.

PART-TIME FARMING

39

Off-farm employment and income. — In 1954, 43.2 percent of
total farm operators worked off their farms; more than half of
these, 23.5 percent, worked off their farms 100 days or more and
almost the same number, 23.2 percent, had other income of the
family exceeding the value of farm sales (Table 26). The propor-
tions working off farms 100 days or more differ considerably from
region to region, with only 15.4 percent working off farms 100 days
or more in the South as against 40.9 percent in the Western
Region. Likewise, the proportion with other income exceeding
the value of farm sales was almost three times as large (44.6
percent) in the Western Region as in the South (15.3 percent).
These differences suggest other noteworthy differences in farm
operation, in off-farm employment, and in level of living.

Value of land and buildings per farm and per acre. — Part-time
farms rank consistently higher than commercial farms in terms of
value of land and buildings, both per farm and per acre (Table 27).
The average value per farm is higher for part-time farms in each
of the regions, although the differences are not so large as the
differences in value per acre. The differences in value per acre
between part-time and commercial farms are most marked in the
Western Region. This indicates that the part-time farms generally
have a smaller acreage than the commercial farms in the West,
and generally either are located on more productive land or are
engaged in more intensive farming.

Total acreage per farm, part-time and commercial farms. — The
average of 136.1 acres for part-time farms in the United States is

Table 26. — Class V Farms, Number of Operators and Percent, by Other Income Exceeding Value of Farm Products Sold

and Work Off Farm, for the United States and Regions: 1954

Other income and work off farm

Number of operators

Percent of operators

Region

Total

Other income

of family

exceeding

value of farm

products sold

Working
off farm

Working
off farm
100 days
or more

Total

Other income

of family

exceeding

value of farm

products sold

Working
off farm

Working
off farm

100 days

or more

United States

769, 080

116, 780
313, 180
187, 800
105, 240
46,080

178, 440

27, 840
47,880
56,440
25, 740
20, 540

332, 080

47,520
118,640
92,560
47,340
26,020

181,020

28,420
48, 140
60,260
25,360
18,840

100.0

100.0
100. 0
100.0
100.0
100.0

23. 2

23.8
15.3
30.1
24.5
44.6

43.2

40.7
37.9
49.3
45.0
S6.5

23.5

24.3

15.4

32.1

24.1

40.9

Table 27- — Class V Farms (Part-time and Commercial), by more than the average of 128.4 acres for commercial farms.

Value of Land and Buildings Per Farm and Per Acre, (See Table 28.) This larger total acreage for part-time farms is al-

for the United States and Regions: 1954 most entirel>' due to the differences observed in the South, where

the average of 129.2 acres for part-time farms is significantly larger
than the 77.1 acres for commercial farms. In each of the other
regions part-time farms are smaller in total acreage than the com-
mercial farms. In the Western Region, in particular, this differ-
ence is substantial; commercial farms average 367.7 acres per farm
as compared with 201.5 acres for the part-time farms.

Cropland harvested. — Cropland harvested per farm is about the
same for part-time and commercial farms in both the Eastern and
the Southern Regions, while in the Central, Great Plains, and
Western Regions it is consistently more for commercial farms
than for part-time farms, the greatest spread being 52.0 acres per
farm for commercial farms in the Western Region as compared
with 22.7 acres for part-time farms.

Table 28. — Class V Farms (Part-Time and Commercial), Land Use Per Farm, for the United States and Regions: 1954

Value of land and buildings (dollars)

Region

Per farm

Per acre

All
farms

Part-
time

Commer-
cial

All
farms

Part-
time

Commer-
cial

9,100

8,409
5.890
9,868
13, 027
17, 865

10, 798

9,472
7,751
9,933
13. 570
18, 226

8,335

7,920
5,384
9.823
12, 785
17,441

74.42

87.81
74 68
90.85
56.75
74.13

85.25

10106
72.42

110.88
58.48

103. 45

69.29

81.92

Southern

Central ... ...

75.61
80.85
55.98

Average acreage per farm

Land use

United States

Eastern Region

Southern Region

Central Region

Great Plains Region

Western Region

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

Total acreage per farm

130.7
38.0
10.8

7.7
19.8
14.7

34.0

64.6

136.1

32.1
12.4

7.5
23.4
16.0

38.8
74.6

128.4
40.6
10.2

7.8
17.7
14 2

31.9

69.8

100.5
27.5
13.3

5.4
11.0
23.1

15.7
40.0

98.9
27.0
13.3

6.4
8.4
21.2

18.7
40.4

101.2
27.8
13.4

4 9
12 2
23.9

14.3
39.9

88.0
25.7

7.7

4.7
16 9
19.9

10.2
34.8

129.2
25.7
13.6

6.0
29.7
29.6

19.8
63.1

77.1
25.7
6.1

4.4
13.6
17.4

7.7
27.3

113.1
42.4
10.9

4.4
21.6
8.2

16.5
49.0

94.8

35.4

9.4

4.9
18.3
6.4

13 2
40.9

125.2
46.7
11.8

4.1
23 7
9.4

18.7
54.2

2.iS 1
79.4
14.7

18.0
27.9
3.8

104.5
147.1

235.4
50.1
15.0

14.2

36.2
6.7

107.2
158.4

268.3
92.6
14.6

19.8
24.1
2.5

103.3
142.0

278.5
36 3
16.6

23.0
35.7
10.1

152.6
204.9

201.5
22.7
13.2

11.5
26.8
13.1

105.7
145.7

367.7

Cropland used only for pasture.

Cropland not harvested and not

pastured

20.5
36.3

Woodland not pastured _

Other pasture (not cropland

6.7

206 9

40

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Acreage pastured. — Total acreage pastured is about the same
for part-time and commercial farms in the Eastern Region, more
for commercial farms in the Central and Western Regions, and
more for part-time farms in the South and the Great Plains Region.
The largest spreads are found in the South, with 63.1 acres of
pasture for part-time farms and 27.3 acres for commercial farms.
The opposite situation is found in the Western Region; 155.7
acres of pasture for part-time farms compared with 261.9 acres
for commercial farms.

Woodland per farm. — Woodland per farm does not differ con-
sistently between part-time and commercial farms among the
regions, although for the United States both woodland pastured
and woodland not pastured is less for commercial farms than for
part-time farms. In the Eastern and Central Regions, commercial
farms have more woodland per farm than the part-time farms,
while in the Southern Region the total of 59.3 acres of woodland
per farm for part-time farms is almost twice the total of 30.9 acres
for commercial farms. In the Great Plains a total of 36.2 acres of
woodland pastured and 6.7 acres of woodland not pastured on
part-time farms is significantly greater than the 24.1 acres pastured
and the average of 2.5 acres pastured on the commercial farms.
In the Western Region the commercial farms have a large acreage
of woodland pastured and a small acreage not pastured.

Summary of land-use comparisons. — These differences in land
use between part-time and commercial farms among regions
suggest several conclusions. Apparently the part-time farms
generally have more livestock and less acreage in cash crops than
commercial farms. The greater extent of pasture for part-time
farms is most marked in the South; the opposite extreme is found
in the Western Region. The smaller acreage of cropland harvested
on part-time farms is most evident in the Central. Great Plains,
and Western Regions.

The general picture that emerges is one of cash cropping among
these small-scale commercial farms, with land being used more
extensively among the commercial than among the part-time
farms in the Central, Great Plains, and Western Regions. In
contrast there is a more intensive type of cropping, typically
cotton and/or tobacco, among the commercial farms in the South.

Classification by type of farm. — These general observations
are demonstrated more precisely in Table 29, and the reasons
for the differences are made more evident, where it is shown that
60.1 percent of the commercial farms are classed as field-crop
farms, other than vegetable and fruit-and-nut farms, while only
41.7 percent of the part-time farms are so classed. Further, 19.9

percent of the commercial farms are classed as predominantly other
field-crop farms, whereas only 10.8 percent of the part-time farms
are in this class. On the other hand, almost twice as large a
proportion of the part-time farms (28.7 percent) as compared with
the commercial farms (15.7 percent) are classed as livestock farms
other than dairy and poultry.

Classification by type of farm, by regions. — The classification
by regions further clarifies the general picture. In the Eastern,
Southern, and Western Regions, particularly, the percentage of
commercial farms classified as field-crop farms is higher than in
the case of part-time farms. In the Eastern Region about twice
as large a proportion of commercial farms (57.0 percent) are pri-
marily field-crop, other than vegetable and fruit-and-nut, than is
the case of the part-time farms (34.2 percent) ; whereas more than
twice the percentage of part-time farms (14.7 percent compared
with 6.3 percent for commercial farms) are primarily poultry. In
the South, 57.5 percent of the commercial farms are primarily
cotton as against 44.1 percent of the part-time farms; and only 5.4
percent of the commercial farms are livestock farms other than
dairy and poultry as against 19.1 percent of the part-time farms.

On the other hand, in the Western Region, 18.8 percent of the
commercial farms are primarily field-crop, other than vegetable
and fruit-and-nut, as against only 10.6 percent of the part-time
farms. However, in this case the part-time farms are not so
likely to be primarily livestock, although 30.1 percent are pri-
marily fruit-and-nut farms as against only 12.8 percent of the
commercial farms.

In the Central Region, however, most of the proportions are
reversed. The commercial farms tend toward livestock and away
from cash crops, in comparison with the part-time farms. A
smaller percentage of Class V commercial farms are primarily
field-crop farms, other than vegetable and fruit-and-nut, 22.0
percent as compared with 28.6 percent of part-time farms; only
19.1 commercial farms are cash-grain as compared with 26.9 per-
cent of the part-time farms; 39.5 percent of the commercial farms
are primarily dairy and 5.9 percent, primarily livestock as com-
pared with 29.2 percent primarily dairy and 4.2 percent primarily
livestock for the part-time farms. The pattern in the Central
Region is for part-time farming to be associated with grains
and field crops and for commercial farms to tend toward chiefly
dairy and livestock. Evidently in the Corn Belt, primarily crop
farming permits greater mobility for the operators, and it comple-
ments off-farm employment.

Table 29. — Class V Farms (Part'Time and Commercial), by Type of Farm, for the United States and Regions: 1954

Percent of all farms

Type of farm

Ignited States

Eastern Region

Southern Region

Central Region

Great Plains Region

Western Region

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All

farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All

farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All

farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Tart-
tlme

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

100.0

54.7
26.2
11.2
17.3

19.5
14.3
10.6
5.6
4.2

2.9
2.3
2.1
1.0
.9

100.0

41.7
15 6
15.1
10.8

28.7
16.1
11.6
5.4
7.1

4.0
5.4
2.2
1.9
1.6

100.0

liO. 1

30.5

9.7

19.9

15.7
13.5
10.1
5.6
3.0

2.4

1.1

2.1

.6

.7

100.0

50.2
.4

8.0
41.9

15.4
15.9
10.6
6". 5

8.8

3.1
2.2
1.0

1.4
1.2

100.0

34.2
.3

10.4
23.5

23.2

18.9
11.6
5.2
14.7

5.8
4.3

.6
2.0
1.5

100.0

57.0

.4

7.0

49.6

12.1
14.6
10.2
7.1
6.3

1.9
1.3

1.2
1.2
1.0

100.0

80.5

54.9

1.8

23.8

8.1
3.6
6.5
3.1
1.9

3.1
1.1

_ 9
'.9
.4

100.0

67.7

44.1

2.7

20.9

19.1
3.7
8.1
3.5

4.8

4.4

3.5

.2

2.2

100.0

83.7

57.5

1.6

24.5

5.4
3.6
6.0
3.0

1.2

2.8
.5
.2
.5
.3

100.0

24.6
1.2

22.2
1.2

27.4

35.5

14.2

7.4

5.5

1.6
1.3

5.2
.7
1.2

100.0

28.6
.8

26.9
.9

29.7
29.2
12.4
6.0
7.6

2. 1
2.3
4.2
1.2
1.5

100.0

22.0
1.4

19.1
1.4

26.0
39.5
15.3
8.3
4.1

1.2

.7
5.9

.4
1. 1

100.0

47.2

19.4

25.8

2.0

39.9
6.5

15.0
8.1
2.4

2.6
.3

4.2
.3

1.2

100.0

46. 0
18.4
24.2
3.4

50.4
6.4

14.1
7.7
3.4

3.0
.4

3.4
.8

1.9

100.0

47.7

19.8

26.4

1.5

35.7
6.5

15.3
8.3
1.9

2.5
.3

4.5
.2
.9

100. 0

14.4

.5

11.5

2.4

36.2
19.4
16.3

7.9
7.5

6.7
21.9
1.7
3.1
2.6

100.0

10.6

8.5
2.1

34.6

18.6
16.2
6.5
6.1

7.6
30.1
2.1
4.2
4.0

100.0

Field-crop farms, other than vege-

18.8

1.1

14.8

2.8

Livestock farms, other than dairy
and poultry

38.0
20.2

General farms

16.3
9.3

Poultry farms

10.1
5.8

12.8

Miscellaneous

1.2
1.9
1. 1

PART-TIME FARMING

41

In the Great Plains the differences between part-time and
commercial farms are perhaps less marked than in any other
region. About the same percentage of farms are primarily field-
crop farms, other than vegetable and fruit-and-nut — 47.7 percent
of the commercial farms as compared with 40.0 percent of the part-
time farms. A larger proportion of the part-time farms are
primarily livestock other than dairy and poultry — 50.4 percent of
the part-time farms as compared with only 35.7 percent of the
commercial farms.

Part-time and commercial farms as a percentage of all farms of
same type. — In Table 30, the comparisons are based on part-time
and ci immercial farms shown as a percentage of all farms of the same
type. Of all farms, 2S.S percent are classed as part-time and 71.2
percent as commercial. Some types of farms are predominantly
commercial; other types tend toward part-time fanning. For ex-
ample, 78.3 percent of field-crop f: rms, other than vi getable and
fruit-and-nut are commercial, S3.0 percent of the cotton farms
are commercial, 82.1 percent of the other field-crop farms are
commercial. In contrast, 07. 3 percent of fruit-and-nut farms are
part-time; 55.0 percent of the miscellaneous farms and 48.8 per-
cent of the poultry farms are part-time.

Commercial farms constitute 70.4 percent of the total farms in
the Eastern Region, 80.3 percent of the total in the South, 61.1
percent in the Central Region, 71.5 in the Great Plains, and only
47.4 in the Western Region. In the South, field-crop and cotton
farms are predominantly commercial (Table 27), while a larger

proportion of the livestock farms are part-time. Just the opposite
situation is found in the Central Region, where a smaller per-
centage of crop farms and a larger percentage of livestock farms
are commercial. In the Western Region, field-crop and poultry
farms are predominantly commercial, and fruit-and-nut farms
tend toward part-time operation.

Distribution of farms by cropland harvested. — Distribution of
part-time and commercial farms in Table 31 according to acres of
cropland harvested illustrates relatively small differences between
the two groups in the United States generally. The differences
between tin' two groups are not particularly marked in the Eastern
and the Southern Regions, but in the Central, Great Plains, and
Western Regions part-time farms have twice as large a percentage
in (lie 1- to 9-acre group as do commercial farms and a smaller
percentage have harvested acreage in excess of 50 acres.

Perhaps the most important generalization based on these data
is that a smaller percentage of the commercial farms are found in
(lie smallest size group and a larger percentage, have more than
50 acres of cropland harvested. In each region except the Eastern,
the commercial farms have a smaller percentage in the class of 1
to 9 acres harvested. In the South there are fewer commercial
farms with 50 acres or more harvested; in the Central, Great
Plains, and Western Regions a larger percentage of the com-
mercial farms are in the classes of 50-acres-and-over of cropland
harvested. This is consistent with a previous generalization about
these regions — that the commercial farms generally rely more
heavily on cash crops or field crops than do the part-time farms.

Table 30. — Distribution of Class V Farms as Part-Time and Commercial Farms for Each Type of Farm, for the

United States and Regions: 1954

Percent distribution of C

ass V farms as part-time and commercial farms

Type of farm

United States

Eastern Region

Southern Region

Central Region

Great Plains Region

Western Region

Part-
timo

Com-
mercial

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

28.8

21.7
17.0
38.5

17.9

42.3
32.4
31.0
28.0

is v

40.3
07. 3
29.0
55.0
47.8

71.2

78.3
83.0
61 5
82.1

57.7
07. 0
08.4
72.0
51.2

59.7
32.7
71.0
44.4
52.3

29.0

20.2
23.8
38. 5
10.0

44.7
35.2
32.5
23.6
49.5

55.9
58. 3
18.2
41.6
38.5

70.4

79.8
70. 2
01.5
83.3

55. 3
64.8
67.5
76 4
50.5

44.1

41.7
81.8
58.4

61.5

19.7

16.6
15.9
29. 1
17.3

46.2
20.3
24.8
22.5
49.0

27.8
03.6
14.3
50.8
33.3

80.3

83. 4

si 1
70.9
82.7

53.8
79.7
75.2
77.5
51.0

72.2
36. 1
85.7
49. 2

00, 7

38.9

45.2
25.0
47.2
28.6

42.1
32.0
34.0
31.7

53. 8

53.8
08.2
31.5

i;r, 7
47. 0

01.1

54.8
75.0
52.8
71.4

57.8
08.0
I'.!!. 0
08.3
46.2

40.2
31.8
08.5
33.3
52.4

28.5

27.8
27.0
26.8
47.4

30.0
28.1
26.9
26.8
40.9

32.5
33.3
23.1
62.5
45.5

71.5

72.2
73.0
73.2
52.6

64.0
71.9
73.1
73.2
59.1

07. 5
00. 7
76.9
37.5
54.5

52.6
38.7

47.4

Field-crop farms, other than vegetable and fruit-

61.3

Cotton farms

Cash-grain farms ._

Other field-crop farms

Livestock farms, other than dairy and poultry

100.0

39. 1)
45.7

50.2
50. 5
52. 4
43.6
35.9

59.4
72.3
65.6
71.2
80.0

61.0
54.3

49.8
49.5

47.6

56.4

04.1

40. 6

27.7

34.4

28.8

Vegetable farms.. ... _

20.0

Table 31. — Class V Farms (Part-Time and Commercial), Cropland Harvested, for the United States and Regions: 1954

Percent of farms reporting

Cropland harvested

United States

Eastern Region

Southern Region

Central Region

Great Plains Region

Western Region

All

farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All

farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercia]

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-

lllllr

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

Farms reporting _
1 to 9 acres ...

100.0

11.0
22.3
18.4
23.0

18.4

5.4

1.4

.1

100.0

13.8
19.5
18.0
25.0

19.5

3.6

.5

100.0

9.8
23.4
18.5
22.2

18.0

6.1

1.8

. 1

100. 0

18.7
24.1
17.6
24.3

12.2
2.1
.3

100. 0

20.8
19.9

14.7
29. 1

14.4
.9
.3

100. 0

17.9
25.8
18.9

22.4

12.9

2.6

.3

100.0

12. 6
32.8
24.0
20.5

9.0
.9

. 1

100.0

10.0
28.9
22.2

19.2

12.3
1.3
.1

. 1

100. 0

11.8
33.8
24.5
20.9

8.1
.8
.1

100. 0

5.3

11.7
15.3
30.5

30.0

6.7

.5

100, 0

7.9
It. 1
17. H
31.7

25.0

3.2

.3

100. 0

3.7
10.2
13.6
29.8

33. 1
8.9

.7

100. o

2.6
5.7
7.7
18.3

36.1

21.2

7.9

.5

iim i)

4.7
7.5
13.7

22.7

34.9

14.3

2.1

.1

100. 0

1.8

4.9
5.3
16.5

30. 6

23.9

10.3

.6

. 1

100.0

21.5
21.3

15.6

17 :;

14.7

6.2

3.2

.4

loo. o

28.1
25.0
17. 1
10.1

10. 6
2.5
.6

100.0

14.1
17.3

20 to 29 acres.

30 to 49 acres

50 to 99 acres

100 to 199 acres

200 to 499 acres.

500 to 999 acres.

13.9
18.6

19.1

10.2

0. 0

.8

42

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Table 32. — Class V Farms (Part-Time and Commercial), by Class of Work Power, Farm Labor, and Specified Farm Expenditures,

for the United States and Regions: 1954

Percent of all farms

Item

United States

Eastern Region

Southern Region

Central Region

Great Plains Region

Western Region

All

farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

100.0
55.9
33.7
22.2
44.0
20.8
23.2

90.9
75.0
41.6
11.0

2.6

8.9
86.5

76.8
59.9
49.2
48.9
.3

70.2
69.2

100.0
64.8
44.2
20.6
35.1
12.7
22.4

86.6
88.7
35.7
16.0

4.0

11.6
83.5

75.7
59.6
49.4
49.1
.4

75.3
74.7

100.0
52.0
29.1
22.9
48.0
24.4
23.6

92.8

69.0

44.1

9.3

2.0

7.7
91.4

77.3
60.0
49.1
48.8
.3

67.9
66.8

100.0
54.2
31.1
23.1
45.9
24.6
21.3

91.0
92.5
40.2
13.7

3.5

10.6
89.4

73.5
53.8
53.2
52.7
.5

73.8
68.4

100.0
64.8
45.7
19.1
35.2
12.2
23.0

87.8
90.3
35.7
19.6

4.4

15.8
85.8

73.4
56.9
53.3
53.0
.3

77.9
75. J

100.0
49.6
24.9
24.7
50.3
30.0
20.3

92.4
93.6
42.2
11.0

3.1

8.3
90.9

73.5
52.4
53.2
62.6
.6

72.0
65.4

100.0
36.0
15.1
20.9
64.0
32.0
32.0

90.2
49.7
47.6
11.5

2.5

9.8
88.4

81.4
59.1
57.4
57.2
.3

57.4
64.0

100.0
49.1
22.5
26.6
60.9
23.6
27.3

84.2
87.0
37.9
18.3

4.9

14.7
80.5

79.3

54.6

61.4

60.9

.6

67.1
61.8

100.0
32.6
13.2
19.4
67.4
34.2
33.2

91.8

39.7

50.2

9.7

2.9

8.5
90.5

82.0
60.3
56.3
56.1
.2

54.8
61.9

100.0
75.8
65.7
20.1
24.2
9.0
15.2

91.9

92.3

36.2

7.3

2.0

5.4
89.9

74.0
67.0
34.0
34.0

100.0
78.4
62.7
15.7
21.7
6.0
16.7

88.5

89.2

35.6

8.5

3.0

6.8
85.4

73.0
66.2
34.3
34.3

100.0
74.0
61.1
22.9
26.1
11.8
14.3

94.1

94.3

36.6

5.5

1.3

5.1
92.8

74.6
61.5
33.9
33.9

100.0
78.5
49.1
29.4
21.0
8.4
13.2

92.2
93.1
36.6
11.1

2.6

8.6
95.2

75.7
59.4
49.4
49.1
.3

81.0

86.2

100.0
71.6
47.0
24.5
28.6
9.2
19.4

86.6
88.1
31.6
14.3

4.4

9.9
84.4

80.0
60.2
57.1
56.8
.4

83.0
79.5

100.0
82.7
50.7
32.0
18.7
8.2
10.6

96.1

96.6

39.5

9.8

1.8

8.1
94.4

73.7
69.1
45.9
45.6
.2

80.1
89.3

100.0
63.4
41.7
21.7
36.6
12.0
24.6

88.3
91.3
37.2
16.1

3.5

12.7
33.0

68.3
52.4
44.8
43.3
1.5

69.0
76.5

100.0
58.3
41.9
16.4
41.7
12.3
29.4

85.0
89.3
35.5
19.2

3.2

16.7
81.3

72.3

56.4

47.1

45.8

1.2

65.6
75.2

100.0

69.3

41.5

Tractor and no horses or mules. ..

27.8
30.6

No tractor, but horses and/or mules

11.6
19.0

Week of Sept. 26-Oct. 2 or Oct. 24-30:

92.1

93.6

38.8

11.8

Regular workers (to be employed 160 days

3.8

Seasonal workers (to be employed less than

8.1

Operator working on farm 1 or more hours —

90.8
63.8

47.9

42.3

$lto$2499 -

40.4

1.9

83.4
83.6

81.2
83.6

84.8
83.6

72.9

77.9

Source of work power: Tractor, horses, and/or mules. — Sources
of work power are of paramount interest in farming. A larger
percentage of part-time farms (64.8 percent) than commercial
farms (52.0 percent) have tractors, and a larger percentage of part-
time farms (44.2 percent) than commercial farms (29.1 percent)
have both tractor and horses and/or mules. About twice as high
a percentage of commercial farms (24.4 percent) as part-time
farms (12.7 percent) have horses and/or mules and no tractor.

About the same percentage have no tractor and no horses or
mules. These generalizations also apply in the Eastern and South-
ern Regions where tractors are more frequent among the part-time
farms than among the commercial group. In the South, where
commercial farms are depending heavily on field crops, only about
one-third of the commercial farms (32.6 percent) have a tractor
and about one-third (33.2 percent) have no tractor and no horses
or mules. Many of these farms are cropper units.

In the Central Region about the same percentage of part-time
farms (78.4 percent) as commercial farms (74.0 percent) have a
tractor. A larger percentage of the part-time farms have horses
and/or mules (62.7 percent to 51.1 percent), while more of the
commercial farms have only tractors (22.9 percent to 15.7 percent).
Also more of the commercial farms (11.8 percent) than the part-
time farms (5.0 percent) have horses and/or mules and no tractors.
However, only about one-sixth of the farms, as compared with
one-third in the South, have neither tractors or horses and/or
mules.

The situation is generally reversed in the Great Plains and in
the Western Region where a higher percentage of commercial
farms have tractors and a smaller percentage of the commercial
farms have neither a tractor, horses and/or mules. In fact, in
the Great Plains Region only 10.5 percent of the commercial farms —
the low for any group — have no tractor and no horses and/or
mules.

Family and hired workers : Week of September 2&-October 2 or
October 24-30. — The differences among part-time and commercial
farms are generally not large in respect to family workers and
hired help (Table 32). On the commercial farms there is some-
what higher percentage of family workers and a lower percentage
having hired help. About 44.1 percent of the commercial farms
and 35.7 percent of the part-time farms had unpaid members of
the operator's family working on the farm during the specified

week; and only 9.3 percent of the commercial farms as against
15.0 percent of the part-time farms had hired workers during the
same week.

Expenditures for machine hire, labor, feed, and fuel. — The
percentage of farm operators hiring machines and labor is remark-
ably uniform between part-time and commercial farms and among
the various regions. Moreover, in general there appears to be no
significant difference between part-time and commercial farms
as to the proportion hiring machines and labor.

Part-time farm operators reporting the specific expenditure
spent more for machine hire, for hired labor, and for feed for
livestock and poultry than did the commercial farmers (Table 33) .
Commercial farmers, with the notable exception of the South,
spent more per farm for gasoline and other petroleum fuels.
These data further emphasize the fact that, for the United States,
part-time farmers tend more toward livestock, and the larger
expenditures for gasoline and other petroleum fuels among
commercial farms are a result of greater emphasis in most regions
on field crops.

Table 33. — Class V Farms (Part-time and Commercial),
Specified Farm Expenditures Per Farm Reporting, for the
United States and Regions: 1954

Specified expenditures andjclass
of farm

Machine hire (dollars):

All farms

Part-time farms

Commercial farms ...

Hired labor (dollars): j ~i

All farms --

Part-time farms

Commercial farms —

Feed for livestock and poultry
(dollars) :

All farms

Part-time farms-. —

Commercial farms

Gasoline and other petroleum
fuels (dollars):

All farms

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

United
States

131.44
147.66
124.36

221. 69
261.33
204.27

406.40
494.42
363.79

202.22
186. 36
210.46

Eastern
Region

114.30
124.23
109. 52

226. 19
255. 94
212.99

478.80
618.92
411.63

163.34
161. 24
164.41

South-
ern
Region

106. 44
135. 82
99.30

206. 48
258.92
191.14

248. 85
343. 35
217.80

168.29
174.24
166.39

Central
Region

136. 45
141.40
133.29

165. 69
198.66
143.87

473. 87
4%. 21
459. 91

201.60
180.02
216.67

Great
Plains
Region

180.43
170. 31
185. 10

242.72
265.10
230. 12

472. 30
664.63
429.09

273. 01
217.30
295.42

West-
ern
Region

211. 62
202.18
224.38

459. 69
409.66
623.75

587.81
568.19
608.09

270.69
217. 18
329.72

PART-TIME FARMING

43

Other specified machinery and expenditures. — Part-time
farms generally appear to be more adequately supplied with other
farm machinery and equipment (Table 34). This is especially
true of such items as milking machines and motortrucks. In some

Table 34. — Class V Farms (Part-time and Commercial),
Percent Reporting Specified Farm Machinery and Equip-
ment, for the United States and Regions: 1954

Machinery and equipment and
type ol farm

Farms reporting electric pig
brooder:

All farms . _ -

Part-time

Commercial --

Farms reporting power feed
grinder:

All farms-.

Part-time-

Commercial

Farms reporting milking ma-
chine:

All farms

Part-time

Commercial

Farms reporting grain combine:

All farms

Part-time -

Commercial

Farms reporting corn picker:

All farms- _

Part-time..

Commercial

Farms reporting pickup baler:

All farms

Part-time

Commercial

Farms reporting field forage har-
vester:

All farms-

Part-time

Commercial ._

Farm reporting motortruck:

All farms.,

Part-time

Commercial

United
States

0.9
1.2

8.9
9.7
8.5

8.4
10.5
6.8

9.9
10.6
8.8

6.0
6.5
5.9

4.6
5.5
4.2

1.0
1.3

39.6
46.7
36.5

Eastern
Region

0.6
.6
.5

8.4
10.0
7.7

9.2
13.6
7.2

4.9
6.1
4.6

3.9
4.2
3.8

6.6
8.6
5.7

1.0
1.4
1.0

39.4
42.7
37.8

South-
ern
Region

0.2
.2
.2

2.8
4.4
2.4

1.7
1.8

.5

3.7
4.9
1.3

1.2
1.4
1.1

1.8
3.6
1.4

33.3
43.9
30.5

Central
Region

2.1
2.7
1.8

13.5
11.7

14.7

18.9
18.3
19.2

15.8
16.1
15.6

15.1
14.8
15.5

5.6
7.5

1.7
1.6

1.7

35.3
39.6
32.4

Oreat
Plains
Region

0.7
.6
.7

18.2
17.3
18.6

6.1
5.3
6.5

22.6
16.9
25.2

9.1

5.2
10.8

5.4
4.9
5.5

1.5
1.6
1.4

56.6
60.9
54.6

West-
ern
Region

1.1
.8
1.5

11.1

7 4
15.4

14 8
12 3

14.4

12.8
7.6
18.8

8.0
6.5
9.7

1.5
1.0
2.2

62.2
63.1
61.1

cases as with milking machines, however, a somewhat larger
percentage of part-time farmers would be expected to have the
given machine since a larger percentage are dairy farms.

Farms by tenure of operator. — A relatively large percentage of
all farm operators are listed as full owners or part owners. (This
is shown in Table 35.) These two groups comprise 69.5 percent
of the total as compared with 30.4 percent listed as tenants.

The stronger ownership status of part-time farmers is shown
in the Eastern, Southern, and Western Regions where significantly
larger percentages of part-time farmers are full owners. In con-
trast, in the Central and Great Plains Regions part-time and
commercial farms are about equal in percentage of ownership.

Nationally, full ownership or part ownership among part-time
farms, totaling 82.0 percent of all part-time farms as compared
with 64.0 percent of ownership among commercial farmers, is
largely the result of considerably greater ownership among part-
time farmers in the South, where 69.3 percent of the part-time
farms are operated by either full or part owners, compared with
only 44.0 percent of commercial farms operated by full owners
or part owners.

If owner operation is accepted as a criterion of financial status
or well-being, there would be little difference among the part-time
and commercial farms except in the South. It appears, however,
that other factors should also be taken into account, such as value
of farm, off-farm income, and type of operation. Part-time
farms by definition, of course, have more off-farm income than
do the commercial farms. In addition, the part-time farms have
been found to be of higher value per farm and per acre, and except
in the Central Region or Corn Belt, part-time farms generally
have larger investments in livestock or, as in the Western Region,
in specialties like fruits or nuts. Thus, although the percentage
of ownership, except in the South, is about as high among com-
mercial Class V operators as among the part-time groups, other
factors suggest that financial status between the two groups is
considerably different. In the South, however, the low percent-
age of ownership among the commercial farms, and the high
percentage of crop-share tenancy in a situation of predominantly
field-crop type of farming, suggest considerable insecurity and
lack of financial reserves among the commercial farm-operator
families.

Table 35. — Class V Farms (Part-Time and Commercial), by Tenure of Operator, for the United States and Regions: 1954

Percent of operators

Tenure of operator

United States

Eastern Region

Southern Region

Central Region

Great Plains Region

Western Region

All
farms

Part-
time

Commer-
cial

All
farms

Part-
time

Commer-
cial

All
farms

Part-
time

Commer-
cial

All
farms

Part-
time

Commer-
cial

All
farms

Part-
time

Commer-
cial

All
farms

Part-
time

Commer-
cial

100.0

53.7

15.8

.2

30.4

23.4
2.4

1.6

.9

2. 1

82.3
17.7

100.0

64.7

17.3

.2

17.8

10.9
2.6
1.5
.6
2.2

(NA)
(NA)

100.0

48.9

15.1

. 1

35.9

28.9
2.3
1.7
1.0

2.1

(NA)
(NA)

100.0

65.5

14.5

.1

20.0

15.3
1.4
.1

1.5
1.7

93.3

6.7

100.0

72.9

14.1

.3

12.7

6.9

2.2

.3

.6

2.8

(NA)
(NA)

100.0
62.1
14.7

100.0

35.5

13.8

.2

50.5

44.0

2.6

.6

.4

2.3

60.6
39.5

100.0

50.4

18.9

.4

30.3

25.9
1.8
.2

2.4

(NA)
(NA)

100.0

31.6

12.4

.1

55.9

49.6

2.8

.8

.5

2.1

(NA)
(NA)

100.0
74.2
15.2

100.0
74.2
15.5

100.0
74.3
15.0

100.0

48.9

23.7

.4

27.0

13.2
3.8
6.2
1.6
2.3

97.0
3.0

100.0

51.4

24.9

.4

23.4

7.6
6.3
5.8
.9
2.7

(NA)
(NA)

100.0

47.8

23.2

.4

28.7

15.7
2.6
6.4
1.8
2.1

(NA)
(NA)

100.0

74.4

16.9

.2

8.5

4.0
1.7
.9

"~L~8~

98.4
1.6

100.0

80.0

13.1

.1

6.8

2.9

1.5

.1

.1

2.2

(NA)
(NA)

Part owners

Managers

21.2
.4

Tenants

Crop-share tenants and crop-

23.2

19.1
1.0

10.6

3.6
2.1

1.9
1.0
2.0

99.6
.4

10.4

3.8
2.2
1.7
1.1
1.6

(NA)
(NA)

10.7

3.4
2.1
1.9
1.0
2.2

(NA)
(NA)

10.4

1.9
1.3

(NA)
(NA)

(NA)
(NA)

NA Not available.

44

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Tables 36 and 37 supplement the description of Table 35 by
providing a direct comparison of relationships (1) with part-time
and commercial farms as a percentage of all farms with similar
tenure in the same region (Table 36), and (2) with part-time and
commercial farms as a percentage of the United States total
(Table 37) .

Table 36. — Class V Farms (Part-Time and Commercial), by
Tenure of Operator, by Type of Farm, for the United
States and Regions: 1954

Tenure of operator and
type of farm

Total all farms

Part-time farms.-

Commercial farms

Full owners -

Part-time farms..

Commercial farms

Part owners

Part-time farms..

Commercial farms.

Managers

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Tenants

Part-time farms .

Commercial farms

Cash

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Share-cash

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Crop-share tenants and crop
pers

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Livestock share.

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Other and unspecified

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Percent distribution within each tenure

United

States

100.0
30.3
69.6

100.0
36.6
63.4

100.0
33.3
66.6

100.0
44.8

55.2

100.0
17.8
82.2

100.0
32.9
67.1

100.0
27.2
72.8

100.0
14.2
85.8

100.0
20.4
79.6

100.0
32.3
67.7

East-
ern
Region

100.0
30.9
69.1

100.0
34.5

65. 5

100.0
30. 1
69.9

100.0
100. 0

100.0
19.7
80.3

100.0
50.0
50.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
14.0
86.0

100.0
11.8
88.2

100.0
49.5
50.5

South-
ern
Region

100.0
?1.0
79.0

100.0
29.8
70.2

100.0
28.8

71.2

100.0
51.9

48.1

100.0
12.6
87.4

100.0
14.9

85.1

100.0

5.0

95.0

100.0
12.2
87.8

100.0

100.0

100.0
22.2

Cen-
tral
Region

100.0
39.6
60.4

100.0
39.5
GO. 5

100.0
40.4
59.6

100 0
40,0
60.0

100.0

37.1
62.9

100.0

41.8
68.2

100.0
41.7
58.3

100.0
32.3
67. 7

Great

Plains
Region

100.0
31.1
68.9

100.0
32.7
67.3

100.0
32.7
67.3

100.0
28.6
71.4

100.0
27.0
73.0

100.0
52.0
48.0

100.0
29.1
70.9

100.0
18.1
81.9

100.0
18.3
81.7

100.0
36.9
63.1

West-
ern
Region

100.0
53.5
46.5

100.0
57.5
42.5

100.0
41.6

58.4

100.0
20.0

80.0

100.0
42.9
57. 1

100.0
48.7
61.3

100.0
4.8
95. 2

100.0
38.7
61.3

100.0
100. 0

100.0
64. 3
35.7

Operators working off farm, by age of operator. — Table 38
shows that in each region the number of days the operator works
off farm is closely correlated with the age of the operator. It also
shows that whether or not he works off farm at all is considerably
influenced by his age. Among all farms, for instance, the per-
centage of farmers working off farm decreases steadily from the
35-to-44 age group to the group 65 years and over; from a peak
of 56.9 percent of all farm operators 35 to 44 years of age working
off farm to 18.6 percent working off farm in the 65-year-and-over
group.

Generally, although almost as large a percentage of the oper-
ators under 25 years of age work off farm as among those 35 to
44 years of age, the younger operators do not work off the farm
as many days. Table 38 shows that 92.8 percent of the part-time
operators under 25, for example, worked off farm, compared with
94.4 percent of those 35 to 44 years of age; yet only 67.4 percent
of those under 25 years worked 100 days or more off farm, whereas
87.7 percent of those 35 to 44 years old did so. Only 42.0 percent
of the younger age group worked 200 days or more off farm while
64.6 percent of those 35 to 44 years old worked off farm that
much. A similar tendency is found among the commercial
farms, where 33.7 percent under 25 worked off farm as compared
with 31.0 percent of those 35 to 44 years of age. More of the
younger ages worked off farm 1 to 49 days and relatively more of
those over 25 worked 50 days or more off farm.

In almost all regions the operators of middle age, that is, from

Table 37. — Class V Farms by Tenure, by Type of Farm,
for the United States and Regions: 1954

Tenure of operator and
type of farm

Total all farms

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Full owners

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Part owners

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Managers.

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Tenants

Part-tinie farms

Commercial farms

Cash

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Share-cash

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Crop-share tenants and crop

pers

Part-time farms -

Commercial farms

Livestock share

Part-time farms --.

Commercial farms

Other and unspecified

Part-time farms

Commercial farms

Farms in region as percent of United States total

United
States

100 0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100 0
100.0

100.0
100 0
100.0

100.0
100. 0
100.0

100.0
100 0
100.0

100 0
100 0
100.0

100 0
100 0
100. 0

100.0
100 0
100.0

100.0
100. 0
100 0

East-
ern
Region

15.2
15.5
15.1

18.5
17.4
19.1

13.9
12.6
14.6

8.6
19.2

10.0
11.1
9.7

8.7
13.2
6.5

9.9
9.8
10.0

26.2
15.2
29.1

12.4
19.1
9.3

South-
ern

Region

40.7
28.2
46.2

27.0
21.9
29.9

35.5
30.7
38.0

46.6
53. 8
40.6

67.7
47.9
72.0

43.7
19.9
55.4

15.9

2.9

20.8

77.6
66.6
79.4

18.5

23.3

44.5
30.5
51.1

Cen-
tral
Region

24.4
31.8
21.2

33.8
36.5
32.2

23.5
28-5
21.0

8.5
18.5
6.3

21.8
26.5
19.4

27.9
38.0
24.1

3.7
11.0
2.5

29.6
60.6
21.7

22.9
22.9
22.9

Great
Plains
Region

13.7
14.0
13.5

12.5
11.1
13.2

20.6
20.2
20.8

36.2
23.1
46.9

12.2

18.4
10.8

21.5
34.1

15.4

52.1

55.6
50.8

7.7
9.8
7.3

25.3
22.7
20.0

15.0
17.2
14.0

West-
ern
Region

6.0
10.5
4.0

8.3
13.0
5.6

6.4
8.0
5.6

8.6
3.8
12.5

1.7
4.0
1.2

4,2
6.3
3.2

3.3

.6

4.4

1.0

2.8

.7

.3
1.5

5.2

10.3
2.7

25 to 54 years who worked off farm at all, did so more days than
those who were under 25 years or those 55 years old and over.
Also both the percentage working off farm, and the days worked
by those so working, declined sharply in the 55-to-64 and in the
65-years-and-over age groups.

Thus, these small-scale farms — particularly the part-time
farms — generally did not absorb the full energies of the operators
in the middle-age brackets. As the operators grew older and
off-farm earnings declined, the farms served more as a basis
for subsistence. However, the large percentage working off farm
in all age groups under 65 possibly suggests that the extent of
off-farm work and earnings is determined considerably by the
opportunities that are available, rather than by the willingness
of the operators to do such work.

Farms having specified facilities. — In the case of each of the
facilities a larger percentage' of the part-time farms than of the
commercial farms have the facility throughout each of the major
regions (Table 39). Sometimes, as with electricity, the differ-
ences are not large and possibly not significant. In most of the
other cases, however, the differences are substantial and they
indicate a higher level of living for the part-time farmers. These
differences appear to be greatest in the South and least in the
Western Region.

Summary and conclusion. — Dividing the farms in Economic
Class V into part-time and commercial groups reveals noteworthy
differences. The part-time farms generally are shown to average
higher in value per farm and per acre. A higher percentage of
the commercial farms are shown to be predominantly field-crop
farms while the part-time farms are more generally livestock,
except in the Corn Belt or Central Region where the opposite
situation prevails. Part-time farms are somewhat better equipped
and apparently have a higher level of living. The work done
off farm is correlated with the age of the operator.

PART-TIME FARMING

45

Table 38. — Class V Farms (Part-Time and Commercial), by Days Operator Worked Off Farm, by Age of Operator, for

the United States and Regions: 1954

Percent of operators

Days of work off farm and age of

United .States

Eastern Region

Southern Region

Central Region

Great Plains Region

Western Region

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All

farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

All
farms

Part-
time

Com-
mercial

Working off farm:

43 6
50 2
55.6
56.9
48 3
35.7
18.6

13.6
20.2
14 2
14 1
16.4
12.5
8.4

6.2

11 2
9.0
7.0
6.2
5.7
2.6

23.8

Is 8
32 3
35-9
25.7
17.6
7.6

6.5
7.1
8.3
9.5
6 8
5.4
1.9

17.4
11.7

24.1
26 4
18 8

12 2
5.7

87 1
92 8
94 (',
94 4
91.9
82.7
48.5

4 0
7 2
2 3
3.0

4 8
5.7
3.9

5.1

18.1

4 8
3.7

5 3
6.6
3.5

78 0
67.4
87.5
87.7
81.8
70.5
41.0

21.2
25 4
22 4
23.2
21.8
21.5
10.4

56.8
42 0
65 1
64 6
60. 1
48.9
30.6

24 4
33 7
32.9
31 0

28 4
2(1 1
11.8

17.8

25 2
21.3
21.8
21.7
14.7

9.4

6. 6

8.5
11.6
'.i 2
6.7
5.4
2 4

41.5

is II
56.3
57.5
50.0
34.1
16.1

12 2
28 0
15.9
11.0
15.9
9.2
8.9

4.5
4 II
5.6
6.6
4.8
4.7
1.3

24 8
16.0
34.9
39.8
29.3
20.3
5.9

5.8
4 II
8.7
8.8
6 7
5.0
1.3

19.1
12.0
26.2
31.0
22 6
15.3
4.7

88.7
83.3
98.0
95 2
94 6

SS 'J

47 1

4 2
16.7
2 0
2 9
4 3
4.4
7.9

4 8

6.1
4 8
4 3
5.9
2.6

79.7
66.7

S'l 'I

87.4
85.9
77.9
36.6

18.5
16.7
22 4
19.4
19.6
19. 1
7 9

61.2

50.0
67 3
68.0
66.3
58.8
28.8

20.2
36.8
29 9
26 0
27.0
15 1
10.1

14.9
31.6

24 7
17.9
21.9
10.9

i.l. 1

4.3
5 3
5 2
8 1
5.1
4.2
111

38.5
41.9
43 2
4S.8
37.9
32.1
18.8

15.7
18.8
15. 1
18.1
17.0
14.1
9.0

7.1
10.3

1(1 2
7.7
7.3
5.2
2.8

15.7
12.8
17.8
23. 1
13.6
12 9
6.3

5.3
6.8
6.3

7.7
4.5
3 7
2.3

10.4
6.0
11.5
15.4
9.1
9.2
4.0

M 8
91.7
87.7
89.1
89. 1
.-:; i,
46.4

4.9
8 3
1.9

5 1
7.9
3.0

4 11

6.2

211. 8

6 6
3 2
9.5
6.0
2.0

73 6
62 5
79.2
80.8
71 7
74.5
40.4

24.8
23.3
28.0
27.0
23.7
21.2
14.8

48. 8
29.2
51.1
53.8
48.0
53 3
25.6

26.0
29 0
30.2

32 7
25 9
21 4
13.7

18.6
21.5
19.0
23. 3
19. 1
16 4
10.7

7.3
7.5
11.3

9 ;,
6 s
5.0
3.0

49.3
75.0
75.3
69.1
59 7
37 2
19, 1

10.9
20.8
13.1

9.6
12.8
11.8

7.4

5. 9

12 5
8.9
IV 1
6 5
5.8

3 6

32.5
41 7
53.3
53 1
40.5
19.6
8.0

8 3

4 2
10.5
11.6

Hi. 9
7.4
2.8

24.1
37.5
42.9
41.9
29 6
12 2
5.2

88.8
100 (1
96. 4
97 6
93 2
82.0
50. 1

3 5
8.3

2.7
1.9

4.4

4 9
4.0

3.5
8 3
1 8
3 3

3 4
4.9

4 0

81.8
83.3
91.9
92 1
85 1
72 2
42.0

21.0
8.3

18 0
92.4
22 9
27.3
14.8

60.7
75.0
73.9
72 4
62.4
44.9
27.2

23.3
50. 0

46.1
30.1
29.6
20 5
11.7

15 8
33 3

27.4
20.3
20.3
14.3
8.2

7.5
HI 7
18.7
9.8
9.2
8. 1
3.5

44.8
54.9
62.7
53.5
54.3
37.6
19.1

15.9
24.5
12.1
15.0
23.7
14.8
9.0

5.1
15.7
7.3
5.4
4.0
6.4
1.6

23.9
14.7
43.3
33.1

26.5
16.5
8.5

6.1
9.8
11.4
8.6
6.6
4.4
1.1

17.8
4.9
31.9
24.5
19.9
12 2
7.4

87.2
100.0
98.3
98.6
91.2
76.1
55.4

3.8

2.8
2.8
9.9
3.0

6.0
25.0
8.4
5.6
2 5
7 1
6.0

77.3
75.0
89.9
90.1
86.0
59.1
46.4

19.8
50.0
23.6
23.4
21.6
15.6
6.0

57.6
25.0
66.2
66.7
64.4
43.5
40.5

26.0
43.9
31.0
27.3
37.8
22.7
11.0

21.4
30.5
24.4
22.0
33. 1
16. 6
10.3

4.7
13.4
6.6
5.3
4.7
6.1
. 7

56.3
78 0
78.9
79.8
62 0
49 9
21.5

7.9
8.5
10.5
5.6
9.7
8.9
6.0

7.7
25.4
11.4
8.5
6.4
9.3
3 0

4u 7
44 1
57 0
65 7
45.8
31.7
12.5

9.5
16.9

9.6
18.4

9.0

9.7
.4

31.2
27.1
47.4
47.3
36.8
21.9
12. 1

85.6
89 1
99 3

•X, 11
91 S

84 6
42.2

3 0

7.1

1.8
8.7

6.1
32.6

2 1
6.1
12 4
3.1

76.5
56.5
92.2
93.5
83.9
63.5
39.1

17.9
21.7
15.6
26.2
16.4
19.5
1.2

58.6
34.8
76.6
67.4
67.5
44.0
37.9

23.0

38.5

25 to 34 years

46.0
42.4

26. 2

15.3

11.7

Working off farm 1 to 49 days:
All ages. ... ._ .

13.5
38.5

16. 1
18.8
19.3

9.1

65 years and over.

Working off farm 50 to 99 days:

8.8
9.5

29.9

23.6

45 to 54 vears ...

6.9
6.2

2.9

Working off farm 100 days or more:

Working off farm 100 to 199 days:

Working off farm 200 days and over:
All ages

35 to 44 vears _

Table 39. — Class V Farms (Part-Time and Commercial), Percent Reporting Specified Facilities, for the United States

and Regions: 1954

Specified facility and type of farm

United
States

Eastern
Region

Southern
Region

Central
Region

Great Plains
Region

Western
Region

Farms reporting electricity:

93.0
94.1
90.0

48.8
52.3
28.7

58.8
65. 5
37.7

25.9
41.3

19.2

23.4

34.7
18.5

63.1
75.4
57.8

92.6
95.3
91.4

43.2
111,(1
35.2

50.4

72. 11
40.4

35.4

;-,:t 2
27. 4

25. 7
39. 9
19.3

65.4
79.5
59.0

89.4
92.5
88.2

13.2

28.1

9.2

32.1
54.2
26. 2

15.5
28.5
12.0

15.2
27.2

12.0

46.6
ii9 n
43.1

94.2
96.7
92.5

62.0
65.3
55.7

54. 6
65.8
47.3

38.4
53.1
28.7

31.8
40.3
26.1

79.9
84.2
77.1

91.0
92.1
90.6

43.0
50.3
40.2

52.7
63. 1

48. 1

22.4
nil 7
18.6

26. 2

31.3
23.9

73.4
75.7
72.3

91.2

91.4

91.0

Farms reporting telephone:

68.6

67.8

47.9

Farms reporting piped running water:

81.7

87.1

75.4

Farms reporting television set:

30.5

36.9

23.4

Farms reporting home freezer:

32.6

34.3

30.6

Farms reporting automobile:

77.6

82.5

72.0

46

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION
F. OFF^FARM INCOME OF FARM^OPERATOR FAMILIES

The data in this section are from a special survey of farm family
income and expenditures made by the Agricultural Marketing
Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture with the cooperation
of the Bureau of the Census. (See Farmers' Expenditures in
1955, Volume III, Part 11, 1954 Census of Agriculture.)
Information was gathered from a national sample of farm-oper-
ator families on sources of income and family expenditures.
This sample is deemed reliable for purposes of inferences concern-
ing distribution of off-farm income for the United States by eco-
nomic class of farm. The data included in this section are re-
printed from the survey report and provide the most detailed
information available on off-farm earnings and other off-farm
income of farm people.

Aggregate off-farm income. — The aggregate off-farm income
of farm-operator families of $8.0 billion for 1955, shown in Table
40, compares with $11.3 billion realized net money and nonmoney
income from agriculture, as estimated by the Agricultural Mar-
keting Service.10 Thus, off-farm income of farm-operator families
is an estimated 41 percent of the total realized net money and
nonmoney income of farm-operator families.

Total off-farm income of $1.0 billion derived from farm sources
such as work on other farms, farm customwork, farm trucking
and hauling, rental of farm real estate, etc., if added to realized
net income from farming, would result in a ratio of about 64
percent from agriculture and 36 percent from nonagricultural

sources. In other words, according to these estimates, more
than 40 percent of the aggregate net income of farm-operator
families is derived from sources off their farm and a little more
than one-third is from sources outside of agriculture.

The largest or most important source of off-farm income is in-
come received by the operator from working for others for wages or
salary with nonfarm work of $3.2 billion constituting more than
93 percent of the $3.4 billion total from this source. Income
received by wife — which includes income received from working
for others for wages or salary as well as from other sources — is
about 97 percent from nonfarm sources. Likewise, the income
received by other members of the family is about 89 percent from
nonfarm sources.

The largest part of the income from off-farm business or self-
employment off the farm is from nonfarm business. Of the total
of $1.3 billion from off-farm business or nonfarm self -employment,
about 79 percent is from nonfarm business. Farm customwork
comprises about 16 percent and farm trucking and hauling only 5
percent of this total.

The only item of off-farm income in which agricultural sources
are more important than nonagricultural sources is the income
from rental of real estate. In this case, income from rental of farm
real estate is 72 percent of the total income from rental of real
estate, or more than two and one-half times the total from rental of
nonfarm real estate.

Table 40. — Off-Farm Income of Farm-Operator Families by Source of Income, by Class of Farm, Aggregate for the United

States: 1955

Source of income

Total off-farm income of farm-operator families:

Total from all sources

Total farm income (except this farm)

Total nonfarm income- .

Income received by farm operator:
Income from off-farm business or self-em-
ployment

Farm customwork

Farm trucking and hauling

Nonfarm business

Income from working for others for wages

or salary

Farm work..

Nonfarm work

Income from rental of farm real estate

Income from rental of nonfarm real estate..

Income from roomers and boarders

Income from interest, dividends, trust
funds, or royalties

Income from veteran's pensions and com-
pensation, veteran's school allotment,
serviceman's family allotment

Income from retirement pay, unemploy-
ment compensation, old age pension,
annuities, alimony, regular contributions
or welfare received

Any other personal income

Income received by wife

From farm sources _

From nonfarm sources

Income received by other family members...

From farm sources

From nonfarm sources

United

States

(000

dollars)

8, 000, 472
1, 066, 728
6, 939. 744

1, 267. 414

205, 521

65, 485

9%, 408

3, 423, 210

229, 693

3, 193, 617

455,880
173,014
53,183

450, 052
189, 832

325, 559
45,480

828, 916

22,401

806, 514

793, 932
87,848
706, 084

Group I

Total

(000

dollars)

1, 009, 530
343, 918
665, 612

243, 624

81,366

7,819

154, 339

236, 129
91.972
144, 167

126,163
24.460
4,205

150, 927

11,749

8,766
6,967

83,169
3,145
80,015

113,490
33. 463
80, 027

Class I

(000
dollars)

392, 575
170, 731
221, 844

121,617
46,415

75,202

95,006
61, 034
33,973

55, 708
9,572
1,200

57, 538

1,286
2,408

23,287

150

23, 137

23,277
7,424
15,853

Class II

(000
dollars)

616, 956
173, 188
443, 768

121, 907

34, 951

7,819

79, 137

141,122
30, 938
110, 184

70,445
14, 889
3,005

93,388

10, 074

7,480
4,659

59, 872
2,994
56,877

90,213
26,039
64, 174

Group II

Total

(000

dollars)

2, 876, 423

447, 077

2, 429, 347

462, 309

110,074

29,258

322, 977

1, 043, 567

68,876

974,1

200,064
73, 279
20,032

77. 955

54,420
25, 499

350.153

11,731

338, 422

356, 355

27, 073

329, 282

Class III

(000
dollars)

835,290
179, 116
656. 175

122, 460

48.268

5,008

69, 185

202,809
20, 165
182, 656

90,920

32,420

7,443

8,270
5.948

93, 715

3,391

90, 325

131, 150
11,375
119,775

Class IV

(000
dollars)

1, 008, 824
151, 107
857, 717

175. 042
31,483
13,523

130, 036

360, 036

27,396

332, 640

03,296
22, 395
6,288

68,839

15,410
12, 437

154, 278

6. 952

147, 326

108, 207

8,457

99,750

Class V

(000
dollars)

1, 032, 308
116, 856
915,454

164,807
30,323
10,727

123, 756

480, 722

21, 326

459, 396

45, 848
18, 465
6,300

30, 148

30,740
7,114

102, 160

1,389

100, 771

116,998

7,241

109, 767

Group III

Total

(000
dollars)

4, 120, 518

275, 733

3, 844, 785

661,581
14, 081
28,408

519,092

2, 143, 514

68, 745

2, 074, 769

129, 663
75, 274
28,946

86, 336
100,128

202, 372
13,015

395, 603

7,526

388, 078

324, 087

27,311

296,776

Class VI

(000
dollars)

390, 731
64,056
326, 676

43, 675
3,557
2,852

37,267

82, 325
12, 778
69,647

32, 070
5,120
2,336

5,330

26, 378

43, 704
3,118

62,909
4,996
57, 912

83,766
7,802
75,964

Part-time

(000
dollars)

1, 683, 006

99,247

1, 583. 759

261,682
7,249
6,141

248, 292

922,1

27,029
895, 150

49,160
44,323
13,278

77,956
3,795

173 67:

830

172, 842

92,028
8,837
83,191

Resi-
dential

(000
dollars)

2,046,781

112,430

1, 934, 351

266,224

3,275

19,415

233, 634

1.139,009

28,938

1.110,072

48,433
25,831
13, 331

45,843

140, 713
6, 102

159,023

1,699

157,324

148, 293
10, 671
137, 622

10 Data published periodically In Farm Income Situation (AMS). Includes Government payments.
$21.6 billion production expenses and $11.3 billion realized net income from agriculture.

In 1955, according to AMS estimates, gross farm income of $32.9 billion included

PART-TIME FARMING

47

Distribution of farm operators, sales of farm products, and
off- farm income by class of farm. — Table 41 provides a basis for
comparing the percentage distribution of all farm operators and of
market sales of all farm products with the percentage distribution
of off-farm income by economic class. The various sources of in-
come in each class are expressed as a percentage of aggregate in-
come received by all farmers from each source.

The farm-operator families on part-time (Class VII) and resi-
dential (Class VIII) farms, constituting 30.4 percent (12.0 percent
plus 18.4 percent) of the total number of farm-operator families,
receive only 1.8 percent of the total receipts from market sales of
farm products and 46.6 percent (21.0 percent plus 25.6 percent) of
the total off-farm income. Part-time and residential farm families,
in other words, who have relatively small receipts from farming
have higher-than-average off-farm income. Income from nonfarm
work is largely concentrated in the part-time and residential
groups. The farm-operator families on part-time and residential
farms received more than three-fifths of the total income from non-
farm work (28.0 percent plus 34.8 percent).

Farm-operator families on Class II to Class VI farms, constituting
two-thirds (67.0 percent) of the total number of farm families, receive
slightly less than half (48.5 percent) of the total off-farm income.

The distribution of nonfarm income by class of farm does not
show as great extremes or as wide a range among the commercial

farm operators (Classes I to VI) as does the distribution of receipts
from sales of farm products. Thus, farm operators in Economic
Classes I and II constitute 12.2 percent of the total number of
farm-operator families and receive 58.2 percent of the receipts from
sale of farm products or about four and one-half the mean or
average for all farms. But they receive only 12.6 percent of the
aggregate off-farm income. At the other end of the class scale,
Class V farm operators have receipts from sales of farm products,
about one-third the average for all farms and receipts from off -farm
income about three-fourths that for all farm-operator families.
Class VI farm operators are 9.7 percent of the total (Class VI
includes farm operators who work off the farm less than 100 days
or whose off -farm income is less than the value of farm sales), yet
they have receipts from sales of farm products constituting only
1.4 percent of the aggregate for all farms, which is about one-
seventh the level for all farms, while their receipts of off-farm in-
come, constituting 4.9 percent of the aggregate, are at a level about
half as high as that of all farms. Thus, the distribution of off -farm
income is such as to reduce the relative dispersion of aggregate
income from all sources in comparison with income received from
farm sources alone. The off-farm income of part-time (Class VII)
and residential (Class VIII) farm operators is so high, in fact, as to
form the basis for an inference that the "low-income problem" is
largely concentrated in the lower class commercial farm in Classes
IV, V, and VI, and particularly in Class VI.

Table 41. — Percent Distribution of Off-Farm Income of Farm-Operator Families From Each Source of Income, by Class of

Farm, for the United States: 1955

United
States

Group I

Group II

Group III

Source of income

Total

Class I

Class II

Total

Class III

Class IV

Class V

Total

Class VI

Part-time

Residen-
tial

Total off-farm income of farm-operator families:

100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0
1000

100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0

100.0
100.0
100.0

12.6

32.2

9.6

19.2
39.6
11.9
16.5

6.9

40.1

4.5

27.7
14.1
7.9

33.5
6.2

2.7
15.3

10 0
14.0
9.9

14.3
38.1
11.3

4.9
16.0
3.2

9.6
22.6

7.7
16.2
6.4

9.6
17.0
11.9

7.9

4.1
13.5
3.5

15.5
8.6
5.7

20.8
5.3

2.3
10.0

7.2
13.4
7.1

11.4

29.6
9.1

35.9
41.9
35.0

36.5
53.6
44.7
32.4

30.5
30.0
30.5

43.9

42.4
37.7

47.3
41.1

16.7
56.1

42.2

52.4
42.0

44.9

30.8
46.6

10.4
16.8
9.5

9.7
23.5
7.6
6.9

5.9
8.8
5.7

19.9
18.7
14.0

25.5
13.3

2.6
13.1

11.3
15.1
11.2

16.5
12.9

17.0

12.6
14.2

12.4

13.8
15.3
20.7
13.1

10.5
11.9
10.4

13.9
12.9
11.8

16.3
11.9

4.7
27.3

18.6
31.0
18.3

13.6
9.6

14. 1

12.9
11.0
13.2

13.0

14.8
16.4
12.4

14.0
9.3
14.4

10.1
10.7
11.8

6.4
15.9

9.4
15.6

12.3
6.2
12.5

14.7
8.2
15.5

51.5
25.8
55.4

44.3
6.9

43.4
52.1

62.6
29.9
65.0

28.4
43.5
54.4

19.2
52.7

80.6
28.6

47.7
33.6
48.1

40.8
31.1
42.0

4.9
6.0

4.7

3.4

1.7
4.4
3.7

2.4
6.6
2.2

7.0
3.0
4.4

1.2
13.9

13.4
6.9

7.6
22.3

7.2

10.6
8.9
10.8

21.0
9.3
22.8

20.6
3.5
9.4

24.9

26.9
11.8
28.0

10.8

25.6
25 0

3.8
14.7

23.9
8.3

21.0

3.7
21.4

11.6
10.1
11.8

Total farm income (except this farm)

10.5

Income received by farm operator:
Income from off-farm business or self-em-

Farm customwork

Farm trucking and hauling

Nonfarm business

7.5

2.8

26.6

1.1

12.2
5.6
2.3

12.8
.9

.4
5.3

2.8
.7
2.9

2.9
8.5
2.2

Income from working for others for wages or

Nonfarm work

34 8

Income from rental of farm real estate
Income from rental of nonfarm real estate...

10.6
14.9

Income from interest, dividends, trust

Income from veteran's pensions and com-
pensation, veteran's school allotment,

24 1

Income from retirement pay, unemploy-
ment compensation, old age pension, an-
nuities, alimony, regular contributions or

13 4

Income received by wife. ..

From farm sources

Income received by other family members

18.7

48

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Average off-farm income by source of income by class of farm. —
Table 42, expressing off-farm income as an average per farm,
indicates a sharp distinction between part-time (Class VII) and
residential (Class VIII) farm operators on the one hand and
Classes II-VI on the other; with the average off-farm income of
$2,730 for Class VII and $2,382 for Class VIII compared with a
narrow range of $1,198 for Class II, $1,161 for Class III, $1,228
for Class IV, and a wider range of $1,668 for Class V to $834 for
Class VI. Class I farm operators average particularly high in
income received from farm custom work, farm work, nonfarm
business, rental of farm real estate, and interest, dividends, trust
funds, or royalties. Part-time and residential farm operators
report that nonfarm work for others for wages or salary is their
major source of off-farm income. Thus, Class I farm-operator
families derive the major part of their off-farm income from invest-
ments in machinery or custom equipment, in land, real estate
stocks, etc., while the high income of part-time and residential
farm operators is largely from wages or salary.

Income received from working for others, for wages or salary in
nonfarm work, averages about the same for Classes II and III,
increases for Classes IV and V, and reaches a peak for part-time
and residential farms; thus suggesting that the amount of money
earned in nonfarm work by the operator is in inverse proportion to
the labor required for farm operation. The income earned by the
wife and by other family members does not vary in the same way
from class to class and there is no apparent consistent relationship
between size of farm operations and average off-farm earnings of

the wife and other members of the family. The most notable ex-
ception is the high average income of the wife in the part-time
(Class VII) farm-operator group.

The differences by economic class in average income from wages
or salary from nonfarm work by the operator — as compared with
income of wife and other family members from nonfarm sources —
suggests that nonfarm earnings of the farm operator are limited by
the time he has available for nonfarm work as well as by the
availability of off-farm work. This suggests that the growing
mechanization of "medium-size" farms, in Classes III, IV, and V
especially, and the consequent reduction in the farm labor require-
ments of these farms, will lead to increased off-farm employment
of the farm operator and to more nonfarm family income. The
low level of mechanization in Class VI, part-time (Class VII), and
residential (Class VIII) farms — in spite of the increases previously
noted — leads to the inference that off-farm earnings of the farm
operator in these classes will increase to a lesser degree, as a general
rule, as the result of further advances in mechanization. The
hypothesis might be suggested that increases in mechanization
among the Class III, IV, and V farms will result in alleviating part
of their income problem by enhancement of off-farm earning
ability. Among farm operators in Classes VI, VII, and VIII
further increases in mechanization will have relatively little effect
in this regard and the low-income problem of these operators, who
constitute 40 percent of the total number of all operators, will be
alleviated primarily through increased off-farm income with reduc-
tions in the farm labor requirement being dependent more on
decline in the amount of farm enterprises undertaken.

Table 42. — Average Off-Farm Income of Farm-Operator" Families by Source of Income, by Class of Farm, for the United

States: 1955

United

States

(dollars)

Group I

Group II

Group III

Source of income

Total
(dollars)

Class I

(dollars)

Class II
(dollars)

Total
(dollars)

Class III
(dollars)

Class IV
(dollars)

Class V
(dollars)

Total
(dollars)

Class VI
(dollars)

Part-time
(dollars)

Residen-
tial
(dollars)

Average off-farm income of farm-operator families:

1, 682

224

1,458

266
43
14

209

719
48

671

96
36
11

95
40

68
10

174

5

169

167
18
148

1,538

524

1,014

371

124

12

235

360
140
220

192
37
6

230
18

13
11

127

5

122

173
51
122

2,779
1.209
1,571

861
329

1,198
336
862

237
68
15

154

274
60
214

137
29
6

181
20

15
9

116

6

110

175
51
125

1,332

207

1,125

214

51

14

150

483
32
451

93

34

9

99
36

25
12

162

5

157

165
13

152

1,161
249
912

170

67

7

96

282

28
254

126
45
10

160
35

11

8

130

5

126

182

16

167

1,228

184

1,044

213
38
16

158

438

33

405

77
27
8

84
28

19

15

188

8

179

132

10

121

1,668

189

1,479

266
49
17

200

777
34
742

74
30
10

47
49

50
11

165

2

163

189

12

177

2,119

142

1,977

289

7

15

267

1,102

35

1,067

67
39

15

44
51

135
7

203

4

200

167
14
153

834
137
698

93
8
6

80

176
27
148

68
11
5

11
56

93

7

134

11

124

179

17

162

2,730

161

2,669

424
12
10

403

1,496

44

1,452

80
72
22

28
45

126
6

282

1

280

149

14

135

2,382

Total farm income (except this farm)

131
2,251

Income received by farm operator:
Income from off-farm business or self-

298

4

23

532

673
432
241

394

68
8

407
12

9
17

165

1

164

165
63
112

272

Income from working for others for wages

1,325

34

1,292

Income from rental of farm real estate

Income from rental of nonfarm real estates-

56
30

16

Income from interest, dividends, trust

74

Income from veteran's pensions and com-
pensation, veteran's school allotment,

63

Income from retirement pay, unemploy-
ment compensation, old age pension,
annuities, alimony, regular contributions

164

7

185

2

183

Income received by other family members

From farm sources

From nonfarm sources

173
12
160

PART-TIME FARMING

49

Distribution of sources of off-farm income by class of farm. —
Table 13 presents each source of off-farm income as a percentage
of the total off-farm income of each class or group. Thus, for all
farms in the United States, nonfarm income constitutes 86.7 per-
cent of total off-farm income while 13.3 percent is from farm
sources other than the farm of the operator. The most important
sources of off-farm income for all farms arc seen to be nonfarm
work for others for wages or salary, nonfarm business, income re-
ceived by wife from nonfarm sources, and income received by other
family members from nonfarm sources.

By classes and by groups the percentage of off-farm income re-
ceived from farm sources generally declines from Class I to Class
V and from Group I to Group III. Thus, in Group I (Classes I
and II) 34.1 percent of off -farm income is from farm sources while
in Group III (Classes VI, VII, and VIII) only 6.7 percent is from
farm sources; this indicates relatively greater reliance, by the
higher class commercial farm operators on farm customwork,
farm trucking and hauling, and other farm investments. Class I
farm operators are also unique in that they have almost twice as
much income from farm work as from nonfarm work; whereas,
Class II farm operators have more than three times as much from
nonfarm work; and the proportion from farm work declines
markedly for other classes from Class III to Class VIII farm
operators.

The farm ownership status of Classes I, II, and III is clearly indi-
cated in that the percent of off-farm income received from rental
of farm real estate of 14.2 percent, 11.4 percent, and 10.9 percent,
respectively, is considerably higher than 6.3 percent and 4.4 per-
cent for Class IV and Class V and the 3.1 percent for Classes VI,
VII, and VIII (Group III). A much narrower range of income
is indicated in returns from rental of nonfarm real estate.

There is basis for the inference that operators of large commer-
cial farms on the average do not have as large investment in
property outside of agriculture as they do in farm resources out-
side their farm. This is contrary to a belief that appears to be
held by many people. The data in Table 43 show that on the
average the off-farm property of the large-scale operators is
largely concentrated in agriculture. Thus, Class I farm operators,
with 14.2 percent of their off-farm income from rental of farm real
estate and only 2.4 percent from rental of nonfarm real estate are
shown to have considerably larger investments in rental property
in agriculture. In addition, although 19.2 percent of Class I off-
farm income is from nonfarm business and another 8.7 percent
from nonfarm work, a total of 27.3 percent is from farm work
such as farm customwork (11. S percent) and from work for others
for wages or salary (15.5 percent). These percentages, when
compared with those for farm operators in other classes, illustrate
that the investments of the large-scale operators are more largely
concentrated in agriculture than are those of operators of smaller
farms.

Classes I, II, and III farm operators, however, are seen to have
relatively larger percentages of income from interest, dividends,
trust funds, or royalties, than is the case for the operators of
smaller-scale farms. This merely points to the fact that operator
families in Classes I, II, and III have larger equities than other
groups.

Operators of Class VI farms arc unique in having a decidedly
higher-than-average percentage of income from retirement pay ,
old-age pensions, annuities, unemployment pay, etc. One may
infer from this that these operators are older than those in other
groups and not as well-to-do.

Table 43. — Percent Distribution of Off-Farm Income of Farm-Operator Families by Source of Income, by Class of Farm,

for the United States: 1955

Source of income

Total off-form income of farm-operator families:

Total from all source?

Total farm income (except, this farm)

Total nonfarm income

Income received by farm operator:
Income from off-farm business or self-em-
ployment

Farm customwork

Farm trucking and hauling

Nonfarm business.

Income from working for others for wages or

salary

Farm work

Nonfarm work

Income from rental of farm real estate

Income from rental of nonfarm real estate .

Income from roomers and boarders

Income from interest, dividends, trust
funds, or royalties

Income from veteran's pensions and com-
pensation, veteran's school allotment,
serviceman's family allotment

Income from retirement pay, unemploy-
ment compensation, old age pension, an-
nuities, alimony, regular contributions or
welfare received

Any other personal income

Income received by wife

From farm sources

From nonfarm sources

Income received by other family members

From farm sources

From nonfarm sources..

United
States

100.0
13.3
86.7

15.8
2.6

42.8

2.9

39.9

5.7
2.2

.7

4.1

.6

10.4

.3

10.1

9.9
1. 1

Group I

Total Class I Class II

100 0
34.1
65.9

24 1

8.1

.8

15.3

23.4
9.1
14.3

12.5
2.4

.4

8.2

.3

7.9

11.2
3.3

100.0
43.5
56.5

31.0
11.8

24 2
15" 5
8.7

11.2

2.4

.3

5.9

(Z)

5.9

5.9
1.9
4.0

100.0
28.1
71.9

19.8
5.7
1.3

12.8

22.9
5.0
17.9

11.4
2.4
.5

9.7
.5

14.6
4.2

10.4

Group II

Total Class III Class IV Class V

100.0
15.5
84.5

16.1
3.8
1.0

11.2

36.3

2.4

33.9

7.0
2.5

.7

12.2

.4

11.8

12.4

.9

11.4

100 0
21.4
78.6

14.7

5.8

.6

8.3

24.3
2.4
21.9

10.9
3.9

11.2

.4

10.8

15.7
1.4
14.3

100.0
15.0

s-, II

17.4
3. 1
1.3

12.9

35 7

2 7

33.0

6.3
2.2

.6

1.5

12

15.3
14 6
10.7

100 0
11.3

88.7

1.0
12.0

46.6

2.1

44.5

4.4

1.8

3.0

.7

11.3

.7
10.6

Group III

Total

100 0

6.7

93.3

13.6
.3

52 0

1 7

50.4

3. 1

1.8
7.

6.4
.3

9.6

.2

9.4

7.9
.7
7.2

Class VI Part-time

100 0
16.4
83.6

21.1
3 3

17.8

8.2
1.3
.6

16.1

1.3

14.8

21.4
2 (I
19.4

100. 0

5.9

94. 1

15.5
.4
.4

14.8

54.8

1.6

53.2

2.6
.8

1.0
1.7

10.3
(Z)
10.3

5.5
.5
4.9

Residen-
tial

100.0

6.5

94.5

12. 5

.2

.9

11.4

55.6

1.4

64.2

2.4
1.3

.7

7.8
.1

7.7

7.2

.5

6.7

Z 0.05 percent or less.

50

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

Off-farm income per farm reporting. — Comparison of data in
Table 44, on off-farm income of farm-operator families per farm
reporting, shows (/) that the income received from most of the
sources is remarkably uniform from class to class outside of
Class I, (£) that average total income from nonfarm work is sub-
stantially higher for part-time (Class VII), residential (Class
VIII), and Class V farm operators, than for those in Classes
II-IV, (3) that income received from interest, dividends, trust

funds or royalties is considerably larger for Class I farm operators
than for others, and (4) that income received by wife from farm
work is low in Class I and part-time (Class VII) farms and high
in Class III and IV. (This is considered significant as there is
assumed to be an inverse relation between income earned by the
wife in farm work and the level of living of the family on the
farm.)

Table 44. — Average Off-Farm Income of Farm-Operator Families by Farms Reporting Specified Sources, by Class of Farm,

for the United States: 1955

Source of income

Average off-farm income per farm-operator family:
Income received by farm operator:
Income from off-farm business or self-employ-
ment:

Farm custom work

Farm trucking or hauling

Nonfarm business

Income from working for others for wages or
salary:

Farm work

Nonfarm work

Income from rental of farm real estate

Income from rental of nonfarm real estate

Income from roomers and boarders

Income from interest, dividends, a trust fund,
or royalties

Income from veteran's pensions and compen-
sation, veteran's school allotment, service-
man's family allotment

Income, from retirement pay, unemployment
compensation, old age pension, annuities,
alimony, regular contributions or welfare
received

Any other personal income ..

Income received by wife:

From farm work

From nonfarm work

Income received by other family members:

From farm work

From nonfarm work

United

States,

total

(dollars)

762

860

2,249

712

2,220

821
701
421

605

654
527

254
1,204

356
1,391

Total
(dollars)

1,089

981

3,390

1.540
1,445

1,659
689
674

773

594
420

243
1,136

825
1,297

Group I

Class I
(dollars)

2.874

4,666

3,739
2,186

1,937
688
508

1,283

277

.544
718

78

870
911

Class II
(dollars)

597

981

2,691

713

1,490
689
775

621
646

604
344

272
1,079

813
1,449

Group II

Total
(dollars)

664

765

2.054

592
1.770

953
663
364

758

694

708

360
1.254

291
1,535

Class III
(dollars)

599

369

2,010

578
1,275

1,408
813
412

676
788

635
516

458
1,189

423
1,617

Class IV
(dollars)

687
1.016
2,229

628
1,521

847
627
316

517
722

600
1,263

211
1,419

Class V
(dollars)

774

942

1,919

564
2,433

649
529
370

263

629
983

102
1,304

277
1,564

Group III

Total
(dollars)

480

950

2,161

470
2,632

482
748
445

413

764

671
386

176

1.178

241
1,282

Class VI
(dollars)

Part-time
(dollars)

322
510
838

916

516

2,609

288
845

689
2,878

492
366
371

483
946
462

111

196

831

620

580
1,594

673
207

295
1,015

79
1,435

295
1,366

274
1,368

Residen-
tial
(dollars)

316

1,666
2,323

462
2,811

474
650
446

861
843

704
466

111

1,036

195
1,197

Table 45. — Farm Operators by Age, Number of Persons in
Family, Education, and Family Income After Taxes, for
the United States: 1955

Item

Farm operators by age:

Total operators

Under 35 years

35 to 64 years

65 years and over

Farm operators by number of persons inf amlly:

Total operators

1.9 persons or less

2.0 to 4.9 persons

5.0 to 5.9 persons

6.0 or more persons

Farm operators by education:

Total operators

Not completing eighth grade

Completing eighth grade but not completing high school

Completing high school

Operators not reporting as to education

Farm operators by family income after taxes:

Total operators _

Negative income _

$0 to $999...

$1,000 to $1,999 _

$2,000 to $2,999

$3,000 to $3,999 ,

$4,000 to $4,999

$5,000 to $5,999 _

$6,000 to $7,499

$7,500 to $9,999

$10,000 and over _

Operators not reporting family income

United States,
total

4, 760, 050
613, 801

3. 209, 546
936, 703

. 760, 050
244, 520

i. 126, 786
573, 472
815, 272

4, 760, 050
1, 535, 263
2, 083, 240
1,081,407
60,140

4, 760, 050

189, 133

1,031,746

1, 003, 694

840, 136

605,229

322, 017
212, 970
137, 102
90,835
85, 650
241,638

Table 46. — Percent Distribution of Farm Operators by Age,
Number of Persons in Family, Education, and Family
Income After Taxes, for the United States: 1955

Item

Farm operators by age:

Total operators _.

Under 35 years _ _ _

35 to 64 years...

65 years and over

Farm operators by number of persons In family:

Total operators. _ ._

1.9 persons or less _

2.0 to 4.9 persons

5.0 to 5.9 persons..

6.0 or more persons

Farm operators by education:

Total operators -

Not completing eighth grade __.

Completing eighth grade but not completing high school

Completing high school

Operators not reporting as to education.

Farm operator by family income after taxes:

Total operators

Negative income.

$0 to $999

$1,000 to $1,999

$2,000 to $2,999....

$3,000 to $3,999

$4,000 to $4,999

$5,000 to $5,999

$6,000 to $7,499

$7,500 to $9,999..

$10,000 and over

Operators not reporting family Income

United States,
total

100.0
12.9
67.4
19.7

100.0
5.1
65.7
12.0
17.1

100.0
32.3
43.8
22.7
1.3

100.0
4.0
21.7
21.1
17.6
12.7

6.8
4.6
2.9
1.9
1.8
6.1

PART-TIME FARMING

51

Table 47. — Farm Operators of Class VI, Part'Time, and Residential Farms, by Age, Number of Persons in Family,
Education, and Family Income After Taxes, for the United States : 1955

Item

Farm operators by age:

Total operators

Under 35 years --

35 to 64 years

65 years and over —

Farm operators by number of persons in family:

Total operators - -

1.9 persons or less —

2.0 to 4.9 persons

5.0 to 5.9 persons

6.0 or more persons —

Farm operators by education:

Total operators

Not completing eighth grade.

Completing eighth grade but not completing high school
Completing high school -'- —

Operators not reporting as to education

Farm operators by family income after taxes:

Total operators

Negative income

$0 to $999

$1,000 to $1,999

$2,000 to $2,999 ----

$3,000 to $3,999

$4,000 to $4.999 ----

$5,000 to $5,999

$6,000 to $7,499 -.

$7,500 to $9,999 ---

$10,000 and over...

Operators not reporting family income

Total Class VI,

Operators of —

residential
farms

Class VI
farms

Part-time
farms

Residential
farms

1,944,357
204, 971

1, 180, 754
558, 632

468,350
24, 473
260,167
183, 710

616, 571

S6.0K2
420.388
109, 501

859, 436
93, 816
500,199
265, 421

1,944,357
144,410

1,249,306
193,117
357, 524

468,350
37,563

309, 777
43, 352
77, 658

616,671
30,830

399,713
64,143

121,885

859, 436
76,017

539, 816
85,622

167,981

1,944,357

852, 444

788, 243

276, 454

27,216

468, 350

242, 863

180, 747

37, 508

7,232

616, 571
226, 656
259, 153
122,485
8,277

859, 436
382, 925
348, 343
116,461
11,707

1,944,357
44, 103
558, 549
401, 134
281,910
242, 303

468, 350
16,019
233, 774
105, 838
53,128
24, 576

616,571
19,322
106, 757
132,310
90,621
87,706

859, 436
8,762
218,018
162,986
138,161
130,021

136, 364
88,725
58,297
25, 974
9,836

7,009

7,148

3, 466

647

61,881
37, 076
28, 905
14, 798
5,708
30,887

67, 474
43,901
25, 926
10,529
4,128

97, 162

16, 745

49,530

Table 48. — Percent Distribution by Economic Class of Farm
of Operators of Class VI, Part-Time, and Residential
Farms, by Age, Number of Persons in Family, Education,
and Family Income after Taxes, for the United States:
1955

Item

Farm operators by age:

Total operators..

Under 35 years

35 to 64 years

65 years and over.

Farm operators by number of persons in family:

Total operators

1.9 persons or less _

2.0 to 4.9 persons _

5.0 to 5.9 persons

6.0 or more persons

Farm operators by education:

Total opera tors

Not completing eighth grade

Completing eighth grade but not completing

high school _.

Completing high school

Operators not reporting as to education

Farm operators by family income after taxes:

Total operators.. __ ..

Negative income

$0 to $999

$1,000 to $1,999

$2,000 to $2,999..

$3,000 to $3,999

$4,000 to $4,999

$5,000 to $5,999

$6,000 to $7,499

$7,500 to $9,999

$10,000 and over..

Operators not reporting family income

Percent distribution by economic
class of farm

Total

Class

Part-

Resi-

VI

time

dential

100.0

24. 1

31.7

44.2

100.0

11.9

42.3

45.8

100.0

22.0

35.6

42.4

100.0

32.9

19.6

47.5

100.0

24.1

31.7

44.2

100.0

26.0

21.3

52.6

100 0

24.8

32.0

43.2

100.0

22.4

33.2

44.3

100.0

21.7

34.1

44.2

100.0

24.1

31.7

44.2

100.0

28.5

26.6

44.9

100.0

22.9

32.9

44.2

100.0

13.6

44.3

42.1

100.0

26.6

30.4

43.0

100.0

24. 1

31.7

44.2

100.0

36.3

43.8

19.9

100 0

41.9

19.1

39.0

100.0

26.4

33.0

40.6

100.0

18.8

32.1

49.0

100.0

10.1

36.2

53.7

100.0

5.1

45.4

49.5

100.0

8.1

42.5

49.5

100.0

5.9

49.6

44.5

100.0

2.5

57.0

40.5

100.0

58.0

42.0

100.0

17.2

31.8

61.0

Table 49. — Percent Distribution of Operators of Class VI,
Part'Time, and Residential Farms, by Age, Number of
Persons in Family, Education, and Family Income After
Taxes, for the United States: 1955

Farm operators by age:

Total operators -

Under 35 years -

35 to 64 years

65 years and over -..

Farm operators by number of persons in
family:

Total operators

1.9 persons or less --

2.0 to 4.9 persons

5.0 to 5.9 persons

6.0 or more persons..

Farm operators by education:
Total operators

Not completing eighth grade .-

Completing eighth grade but not com-
pleting high school

Completing high school

Operators not reporting as to education. .

Farm operators by family income after taxes:

Total operators - -

Negative income

$0 to $999... - - -

$1,000 to $1,999

$2,000 to $2,999

$3,000 to $3,999 ---

$4,000 to $4,999 -

$5,000 to $5,999

$6,000 to $7,499

$7,500 to $9,999

$10,000 and over..

Operators not reporting family income. -

Percent distribution of operators of-

Class VI,
part-time,
and resi-
dential
farms

Class

Part-

VI

time

farms

farms

100.0

100.0

5.2

14. 1

55.5

68.2

39.2

17.8

100.0

100.0

8.0

5.0

66.1

64.8

9.3

10.4

16.6

19.8

100.0

100.0

51.9

36.8

38.6

42.0

8.0

19.9

1.5

1.3

100.0

100.0

3.4

3.1

49.9

17.3

22.6

21.6

11.3

14.7

5.2

14.2

1.6

10.0

1.6

6.1

.7

4.7

.1

2.4

.9

3.6

6.0

Resi-
dential
farms

100.0
10.9
58.2
30.9

100.0
8.8
62.8
10.0
18.4

100. 0
44.6

40.5
13.6

1.4

100.0
1.0
26.4
19.0
16.1
15.1

7.9
5.1
3.0
1.2
.5
5.8

52

FARMERS AND FARM PRODUCTION

G. FARM MORTGAGE DEBT, BY ECONOMIC CLASS

The data given in this section are based on estimates published
in greater detail in Part 5 of Volume III of the reports of the 1954
Census of Agriculture. The data on the number of mortgaged
farms are estimates of the mortgage status as of January 1, 1956,
for farms included in the 1954 Census of Agriculture. Likewise,
the estimates of land in farms, value of land and buildings, and
amount of mortgage debt represent totals as of January 1, 1956,
for farm land and buildings included in the 1954 Census of Agri-
culture. The data on mortgaged part-owner farms relate only
to the proportion of the part-owned farm, owned and operated
by the owner.

Distribution of mortgaged farms and land in farms, by economic
class. — The data in Table 50 present full-owner farms and part-
owner farms according to their distribution by economic class.
A larger percentage of the full-owner farms are found in the part-
time and residential class while a relatively heavier concentration
of the part-owner group is found in Classes I to IV. The distribu-
tion of mortgaged land shows a similar relationship between full
owners and part owners providing allowance is made for the
difference among the economic classes in size of farm. Over one-
third of all mortgaged farms operated by full owners are part-time
or residential farms.

Table 50. — Percent Distribution of Number of Mortgaged
Farms and Land in Mortgaged Farms, of Full Owners
and Part Owners, by Economic Class of Farm, for the
United States: 1956

Economic class

Number of farms

Land in mortgaged
farms

Full
owners

Fart
owners

Full
owners

Part

owners

100.0
2,5
8 1
15.1
17.4
16.4
6.8
15.3
18.4

100.0
7.0
19.8
26.6
21.6
12.6
4.0
5.7
2.6

100.0
10.3
19.3
21.0
19.1
13.2
4.9
7.3
4 9

100 0

Class I

23.1

Class II

31.6

Class III

22.6

Class IV

13.8

Class V

5.5

Class VI.. _

1.6

1.4

.4

Percentage of farms mortgaged, by economic classes. — A larger
percentage of farms are mortgaged in Economic Classes I, II, and
III than among the other economic classes, as is shown in Table 51.
Among commercial Classes I to VI there is a definite correlation be-
tween economic class and percent of farms mortgaged. Also, in
each of the classes of commercial farms a higher percentage of farms
operated by part owners than by full owners are mortgaged while a
slightly higher percentage of part-time and residential farms oper-

ated by full owners are mortgaged. Almost a third of the part-
time and almost a fourth of the residential farms are mortgaged.

Table 51. — Percent of Farms Mortgaged, for Farms
Operated by Full Owners and by Part Owners, by
Economic Class of Farm, for the United States: 1956

Economic class

Full owner

Part

owner

All classes ... ..

Class I

Percent
33.1
47.4
46.7
46 3
40.5
36.6
21 0
33 2
22.9

Pe

''cent
42.4
50.2

Class II ..

48.8

Class III..

49.3

Class IV...

44.8

ClassV

37.0

Class VI

27.6

31.5

21.5

Table 52. — Average Size of Mortgaged Farms, for Full
Owners and Part Owners, by Economic Class of Farm,
for the United States: 1956

Economic class

Full owners

(acres per

farm)

Part owners

(acres per

farm)

164.0
686. 2
389. 6
228.5
179.1
132. 4
117.3
78.1
44.1

317.9

Class I

1,054.0

Class II

507.3

Class III. .

269.2

Class IV...

203.4

ClassV.

138.9

Class VI..

127.1

78.4

44.1

Table 53. — Value of Land and Buildings, per Farm and
per Acre for Mortgaged Farms of Full Owners and Part
Owners, by Economic Class of Farm, for the United
States: 1956

Mortgaged farms

Economic class

Average value per
farm

Value per acre

Full
owners

Part
owners

Full
owners

Part
owners

$19, 385
97, 253
45, 747
27, 114
18, 296
12, 821

9,275
10, 768

8,763

$24, 675

95, 742

36, 265

21, 062

13, 860

9,602

7.544

8, 811

7,054

$118.20
141.73
117.41
118. 68
102. 16
96.84
79.04
137. 85
198. 77

$77. 61

Class I

90.84

Classll —

71.49

Class III .

78.23

Class IV

68.15

ClassV

69.13

Class VI ..

59.37

112.75

159.89

PART-TIME FARMING

53

Table 54. — Value of Land and Buildings and^Amount of
Mortgage Debt per Farm, for Mortgaged Farms Operated
by Full Owners and Part Owners, by Economic Class of
Farm, for the United States: 1956

Economic class

Value ol land
and buildings
per mort-
gaged farm

Amount of
mortgage
debt per

farm

$20,910
96, 445
11,035
24,592

16. Sll
12. 054

8,943
10, 516

8, 669

$5, 504

20, mo

Class II

10,233

Class III

6. S40

Class IV. ... ..

1,797

ClassV

3.412

2,292

3. 021)

2.653

Land in farms, value of land and buildings, and amount of
mortgage debt per farm for mortgaged farms, by economic class. —
The average size of mortgaged farms for both farms operated by
full owners and part owners declines from Class I to (class VIII
residential farms). (See Table 52.) Likewise, except for part-
time farms, the average value of land and buildings and the
average amount of mortgage debt per farm decreases from Class
I to Class VIII. (See Tables 53 and 54.)

Ratio of mortgage debt to value, by economic class. — Among
both full owners and part owners, the ratio of debt to value is
lowest for Class I farms and increases from class to class from
Classes I to IV, after which there is some leveling off. The ratio
of mortgage debt to value is greater on Class V, on part-time, and
residential farms than on all farms. As is shown in Table 55, in
most of the economic classes there is not much difference in ratio
of debt to value, between the farms operated by full owners
and those operated by part owners.

Table 55. — Ratio of Farm Mortgage Debt to Value for
Mortgaged Farms of Full Owners and Part Owners,
by Economic Class of Farm, for the United States: 1956

Economic class

Full ownei s

Part

owners

Percent
26. 8
21.9

24.4
27.9

as 3
28. 1

21.il
28.6
30.6

Perce

25.4

Class I .

20.5

Class II..

•_'.r. 6

Class 111

27. 6

ClassIV.. . .

29.1

Class V

29 2

Class VI... .

2'J. 2

30.5

30.9

U. S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE* 19S7