(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

Full text of "United States census of agriculture: 1954"

r^ 



■£. 



^tou^ 




Given By 

US. SUPT. OF DOCUMENTS 



J- 1 



05ITORY 



Vol. Ill - pi. 4 



AGRICULTURE, 1954 
A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 

(A Cooperative Report) 

SPECIAL REPORTS 





(J. S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 

BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



1954 

Census 
Agriculture 




L 






& 



U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



WASHINGTON • T95<S 



U. S. Department of Agriculture 

Ezra Taff 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 



United States 

Census 

of 






Agriculture: 

1954 



Volume III 
SPECIAL REPORTS 

Part 4 

Agriculture, 1954, A Graphic Summary 

(A Cooperative Report) 



LAND UTILIZATION • FARM MACHINERY and FACILITIES • FARM TENURE 






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 

DIVISION OF FARM AND LAND MANAGEMENT RESEARCH 
Sherman E. Johnson, Director 

PRODUCTION ECONOMICS RESEARCH BRANCH 
Carl P. Heisig, Chief 



Boston Public Library 
Superintendent of Documents 

OCT 3 -1957 



#73/7 s/7**/ 



SUGGESTED IDENTIFICATION 

U. S. Bureau of the Census. U. S. Census of Agriculture: 19H. Vol. Ill, Special Reports 

Part 4, Agriculture, 1954, A Graphic Summary. 

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 $1.25 



n 



PREFACE 



Volume III, Special Reports, comprises a group of special compilations and summaries of data from 
tie 1954 Census of Agriculture and related surveys. Part 4 of Volume III, "Agriculture 1954, A Graphic 
Summary," presents in graphic form some of the significant facts regarding farms, land use, farm tenure, 
and farm power and machinery as shown by the 1954 Census of Agriculture. 

This report has been prepared cooperatively by the Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of 
Commerce, and the Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture. 

Chapter 1 presents some of the significant facts regarding the uses being made of agricultural land 
both inside and outside of farm boundaries, and changes and developments in the use of agricultural lands. 
This chapter was written by James R. Anderson, Agricultural Economist, Production Economics Research 
Branch, Agricultural Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture. 

Agricultural production during the present century has been greatly influenced by the mechanization 
of farms. Chapter 2 presents some of the significant facts regarding the extent of use of farm power, 
machinery and facilities on farms, and changes and developments during recent years. This chapter was 
written by Martin R. Cooper, assisted by Joe F. Davis, Paul E. Strickler, Albert P. Brodell, and Julius J. 
Csorba, Agricultural Economists, Production Economics Research Branch, Agricultural Research Service, 
U. S. Department of Agriculture. 

Chapter 3 provides some of the significant facts regarding the extent and general nature of the various 
forms of tenure under which farms are held and operated, and the changes and developments in farm 
tenure, especially during the last two decades. This chapter was prepared by Gene L. Wunderlich, 
Agricultural Economist, assisted by Marie B. Harmon, Production Economics Research Branch, Agricultural 
Research Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture, and by Hilton E. Robison, Supervisory Statistician, 
Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce. 

The preparation of these reports was under the supervision of Ray Hurley, Chief of the Agriculture 
Division of the Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce. Charles F. Frazier, Ethel Lund. 
Olive K. Britt, Emile Hooker, and Henry A. Tucker assisted in the preparation of maps, charts, and other 
materials. Most of the maps were prepared under the supervision of Clarence E. Batschelet, Geographer, 
Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce. 

December 1956. m 



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 as follows: 



Part 


State or States 


Part 


State or States 


Part 


State or States 


1 


New England States: 




West North Central: 




East South Central — Continued 




Maine. 


8 


Minnesota. 


21 


Alabama. 




New Hampshire. 


9 


Iowa. 


22 


Mississippi. 




Vermont. 


10 


Missouri. 




West South Central: 




Massachusetts. 


11 


North Dakota and South 


23 


Arkansas. 




Rhode Island. 




Dakota. 


24 


Louisiana. 




Connecticut. 


12 


Nebraska. 


25 


Oklahoma. 


2 


Middle Atlantic States: 


13 


Kansas. 


26 


Texas. 




New York. 




South Atlantic: 




Mountain: 




New Jersey. 


14 


Delaware and Maryland. 


27 


Montana. 




Pennsylvania. 


15 


Virginia and West Virginia. 


28 


Idaho. 




East North Central. 


16 


North Carolina and South 


29 


Wyoming and Colorado. 


3 


Ohio. 




Carolina. 


30 


New Mexico and Arizona. 


4 


Indiana. 


17 


Georgia. 


31 


Utah and Nevada. 


5 


Illinois. 


18 


Florida. 




Pacific: 


6 


Michigan. 




East South Central: 


32 


Washington and Oregon. 


7 


Wisconsin. 


19 
20 


Kentucky. 
Tennessee. 


33 


California. 



Volume II. — General Report. Statistics by Subjects, U nited States Census of Agriculture, 1954. Summary data and analyses of 
the data for States, for Geographic Divisions, and for the U nited States by subjects as illustrated by the chapter titles listed below : 



Chapter 


Title 


Chapter 


Title 


I 


Farms and Land in Farms. 


VII 


Field Crops and Vegetables. 




II 


Age, Residence, Years on Farm, Work Off Farm. 


VIII 


Fruits and Nuts, Horticultural Specialties, 


Forest 


III 


Farm Facilities, Farm Equipment. 




Products. 




VI 


Farm Labor, Use of Fertilizer, Farm Expenditures, and 


IX 


Value of Farm Products. 






Cash Rent. 


X 


Color, Race, and Tenure of Farm Operator. 




V 


Size of Farm. 


XI 


Economic Class of Farm. 




VI 


Livestock and Livestock Products. 


XII 


Type of Farm. 





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 
Agriculture. 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 
XT. 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 Agricluture and the Bureau of the Census. It will present, 
by States, data based on the 1954 Census of Agriculture and a 
special mail survey to be conducted in January 1956, on the 



number of mortgaged farms, the amount of mortgage debt, and 
the amount of debt held by principal lending agencies. 

Part G. — 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 — The American Farmer in 1954. 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. 

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-f arming 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. 



rv 



CHAPTER 1 



LAND UTILIZATION 



CONTENTS 



Page 

Introduction 5 

Sources of data 5 

Scope, definitions, and explanations 5 

Major uses of land 6 

Land use — 1954 7 

Changes in land use 8 

Regional trends in land use 9 

Cropland 11 

Pastureland 15 

Woodland and forest land 17 

Regional patterns of land resources and uses 19 

Type of farming 20 

Major land-use regions 22 

Major uses of all land by farm-production regions 23 

Major uses of nonfarmland by farm-production regions 24 

Land capability by farm-production regions 25 



Page 
Conservation, development, and improvement of land re- 
sources 26 

Irrigated land 27 

Drainage 29 

Land clearing and brush control 30 

Pasture improvement 31 

Soil-conserving practices 32 

Farm resources and production 34 

Farms and farmland 35 

Farm population 41 

Power and equipment 42 

Agricultural production 44 

Principal crops 49 

Livestock 54 



CHARTS AND MAPS 



Page 

Farm production regions 5 

Map of the United States, showing geographic regions and 

divisions 5 

Major uses of land, 1954 7 

The trend in land utilization 8 

Land in farms, agricultural land and cropland harvested, by 

regions, 1880-1954 9 

Total cropland, acreage, 1954 10 

Cropland harvested, acreage, 1954 10 

Cropland used only for pasture, acreage, 1954 10 

Cropland not harvested and not pastured, acreage, 1954 10 

Cultivated summer fallow, acreage, 1954 10 

Cropland harvested — increase and decrease, in acreage, 

1949-1954 ' 11 

Cropland harvested — increase and decrease, in acreage, 

1899-1949 11 

All land in farms and cropland harvested, for the United 

States: 1850-1954 11 

Cropland as a percent of total land area, 1954 12 

Total cropland as a percent of all land in farms, 1954 13 

Cropland harvested as a percent of the total land area, 1954. 14 

Uses of cropland harvested 14 

Total land pastured, acreage, 1954 15 

Cropland used only for pasture, acreage, 1954 15 

Pasture other than cropland and woodland, acreage, 1954. _ 15 

Pasture and grazing land : 1900-1954 16 

Woodland pastured, acreage, 1954 16 

Farm operators with grazing permits, number, April 1, 1950. 16 

Distribution of forest land, acreage, 1953 17 

Woodland in farms, acreage, 1954 18 

Woodland pastured, acreage, 1954 18 

Woodland not pastured, acreage, 1954 18 

Major types of farming in the United States 20 

Type-of-farming areas, based on type accounting for 50 per- 
cent or more of commercial farms, 1954 21 

Major land use regions 22 

Major uses of all land as compared with total land area, by 

regions, 1954 23 



Page 
Major uses of nonfarmland as compared with total land area, 

by regions, 1954 24 

Land capability as compared with total land area, by regions, 

1950 - 25 

Irrigated land in farms, acreage, 1954 27 

Irrigated acreage of specified crops and pasture in the 20 

States: 1954 27 

Irrigated land — increase and decrease, in acreage, 1949-1954. 27 

Areas irrigated and irrigable 28 

Acreage of irrigated land in the United States: 1889-1954 28 

Farm drainage, acreage, 1947-53 29 

Farm drainage in United States 29 

Land cleared, acreage, 1954 30 

Brush control, acreage, 1954 30 

Seeding and reseeding of pasture, acreage, 1950-53 31 

Seeding and reseeding of pasture, 3-year averages, United 

States 31 

Land in cover crops turned under for green manure, acreage, 

1954 32 

Land in row crops or close-seeded crops grown in strips for 

wind erosion control, acreage, 1954 32 

Cropland used for grain or row crops farmed on the contour, 

acreage, 1954 33 

Number of farms, 1954 35 

Commercial farms, number, 1954 35 

Other farms, number, 1954 35 

Percent of total land area in farms, 1954 36 

All land in farms, acreage, 1954 36 

Land in farms, by tenure of operator, for the United States: 

1954 36 

Acreage of land in farms and not in farms, for the United 

States: 1850-1954 36 

Land in farms and number of farms for the United States: 

1850-1954 37 

Commercial farms as a percent of all farms, 1954 38 

Average size of commercial farms, 1954 38 

Average value of land and buildings per acre, 1954 39 



CONTENTS 



Page 
Distribution of selected resources for the United States by 

regions and by commercial and other farms within regions: 

1954 40 

Percent of total population represented by farm population, 

April 1, 1950 41 

United States farm population 41 

Tractors on farms, number, 1954 42 

Horses and mules, number, 1954 42 

Tractors — increase and decrease, in number, 1950-1954 42 

Horses and mules, and tractors on farms, January 1 42 

Principal machines on farms, 1940 and 1955 43 

Farm production per acre and per animal 44 

Trends in population, cropland and farm output in United 

States 44 

Acreage on which commercial fertilizer was used, 1954 45 

Changes in use of fertilizer and farm income 45 

Average value of farm products sold per acre of all land in 

farms, 1954 46 

Value of all crops sold as a percent of all farm products 

sold, 1954 46 

Value of all farm products sold, dollars, 1954 47 

Specified crops harvested — acreage and value of production, 

for the United States: 1954 47 

Acreages in food grains, feed grains, oil seed crops, and cotton, 

for the United States: 1879-1954 48 

Changes in harvested acres of principal crops, 1949-54 48 

All wheat threshed, acreage, 1954 49 

Oats threshed, acreage, 1954 49 

Barley threshed, acreage, 1954 49 

Rice threshed, acreage, 1954 49 

Corn for all purposes, acreage, 1954 50 

Sorghums for all purposes except for sirup, acreage, 1954 50 

Soybeans grown for all purposes, acreage, 1954 50 

Flax threshed, acreage, 1954 50 



Page 

Peanuts grown for all purposes, acreage, 1954 51 

Cotton harvested, acreage, 1954 51 

Tobacco harvested, acreage, 1954 51 

Sugar beets harvested for sugar, acreage, 1954 51 

Land in fruit orchards, groves, vineyards, and planted nut 

trees, acreage, 1954 52 

Vegetables harvested for sale, acreage, 1954 52 

Irish potatoes, acreage, 1954 52 

Dry field and seed beans harvestedjfor beans, acreage, 1954. 52 

Land from which hay was cut, acreage, 1954 53 

Wild hay cut, acreage, 1954 53 

Alfalfa cut for hay, acreage, 1954 53 

Clover or timothy cut for hay, acreage, 1954 53 

Feed for all livestock, percentage of all feed from all concen- 
trates, 1949-50 54 

Feed for all livestock, percentage of all feed from hay, 1949- 

50 54 

Feed for all livestock, percentage of all feed from pasture and 

grazing, 1949-50 54 

Cattle on farms January 1 54 

United States pig crops 54 

Stock sheep and lambs on farms January 1 54 

Cattle, number, 1954 55 

Milk cows, number, 1954 55 

Hogs, number, 1954 55 

Sheep, number, 1954 55 

Output of poultry and eggs compared to other products 56 

Increases in efficiency in poultry industry 56 

Poultry meat supply (ready-to-cook basis) 56 

Broiler chick placements, for 1954 and 1955 production, 

selected reporting areas 56 

Chickens sold, number, 1954 56 

Value of poultry and poultry products sold, dollars, 1954 56 



INTRODUCTION 



Since 1925, Censuses of Agriculture taken at 5-year intervals 
have provided information on the major uses of land in farms. 
The former Bureau of Agricultural Economics and the Produc- 
tion Economics Research Branch, Agricultural Research Service 
have compiled data at different times on the uses of land not in 
farms. Graphic presentation of the basic information about land 
use has accompanied the collection and tabulation of the basic 
statistics for each of the Censuses of Agriculture since 1925. 

Numerous uses are made of the graphic presentation of avail- 
able statistics and other information on the utilization of land. 
Facts relating to the present extent, location, and productivity 
of land used for different purposes are needed in the analysis of 
present and prospective agricultural or general economic condi- 
tions for the country as a whole and for specific areas. Future 
requirements for land resources need to be compared with present 
uses in order to determine the best possibilities for meeting the 
long-term demands for food and fiber required by an expanding 
population with a desire for an improved level of living. Alter- 
native means of increasing production when the occasion arises 
will need to take account of possible shifts in land use that may 
be needed to provide more of some kinds of commodities and less 
of others as overall patterns of consumption change. 

Current problems in the surplus production of some agricul- 
tural commodities are related in part to the need for certain basic 
shifts in land use. In order to approach an effective solution to 
this problem, a thorough understanding of how the land is pres- 
ently used is a necessary starting point. Historical perspective is 
also required in order to arrive at satisfactory solutinns to such 
problems of agriculture as the present overproduction of certain 
crops. 

Competitive demands for the use of land have attracted con- 
siderable attention in recent years. Widely divergent opinions 
are expressed about the need to deal with such problems as the 
subdivision of good farmland for urban development, the need for 
recreational space near large concentrations of population, and 
the relationship between the improvement of farmland through 
drainage and the need to maintain adequate habitats for wildlife. 
If these and conflicts in use are to be resolved, a good basic knowl- 
edge of how the land is presently being used will be needed. 

Sources of data. — The maps and charts pertaining to land in 
farms presented in this graphic summary are based principally 
on statistical data published in reports of the 1954 Census of 
Agriculture and in reports of earlier Censuses. Agricultural 





FARM 


PRODUCTION 


REGIONS 


(*$■ 












r^ril' 1 




NORTHERN 


LAKE SI. 




| PLAINsA 






? 0u "M/ N 




CORN 


BEIT jTT^SrfjW 
^APPALACHIAN-^ 

1 SOUTHEAST/ 










j SOUTHERN 
PLAINS 


V. DELTA 
TsTATES 


1 1 'lift 


HCNT OF AGRICUL 


UHf 




Nee. Utii- 


1191 AcmruLTuaAi. Dr->r«orn IBRVIce 



Research Service, Production Economics Research Branch, in 
the United States Department of Agriculture, has collected, in- 
tegrated, and analyzed data on land not in farms and has re- 
lated this information to Census statistics for land in farms. 
This information has been gathered from the records and reports 
of State and Federal agencies. These records of public land- 
owning and land-managing agencies, branches of State govern- 
ments, and other sources were consulted in the preparation of 
an inventory of major land uses by the Production Economics 
Research Branch, Agricultural Research Service. Aerial photo- 
graphs, topographic and other maps, soil surveys, and related 
materials provided information necessary for the preparation 
of some of the maps. The Soil Conservation Service supplied 
information on land clearing and brush control in soil conserva- 
tion districts for which technical assistance was provided. The 
Agricultural Conservation Program Service provided county 
data necessary for preparing maps on farm drainage and the 
seeding and reseeding of pasture. 

Scope, definitions, and explanations. — The graphic summary of 
land utilization focuses attention on the major uses of land. 
Attention is given to land not in farms as well as to land in 
farms. Maps and charts showing present distribution and past 
changes for the major land uses are included along with a brief 
explanatory text. This report is not concerned primarily with 
the distribution of crops and livestock and with changes in the 
production of individual commodities. However, a selected 
number of maps and charts dealing with some of the principal 
crops and with the main livestock classes are presented to fa- 
cilitate the use and interpretation of maps and charts on major 
land uses. Care has been exercised in the selection of illustra- 
tions in order to include the most significant changes taking 
place as well as the present distribution of different land uses. 

In the maps, charts, and text, terminology consistent with the 
various definitions contained in the 1950 Census of Agriculture 
is used. In describing and locating areas, commonly accepted 
geographical terms are used. In presenting data by States, farm- 
production regions or divisions are used in order to obtain more 
agriculturally related combinations of States than the geographic 
divisions used by the Census. This division permits the presen- 
tation of significant regional differences in land use which are 
obscured in Census data. Unless otherwise stated, the farm- 
production regions are used throughout this graphic summary. 
In order to avoid confusion, the comparative grouping of Census 
geographic divisions and farm-production regions is shown by 
the accompanying two maps. 

MAP OF THE UNITED STATES. SHOWING GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS AND DIVISIONS 




407763 — 57- 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



MAJOR USES OF LAND 



Inventory of land uses. — In a country as large as the United 
States, land is used for many diverse purposes. In the inventory 
and study of land, the several uses are commonly grouped into 
a few major categories designated as major uses. Cropland, 
pasture and grazing land, forest and woodland, and special-use 
areas and miscellaneous other laud are discussed as major uses 
of land in this report. These major uses of land are explained 
here so that those who use the maps and charts in this report will 
understand more clearly some basic concepts about land use 
and how different uses are interrelated. 

The major uses of land are often separated broadly into land 
in farms and land not in farms. Land iu farms includes land 
used chiefly for agricultural purposes under direct, or sole con- 
trol of the operators. Under this definition, land owned or leased 
and operated individually for farming by farm operators is con- 
sidered as land in farms. It includes considerable areas of land 
not actually under cultivation and some land not used for pasture 
or grazing that is intermingled with farms or part of tracts used 
for farming. Large areas of timberland or other npnagricultural 
land held by farm operators as separate enterprises, and not used 
for pasture or any other farming purposes generally, are excluded 
from land in farms. Indian land, whether operated by Indians 
or leased out to others for agricultural purposes, is classified as 
farmland. Public land used under permit is not included in 
land in farms. 

Nearly all of the cropland is a part of land in farms, although 
some cropland undoubtedly exists that has not been reported by 
the Census of Agriculture because of limitations of definition and 
underenumeration. Pasture refers to land in farms used for pas- 
turing livestock, except for forage obtained from the aftermath 
of crops or by pasturing growing crops for short periods of time. 
Grazing pertains to land not in farms which is grazed. Forest 
and woodland may be either in farms or outside farm boundaries. 
Most of the special-use areas, except farmsteads, are not in farms. 
Miscellaneous unaccounted-for areas may be either a part of land 
in farms or land not in farms. 

The major uses of land are also subdivided on the basis of 
actual vegetative cover on the land at the time of classification. 
Thus, cropland may be broken down into cropland used for crops, 
cropland used only for pasture, and cropland idle or used for 
growing soil-improvement crops. Cropland used for crops in- 
cludes cropland harvested, cropland on which crops failed, and 
cropland used for cultivated summer fallow. Cropland used only 
for pasture may also be considered as a part of the pasture area. 
For the most part, cropland used only for pasture is pasture that 
is grown in rotation with crops, although some of it may be crop- 
land that is no longer used for producing crops and that may 
eventually become idle cropland or permanent pastureland. 

Pasture and grazing land has a great variety of vegetative 
cover and varies widely in the amount of forage furnished to 
livestock. Pasture in farms consists of open or nonforested pas- 
ture, including cropland used only for pasture, other open grass- 
land pasture (not cropland and not woodland), and woodland 
pastured. Woodland or forest land that is pastured is also con- 
sidered a part of the forest-land area. In some parts of the 
country, the woodland in farms that is pastured may be com- 
mercial forest land while in other areas it has little commercial 
value. 

Grazing land may be either forested or nonforested. Non- 
forested range produces forage suitable for grazing without cul- 
tivation, including mountain meadow, cutover land, and brush- 
land on which the number or grouping of any brush and trees is 
such that the land could not be considered forest land. In the 
Western States, much of the grazing land not in farms is public 
land that has never been privately owned. Seasonal use of the 
nonfarm grazing land furnishes an important complementary 



source of forage to that produced on farms and ranches. In 
parts of the South, privately owned nonfarm forest land is ex- 
tensively grazed, particularly in spring and early summer. 

Forest and woodland may be considered in several ways. Some 
forest types may be pastured or grazed ; other types may have 
little value for forage. The farm and nonfarm breakdown of 
forest and woodland is significant from the standpoint of forest 
management. Private or public ownership is also an important 
separation in any inventory of forest and woodland use. The 
commercial and noncommercial value of forest and woodland 
is needed for studies of timber resources. 

By definition of the United States Forest Service, forest and 
woodland includes: (1) Land 10 percent or more stocked with 
trees of any size and capable of producing commercial timber 
and other valuable wood products and services; (2) land from 
which trees have been removed to less than 10 percent stocking 
and which has not been developed for uses other than timber 
production; (3) afforested areas (planted) ; and (4) arid wood- 
land with dense cover, such as chaparral. Adherence to this 
definition means that there may be some overlapping among the 
major uses of land as cropland and open grassland pastureland 
as reported by the Census of Agriculture may be included under 
certain circumstances as forest land under the definition used 
by the Forest Service in its inventory of forest land. 

Special uses of land include a wide variety of uses, such as 
urban sites, highways, railroads, airports, parks, national de- 
fense areas, wildlife refuges, farmsteads, and farm roads and 
lanes. For the most part, these uses are largely nonagricultural. 
Much recent interest in this group of uses centers around the 
question of whether or not it is desirable to use good agricultural 
land for urban sites and other similar uses when less desirable 
agricultural land suitable for such uses is available. The com- 
peting demands for the use of land are particularly acute in 
good farming areas where urban and industrial expansion have 
been rapid. 

Other miscellaneous unaccounted-for areas include deserts, 
sand dunes, bare rock areas, and marshes. Some of the land 
having these physical characteristics is used for military pur- 
poses or for parks and wildlife refuges. 

Some land may have two or more uses. When land is used 
for multiple purposes, it is sometimes difficult to distinguish pri- 
mary and secondary uses. The extent to which the exact area 
or closely intermingled areas have more than one use may also 
be hard to determine. In an inventory of land use, it is not al- 
ways possible to eliminate completely duplications arising from 
the multiple uses of land. But despite these difficulties, the pos- 
sibilities of obtaining closer integration of such uses of land as 
recreation, watershed uses, forage, timber, and wildlife must 
be carefully explored in order that these uses may be geographi- 
cally and economically available to the growing number of people 
who desire to use them. 

Contrasts in land quality. — In this report, most of the land-use 
information is presented in terms of area used for different pur- 
poses. Data are often not so readily available for certain quali- 
tative aspects of land use. Considerable variation exists in the 
quality of land used for different purposes. For example, nearly 
a tenth of the present, cropland area should be converted to 
grassland and woodland. Different limitations on use apply to 
the land that is suitable for cropland. 

Nearly nine-tenths of the production from pasture and grazing 
land comes from the 647 million acres of pasture in farms. This 
means that only a tenth of the forage comes from the 353 million 
acres of grazing land not in farms. The 66 million acres of crop- 
laud used only for pasture, which accounts for only about 7 
percent of all pasture and grazing land, supplies approximately a 
third of the total feed production from pasture and grazing land. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



Forest land has a similar wide variation in productivity. Of 
the 64S million acres of forest land in continental United States 
reported in the recent Timber Resource Review of the United 
States Forest Service, only 484 million acres are classified as com- 
mercial forest land. Of the commercial forest land, only 179 mil- 
lion acres are in sawtimber stands and 42 million acres of the 
commercial forest land are presently nonstocked. 

Factors affecting land use. — The question of how land resources 
are used and how much production comes from different major 
uses is determined largely by four groups of factors affecting 
land use : (1) Physical conditions — climate, soil, topography, and 
vegetative cover; (2) control or ownership of the land; (3) re- 
quirements for the different commodities produced on the land ; 
and (4) the status of technology relevant to land use. 

land use changes. — The historical background of land use must 
also be studied as a significant part of each of the above factors. 
For the United States, recognition of two general periods of land- 
use development are especially significant in acquiring an under- 
standing of the present land-use situation. Before World War I, 
while new settlement of the land was still taking place, changes 
in the major uses of land occurred rapidly. Forests were cleared 



and the land was converted to cropland and pasture. Native 
grasslands were plowed and used for crop production for the first 
time. Mistakes were made in the selection of land suitable for 
cultivation, but often these appeared to be of little importance 
while new lands were still available. 

During the last four decades, total acreages of cropland and 
pasture and grazing land have not increased or decreased greatly, 
but significant changes have nonetheless been taking place. 
Shifts in cropland and pastureland among regions have occurred. 
Cropland is becoming more concentrated on land with fertile soils 
and level topography. Land that is rough or otherwise physically 
ill-suited for crop production is reverting to pasture and forest. 
Gradual improvement of land being used for cropland and pasture 
is taking place through irrigation, drainage, clearing^ and flood 
control. In some areas, urban, industrial, and related nonagri- 
cultural uses are encroaching on land formerly farmed. 

The present lack of balance between crops grown and the types 
of products in strongest demand indicates that future basic ad- 
justments in land use are likely to occur. Careful study of the 
present patterns and past shifts of land use as these are affected 
by different factors or conditions will facilitate future changes 
that are needed in the major uses of land. 



LAND USE— 1954 



Distribution of the 1,904 million acres of land in the continental 
United States among the major uses is shown in the accompany- 
ing chart. The total land in farms reported by the 1954 Census 
of Agriculture was 1,15S million acres, which is nearly identical 
with that reported for 1950. However, the distribution of the 
land in farms among the major uses has changed considerably. 
The 746 million acres of land not in farms also break down into 
the various major uses differently in 1954 from the estimates 
made for 1950 by the former Bureau of Agricultural Economics. 
Some of these shifts in acreage among the major uses represent 
actual changes while others are related in part to difficulties in 
classification and definition. 

If the division between land in farms and land not in farms is 
omitted, the total land in each of the five major uses would be 
allocated as follows : 

Million 
acres 

Cropland (including that used only for pasture) 460 

Pasture and grazing land (including woodland and for- 
est land pastured or grazed) 934 

Forest and woodland not pastured or grazed 314 

Special-use areas (cities, parks, highways, railroads, 
airports, wildlife refuges, defense areas, farmsteads, 

farm lanes, and related uses) 110 

Miscellaneous other land (deserts, swamps, sand dunes, 

bare-rock areas, beaches, etc.) 86 



Total 1, 904 



MAJOR USES OF LAND, 1954 

Total U.S. Acreage = 1,904 Mil. Acres 




Cropland • 
25% 



Grassland posture 
and grazing land 
■ 33% 



:iuoes cnopLtHB usee OHLt eon etsrune o Bestir, sutup. ot/*ts, ere 

t r»»wsre»os. mews, ptnpotos. unstn nets. Pitts, ere 
A eteiuees rotesr itno in Hues **o orne* eesetree tests 



Cropland is made up of cropland harvested (333 million 
acres), cropland used only for pasture (66 million acres), and 
cropland not harvested and not pastured (61 million acres). 
Cropland not harvested and not pastured includes cultivated 
summer fallow, land on which all crops failed, land in soil- 
improvement crops only, and land seeded to crops for harvest 
after 1954. Cultivated summer fallow totaled 29 million acres 
in 1954. This was 3 million acres more than was reported by the 
1950 Census of Agriculture. This increase may be attributed 
principally to acreage allotments on wheat and cotton that were 
in effect for 1954 but were not applicable for these crops in 1949. 
Land on which crops failed in 1954 totaled about 13 million acres 
according to estimates prepared by the Production Economics 
Research Branch, Agricultural Research Service, United States 
Department of Agriculture. 

In order to obtain the total acreage of all pasture and grazing 
land, the 66 million acres of cropland used only for pasture can 
be added to the 934 million acres of other pasture and grazing 
land. This makes a total of 1 billion acres used for pasture and 
grazing. Pasture in farms totals 647 million acres and grazing 
land not in farms accounts for the remaining 353 million acres. 

Woodland and forest land total 615 million acres. This total 
is obtained by adding the 301 million acres of woodland and forest 
pastured or grazed to the 314 million acres not used for that 
purpose. Woodland and forest land in farms totals 197 million 
acres, while that not in farms accounts for 418 million acres. The 
615 million acres of woodland and forest land does not include 
26 million acres of reserved forest land that is set apart in parks, 
wildlife refuges, and other special uses. 

Special-use areas in the aggregate occupy only about 5 percent 
of the total land area, but the competition between such uses 
and agricultural uses is an important problem in many areas. 
Frequently, good agricultural land may be diverted to these uses 
when land of lower agricultural value is available. Whether or 
not this is in the best interests of the Nation is a question that 
needs to be answered. 

The 86 million acres of land classified under miscellaneous 
other uses is for the most part land that is not used for other 
purposes. Of this 86 million acres of miscellaneous other land, 
it is estimated that 20 million acres is wasteland in farms. It 
does not include all deserts, swamps, sand dunes, beaches, and 
bare-rock areas. Frequently, such areas are a part of national 
defense areas, parks, w'ildlife areas, and other related uses. 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 
THE TREND IN LAND UTILIZATION 




1930 



1940 



I960 



CONTINENTAL UNITED STATES EXCLUSIVE OF ALASKA 

1 EXCLUDES FORESTED AREAS RESERVED FOR PARKS AND RELATEO USES AND ARID WOODLAND. BRUSHLAND, AND FOREST LAND 
USEO FOR GRAZING . 

2 121 MILLION ACRES WERE REPORTED PASTURED IN 1954. 

3 INCLUDES GRASSLAND. ARID WOODLAND. BRUSHLAND, AND FOREST LAND GRAZED 

4 OPEN PASTURE IN FARMS, INCLUDING CROPLANO USED ONLY FOR PASTURE AND OTHER PLOWABLE PASTURE. 

5 INCLUDES SOIL IMPROVEMENT CROPS. SUMMER FALLOW, AND LAND SEEDED TO CROPS FOR HARVEST THE SUCCEEDING YEAR, 

CROPLAND ACREAGES ARE FOR THE YEAR PRECEDING THE DATE OF THE CENSUS EXCEPT FOR 1954. 



CHANGES IN LAND USE 



The Trend in Land Utilization 

[Continental United States exclusive of Alaska] 



Uses of land 


1900 


1910 


1920 


1930 


1940 


1950 


1954 




Million 
acres 
319 
276 

768 

191 

175 

174 


Million 
acres 
347 
284 

739 

191 

162 

180 


Million 
acres 
402 
328 

661 

158 

160 

184 


Million 
acres 
413 
379 

578 

150 

208 

175 


Million 
acres 
399 
461 

504 

157 

203 

181 


Million 
acres 
409 
485 

400 

220 

201 

189 


Million 
acres 
394 




526 


Grazing land not In 


358 


Farm woodland (pas- 
tured and not pastures- 
Forest land not in farms 

(not grazed) '... __ 

Farmsteads, roads, rail- 
roads, urban areas, 
parks, and other land.. 


197 
238 

196 


Total 


1,903 


1.903 


1,903 


1,903 


1,905 


1,904 


1,904 







1 Includes soil-improvement crops, summer fallow, and land seeded to crops for 
harvest the succeeding year. Cropland acreages are for the year preceding the date of 
the Census except for 1954. 

1 Open pasture in farms, including cropland used only for pasture and other plowable 
pasture. 

» Includes grassland, arid woodland, brushland, and forest land grazed. 

4 Excludes forested areas reserved for parks and related uses and arid woodland, brush- 
land, and forest land used for grazing. 

Historical changes in the major uses of land in the United 
States can be grouped into two periods. The first period lasted 
until about 1920. This was the settlement or pioneer period 
which came to a close with the expansion of the cropland area 
into the subhumid parts of the Great Plains during and follow- 
ing World War I. From 1880 to 1920, the acreage of cropland 
harvested was more than doubled as it increased from 178 to 362 



million acres. This rapid expansion in the acreage of cropland 
was accompanied by large decreases in the area of native grass- 
land. Grazing land not in farms, which includes idle grassland 
and arid woodland and brushland grazed, was reduced by about 
380 million acres between 1880 and 1920. Part of this grazing 
land was converted to cropland and part of it has since been 
included as land in farms. Clearing of forest land also continued 
during this period as cropland and open pastureland were added 
to farms in the 31 Eastern States and in parts of the Pacific 
Northwest. The forest area was reduced by 50 to 75 million 
acres between 1880 and 1920. 

A greater degree of stabilization in the major categories of 
land use has characterized the period since 1920. Fluctuation 
rather than a continued increase in acreage of cropland has pre- 
vailed. But significant regional shifts in distribution of cropland 
have occurred. Land development and improvement through 
drainage, irrigation, and clearing of forests has continued to ex- 
pand the acreage of cropland in some areas bypassed or only 
partially developed during the settlement period. Reversion to 
woodland and conversion to such nonagricultural uses as cities, 
highways, airports, parks, defense areas, and related uses have 
offset some of the additions to cropland and improved pasture 
through the development of new land. More of the grazing land 
not in farms has become a part of the pasture area in farms. 
This is partly explained by the inclusion of more public land in 
farms. If the grazing land is leased, it is reported in farms ; 
but if it is used under permit, it is not included as a part of the 
land in farms as defined for the Census of Agriculture. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



LAND IN FARMS, AGRICULTURAL LAND* AND CROPLAND HARVESTED 
By Regions 1880-1954 




o 

500 



WES 


rERN 




1 






' ■ 




: 




J 
1 






1 " 












1 






855888^ 














I860 



1900 

I CROPLAND HARVESTED 



I FARMS EXCLUDING WOODLAND 



j AGRICULTURAL LAND 
OTHER THAN CROPLAND 
HARVESTED 



1930 1940 

KSSgj! WOOOLANO IN FARMS 



I960 



REGIONAL TRENDS IN LAND USE 



The general trends of land in farms, agricultural land (ex- 
cludes woodland), and cropland harvested are shown for the 
Northern, Southern, and Western States in the accompanying 
chart. In all three groups of States, land in farms and agricul- 
tural land increased in nearly all decades until 1940. Cropland 
harvested reached a peak acreage in the Northern and Southern 
regions in 1930, while the peak acreage for the Western States 
was reported by the 1950 Census of Agriculture. 

Several important contrasts in trends exist among farm-pro- 
duction regions within these three groups of States. These re- 
gional changes in land in farms, agricultural land, and cropland 
harvested are summarized briefly: 

Northern States: 

(1) Northeastern States. — Nearly uninterrupted decline since 
1900 in land in farms, agricultural land, and cropland har- 
vested characterizes this region. Abandonment of agricultural 
land in the face of competition from midwestern agricultural 
areas and urban and industrial expansion into agricultural 
areas have contributed greatly to this decline. 

(2) lake States. — Substantial increase occurred until 1920. 
Fluctuation in land in farms and agricultural land has pre- 
vailed since 1920. Cropland harvested more than doubled be- 
tween 18S0 and 1920. During the last 35 years, it has increased 
from 35 to 37 million acres. 

(3) Corn Belt. — Land in farms reached a peak of 147 million 
acres in 1900 and since then it has fluctuated between 146 and 
138 million acres. Agricultural land reached its first peak in 
1910 and since has ranged between 119 and 127 million acres. 
Cropland harvested reached a peak of 80 million acres in 1920. 
After some decline in intervening years, cropland harvested 
totaled 77 million acres in 1954. 

(4) Northern Plains. — Nearly uninterrupted increase of land 
in farms and agricultural land characterizes this region. Crop- 
land harvested reached a high point of 85 million acres in 1930. 
Drought frequently reduced the acreage harvested during the 



1930's, but since World War II crops have been harvested from 
nearly 80 million acres of cropland each year. 
Southern States: 

(5) Appalachian. — Land in farms has dropped from a high 
of 96 million acres in 1900 to 76 million acres in 1954. Agri- 
cultural land accounted for 50 to 55 million acres between 1900 
and 1950. In 1954, it dropped to 46 million acres. Cropland 
harvested has fluctuated between a high of 25 million acres and 
a low of 19 million acres in 1954. 

(6) Southeastern States. — Land in farms reached a peak in 
1950 largely because large grazing areas in Florida have been 
included as land in farms in recent years. Cropland harvested 
has declined by S million acres from a peak of 24 million acres 
in 1920. 

(7) Mississippi Delta. — The highest acreage of 51 million 
acres of land in farms was reported in 1950. Agricultural 
land increased from 15 million acres in 1SS0 to 32 million acres 
in 1940, 1945, and 1950, and then declined slightly in 1954. 
Cropland harvested has declined 3% million acres from the 
1940 peak. 

(8) Southern Plains. — A fivefold increase in land in farms 
during the last 75 years characterizes this region. Pronounced 
fluctuations in the acreage of agricultural land are explained 
in part by difficulties in applying definitions of open and wood- 
land pasture in the areas of brush infestation in Texas. Crop- 
land harvested has declined about 11 million acres from the 
peak of 46 million acres reached in 1930. 

Western States: 

(9) Mountain States. — Land in farms, agricultural land, and 
cropland harvested have all increased during the 75-year period. 
The inclusion of more of the grazing area in farms, gains in 
the acreage irrigated, and development of dry-farming prac- 
tices are responsible for these increases. 

(10) Pacific States. — The trend in the three Pacific States has 
been very similar to that in the Mountain States. Land in 
farms, agricultural land, and cropland harvested have all more 
than tripled during the 75-year period covered by the accom- 
panying chart. 



10 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



/VJ^*~ 






TOTAL CROPLAND* 

ACREAGE, 1954 










UNITED STATES TOTAL 
459,648,961 

'cropland harvested, cropland used only for pastl 
plus cropland not harvested and not pastured 



DOT=25,000 ACRES 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54-I24 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



CROPLAND HARVESTED 
ACREAGE. 1954 




CROPLAND USED ONLY FOR PASTURE 
ACREAGE. 1954 




CROPLAND NOT HARVESTED AND NOT PASTURED 
ACREAGE. 1954 




CULTIVATED SUMMER FALLOW 
ACREAGE. 1954 




LAND UTILIZATION 



11 



CROPLAND HARVESTED-INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN ACREAGE, 1949-1954 




CROPLAND HARVESTED*-INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN ACREAGE. 1899-1949 




CROPLAND 



Almost three-fourths of the agricultural production of our 
country is derived from that part of the land resources that are 
used to produce crops. The total area of cropland contained 460 
million acres in 1954, which accounts for a fourth of the total 
land area. Cropland used only for pasture is included in this 
total cropland area. 

The decrease in total acreage of cropland between 1949 and 
1954 amounted to 18 million acres. Several different factors ac- 
count for this change. The decrease in cropland harvested be- 
tween 1949 and 1954 represents in part an actual decrease in 
land used for that purpose. Acreage allotments on wheat, cotton, 
and corn which were in effect in 1954 but not in 1949 encouraged 
a diversion of part of the acreage used in preceding years to grow 
these crops to production of nonallotment crops. But part of the 
acreage was diverted to pasture and part of it remained idle. 

The decrease in cropland used only for pasture and in idle crop- 
land may be due partly to the fact that cropland used only for 
pasture in 1949 which was not actually in rotation with crops was 
less frequently reported as cropland in 1954. This shift is 
particularly evident in parts of the South where the seeding of 
pastures on cropland taken out of crop production proceeded 
rapidly after World War II. Much of this cropland, which had 
been seeded for only a short time when the 1950 Census of 
Agriculture was taken, has remained in pasture and by 1954 it 
was generally considered as permanent grassland pasture. 

Looking at a longer period of time, cropland used for crops or 
idle as reported at 5-year intervals by the 8 Censuses of Agricul- 
ture from 1920 to 1954 has averaged 403 million acres. The 1954 
acreage of cropland used for crops or idle was 2 percent below 
this average while the 1950 acreage was about 1 percent above the 
average. This stability in acreage of cropland has been an im- 
portant characteristic of agricultural land use since the end of 
World War I. 

Although the overall changes in cropland area have been 
comparatively small, a considerable amount of change in distri- 
bution and kind of land used for crops has taken place. The 
distribution of total cropland and its component parts are shown 
by the accompanying maps along with a chart and map showing 
changes in cropland harvested, which is the most important part 
of the cropland area. 

Total cropland. — The heavy concentration of cropland in the 
Corn Belt and in the eastern part of the Great Plains is a striking 
characteristic of any map showing the distribution of cropland 
in the United States. The 11 Corn Belt and Great Plains States 
have 245 million acres of cropland or more than half of the total 
acreage of cropland. Yet the land area of these 11 States ac- 
counts for only a fourth of the total land area of the country. 



Other concentrations of cropland are less extensive but they are 
significant and are observable on the accompanying map. The 
ribbon of concentration along the lower Mississippi River and the 
extension of the high density cropland area of the Corn Belt 
into the Lake States are two other areas in the Eastern States. 
In the 11 Western States, cropland area is closely associated with 
situations in which irrigation and dry-farming are practiced. Ex- 
cept for parts of the Pacific Northwest, crops are not widely 
grown in the Western States without reliance upon either irriga- 
tion or conservation of moisture by fallowing. 

Cropland harvested. — The distribution of cropland harvested is 
very similar to that of total cropland. Parts of the country 
which have very little cropland include extensive areas in the 
West that are too dry and areas in the East that are too rough, 
too wet, or have soils too poor for profitable use. Prominent 
among these areas are the Southern Appalachian, Adirondack, 
and Ozark Mountain areas, the Maine woods, the northern part 
of the Lake States, and the flatwoods of the Southeast. 

ALL LAN0 IN FARMS AND CROPLAND HARVESTED, 
FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1850-1954 

MILLIONS OF ACRES 
200 400 600 800 1000 



1954 

1950 
I94S 
1940 
1933 
1930 
1925 
1920 
1910 
1900 
1890 
1880 
1870 
I860 
1850 



• ^^^^^^^^n^ tt_ 



Ktffi 



mmm mmmimmillMllirm 

imimiiMMM MiiMMMrrm 



mimmiimm iiiMMMMn 



^w^^MiimtimirrrMMimMMiiii7\ 



IIIIIMIM 



MIM1IIII, 



■MM 



mtmiMMMF\ 



222 



MMMMiMmMimmwMiM-r* 



11II1IIMMM1MMMI 

-mmmmmli 



■zzzzrzz. 

mmmmllj -rm\ 



mnmiiMlllll 
mmm mmrrrr. 



nmmnmmm\ 



mmmlllli 



54C-002 



•NOT AVAILABLE 

irr7i TOTAL LAND IN FARMS 

■M CROPLAND HARVESTED, 1925-1954, ACRES OF CROPS HARVESTED 1880-1920 

Cropland used only for pasture. — Included in the total cropland 
area are 06 million acres of pasture that is for the most part in 
rotation with crops. Some cropland may be occupied by pasture 
during the transition period between its use for crops and a state 
of idleness, which will probably be followed by reversion to 
permanent pasture or to woodland. From the map it may be ob- 
served that the highest density of cropland used only for pasture 
is in Kentucky. There it is associated with limestone soils and 
moderately sloping land. 



12 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Cropland not harvested and not pastured.— This category of 
cropland, which totaled 61 million acres in 1954, includes culti- 
vated summer fallow, cropland on which crops failed, cropland 
used for soil-improvement crops, and idle cropland. As most of 
the cultivated summer fallow and much of the crop failure is 
reported in the 17 Western States, the major concentrations of 
cropland not harvested and not pastured are nearly all in these 
States. Cropland used for soil-improvement crops and idle 
cropland account for most of the cropland not harvested and not 
pastured in the 31 Eastern States. In 1954, less than a third of 
the crop failure occurred in the 31 Eastern States. 

Cultivated summer fallow.— The practice of summer fallowing 
land is closely associated with growing wheat in the drier parts 
of the major wheat belts. By letting the land lie fallow for a 
crop season and by cultivating it to keep it free of weeds, the 
accumulation of soil moisture is sufficient to result in higher 
yields per acre. Cultivated summer fallow is widely used in the 
drier parts of both the spring and winter wheat belts. 

Cropland harvested — increase and decrease, 1949-54. — Changes 
in the acreage of cropland harvested were widespread between 
1949 and 1954. Counties in which a decrease in acreage occurred 
are most heavily concentrated in the Southern States. Most of 
the change that took place in the Northeastern States was a de- 
cline in acreage. Counties in which increases occurred were 
located principally in the spring wheat-producing area of North 
Dakota, South Dakota, and Montana; in the central valley of 
California ; the Columbia Basin; the rice-producing area of north- 
eastern Arkansas ; and the Corn Belt. 

All land in farms and cropland harvested, 1850-1954. — The long- 
run trend in cropland harvested is compared with that for laud 
in farms in the accompanying chart. Fluctuation rather than 
progressive change has characterized the acreage of cropland 



harvested since about 1920. Before that time the acreage 
steadily increased during the period of settlement. The high 
proportion of land in farms that is not used for growing crops 
is also emphasized by this chart. 

Cropland harvested — increase and decrease, 1899-1949. — De- 
creases in cropland harvested that occurred over a 50-year period 
between 1899 and 1949 are found mainly east of the Great Plains. 
The decline is associated chiefly with hilly areas in which soil 
erosion and depletion have taken place. The most extensive 
areas of decrease are located in the Northeastern States, southern 
Piedmont, hill-land fringe of the Ohio Valley, eastern Texas, and 
the Ozark-Ouachita Highlands and adjacent hilly areas. Several 
small areas of sharp decline are largely associated with the growth 
of cities, as in northeastern Illinois and parts of southern 
Michigan. 

The most widespread and heaviest increase occurred in the 
Great Plains. In the South, acreage in cropland harvested 
has expanded mainly in the Mississippi Delta, Coastal Plain, 
and in the Lower Rio Grande Valley. The Mississippi Delta, 
with its improved flood protection and drainage, greatly expanded 
acreage in cotton and other crops. In the Coastal Plain, use 
of fertilizers ; drainage of land ; suitability of soils for producing 
bright tobacco in North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia ; 
expansion of peanut acreage in Alabama and Georgia ; increased 
production of citrus fruits and vegetables ; and additional acreages 
devoted to rice in Louisiana and Texas, have contributed to the 
increase in cropland. In the Lower Rio Grande Valley the acre- 
age of cropland has been greatly expanded through irrigation. In 
the Corn Belt and Lake States, cropland has been added largely 
through drainage of wet lands on existing farms. In the 11 
Western States, the increase in acreage of cropland harvested 
is associated chiefly with the development of irrigation and dry- 
farming. 



CR0PLAND**AS A PERCENT OF TOTAL LAND AREA, 1954. 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




I I UNDER 20 
W//A 20 TO 39 
40 TO 59 
*N0 FARMS 
* * CROPLAND HARVESTED. CROPLAND USED ONLY FOR PASTURE 
AND CROPLAND NOT HARVESTED AND NOT PASTURED 

u S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54- 118 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



LAND UTILIZATION 



13 



TOTAL CROPLAND**AS A PERCENT OF ALL LAND IN FARMS. 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




Cropland as a percentage of total land area. — This map shows 
the proportion of the total land area occupied by cropland. Two 
extremes stand out. On the one hand, there is the comparatively 
compact area in the North Central States in which nearly all 
of the counties have 60 percent or more of their total area in 
cropland. Counties with less than 20 percent of the total land 
area are at the other extreme. These counties are more widely 
scattered than are counties having high proportions of cropland. 
Very few counties in the Western States have more than a fifth 
of their total area in cropland. This is partly because of their 
large size and partly because of the widespread climatic limita- 
tions to crop production. In the East, counties with a low pro- 
portion of the total area in cropland are found in most States. 
The largest areas are associated mainly with rough topography, 
poor soils, and inadequate natural drainage. In some areas of 
contiguous counties, such as those in southern New England and 
in many scattered counties, urbanization has proceeded so far 
that cropland has become a minor use of land. 

Since a county-unit basis is used on this map, several important 
details are obscured. For example, the high proportion of crop- 
land in irrigated areas in the Western States is not clearly indi- 
cated. Small areas of rough forested land and poorly drained 
areas in the Eastern States cannot always be distinctly associated 
with the physical conditions that limit their use for crop pro- 
duction. 

Some of the distinctive physical features that are related to 
the low proportion of cropland shown by this map are the Sand 



Hills of North Carolina, South Carolina, and Georgia ; the Sand 
Hills of Nebraska ; the ridge and valley section of the Appalachian 
Mountains ; the Adirondack Mountains ; the Cross Timbers of 
Texas ; the Knobstone Belt in southern Indiana ; unglaciated 
southeastern Ohio ; and many other areas with relatively little 
cropland. Many of the unshaded areas in the East are used only 
to a limited extent for farming. In the West, grazing is the pre- 
dominant use of the land over extensive areas. 

Small areas with a high proportion of land used as cropland 
that do not stand out distinctly on a county-unit basis are the 
many small irrigated areas in the West, the Black Prairies of 
Texas, the Inner Bluegrass and the Pennyroyal areas of Ken- 
tucky, the southern shore of Lake Ontario, and the southern and 
eastern shores of Lake Okeechobee in Florida. 

Total cropland as a percentage of all land in farms. — Essentially 
the same overall pattern is found represented in this map as that 
for cropland as a percentage of total land area. The map indi- 
cates the importance of cropland relative to other uses of farm- 
land. In the West, ranches with large acreages used for pasture 
tend to obscure the much higher proportions of cropland on most 
irrigated farms. In the South, Northeast, and Lake States, 
much land in farms remains in forest. In some type-of-farining 
situations, the high proportion of forest land is associated with 
production of crops with high labor requirements, such as tobacco 
or cotton which are often concentrated on a few acres of the 
best farmland. In such instances, little attention is given to the 
rest of the farm. 



14 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



*kj^-~ CROPLAND HARVESTED AS A PERCENT OF THE TOTAL LAND AREA. 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




I I UNDER 10 
fc'^3 10 TO 19 
■:': £S 20 TO 39 
*N0 FARMS 



US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54-I20 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Cropland harvested as a percentage of the total land area. — 
Most of the counties with more than 60 percent of the total land 
area used for harvested cropland are concentrated in the North 
Central States. Only a few additional counties in Texas and in 
the Mississippi Delta fall into this category. Immediately sur- 
rounding this core of high-density counties are found most of the 



USES OF CROPLAND HARVESTED 

MIL. ACRES - 



400 



300 



200 



_ Crop acres harvested 
/ i 




1910 1920 1930 1940 



1950 



IM ANE> HON 



i. 1. tl'-Bi.l.t ot AGRICULTURE 



-»•» AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



counties with 40 to 59 percent of the land area in cropland har- 
vested. Counties with less than 10 percent of the total land area 
used for cropland harvested are numerous in the Western States, 
the mountainous and hilly areas of the Eastern States, the Coastal 
Plain flatwoods, and in the heavily forested counties of northern 
New England, and the northern parts of the Lake States. 

Uses of cropland harvested. — Most of the Nation's cropland is 
now used to produce products for domestic use. From 1950 to 
1954, about 85 percent of the acreage of crops harvested was used 
in domestic consumption. The other 15 percent was used to pro- 
duce exports and feed for horses and mules. Acreage used for 
producing exports during this 5-year period averaged 40 million 
acres and that used for feed for all horses and mules averaged 
15 million acres. This represents a significant drop from the 
1945—49 period when an average of 46 million acres were used for 
export production and 27 million acres were needed to feed all 
horses and mules. 

From 1910 to 1914 only 60 percent of the acreage was used to 
produce domestic products. About 44 million acres were used 
to produce exports in the 1910-14 period. This means that the 
principal change in the disposition of production from the acre- 
age of crops harvested has been the marked reduction in the 
acreage used to produce feed for horses and mules. The acreage 
used to feed horses and mules has declined by about 76 million 
acres between the 1910-14 and 1950-54 periods. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



15 



TOTAL LAND PASTURED" 

ACREAGE, 1954 




UNITED STATES TOTAL 
647,100,398 

CROPLAND USED ONLY FOR PASTURE. 
WOODLAND PASTURED PLUS OTHER PASTURE 

US. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54-I6I 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



JvJW^ 


CROPLAND USED ONLY FOR PASTURE 






ACREAGE. 1954 






■^--Ww^M^w 




v \ 7 • 








j — r * . i , ,, _ j&i 




I ' \ I ^-Y" — ^"~ N. f 






^^M^-J / 






UNITED STATES TOTAL 


V ^--'■^&^f> 






66,069,830 


\ -f IQ0T-25.OOO ACRES V '■ J 
tCOWNr* uwi Basra \^ J 




lis HHmwiii v couMcnu 


"" ■« *S« M ■' 4*f*l V " 


« U-SUl 



PASTURE OTHER THAN CROPLAND AND WOODLAND 
ACREAGE, 1954 




PASTURELAND 



Total land pastured. — Nearly every part of the United States 
has some pastureland. The total acreage of all pasture in farms 
reported by the 1954 Census of Agriculture was 647 million acres. 
If the 353 million acres of grazing land not in farms is added to 
the acreage of pastureland in farms, the total acreage of all 
pasture and grazing land is about 1 billion acres. If the distribu- 
tion of the grazing land not in farms were added to the map of 
total land pastured in farms, many of the areas not occupied by 
dots would be filled in. This would be particularly true in the 
Western and Southern States where most of the grazing land 
not in farms is located. 

Cropland used only for pasture. — On the whole, cropland used 
only for pasture constitutes the most productive part of the 
pastureland area. Generally, it is pasture that is being grown 



in rotation with crops. As the accompanying map shows, this 
kind of pasture is especially concentrated in the Corn Belt, Delta, 
Southern Plains, and the western part of the Appalachian States. 
The major concentration in the Western States is located in the 
Central Valley of California. 

Pasture other than cropland and woodland. — The pastureland 
included in this category differs widely in quality. Some of it 
has been improved by liming, fertilizing, and seeding. Extensive 
areas of the unimproved part of this open permanent pasture are 
parts of the native rangelands which are now included in the 
farmland acreage in the Western States. In the Eastern States, 
a considerable acreage of fairly open land that is gradually re- 
verting to woodland is probably included. This kind of pasture- 
land will eventually become woodland pasture. 



16 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Millions of Acres 
1200 



1000 



PASTURE AND GRAZING LAND: 1900-1954 



800 



600 



400 



200 




1930 
CENSUS YEAR 



1940 



1950 



I960 



NOTE ! * Includes nonforested grazing land , idle grassland In first decades, forest 
and arid woodland grazed, and shrub and brush grozing land in all years 
"■Includes cropland used only for pasture in recent years and plowoble posture in eorlier years. 



WOODLAND PASTURED 
ACREAGE. 1954 




Pasture and grazing land, 1900-54. — The long-term trend in 
total pasture and grazing land has been slightly downward. 
More of the rangeland in the Western and Southern States 
has been included as land in farms. This partly accounts for the 
decrease in grazing land not in farms and the increase in farm 
pasture. Part of the decline in grazing land is explained by 
the plowing up of native grassland areas for cropland, par- 
ticularly in the Great Plains. Woodland pastured in farms has 
changed comparatively little. 

Several important changes in pasture and grazing land oc- 
curred between 194!> and 1954. Open grassland pasture in 
farms which was not cropland and not woodland increased by 
44 million acres between 1949 and 1954. This gain is explained 
by several factors: (1) An actual gain in this type of pasture 
occurred with additions coming from seeding of idle and other 
cropland to pasture and the clearing of woodland, particularly 
in parts of the South. (2) The substantial gain in pasture in 
farms in the West was accompanied by a reduction of grazing 
land not in farms. (3) Pastureland in Texas and other parts 
of the Southwest which was reported as woodland pastured in 
1949 was reported as nonwoodland pasture in 1954. This dif- 
liculty in enumeration is indicated by a comparison of acreages 
reported in these uses from 1945 to 1954. (4) Cropland which 
was reported as used for pasture in 1949 appears to have been 





%si&~- — _ FARM OPERATORS 


WITH GRAZING PERMITS* 








1 ff ^~T7*~~~-— -^ NUMBEF 


. APRIL 1. 1950 








f\ J \ £•*■?•"! 


T^ 






/ ' ' ■/' ^* ■-'•-■• ■ ii 




j ^>/^ s ft" e V\ 






























t \ : / w7ripw~\ 
















< ,\ L^Jjpf 
























UNITED STATES TOTAL V/~~X 
24,618 \ 


jr 








* fi 


EPORTEO ONLI IN MOUNTAIN AND PACIFIC STATES N 


I 1 DOT -25 FARMS 1 

\ ICOUNTT UNIT BASIS] 








* DOMTMNT Of COM.CMC 


•» m UO-tM 


' BUHtHJ Of 'Hf cfJCui 





reported more frequently as permanent grassland pasture in 
1954. 

Woodland pastured. — The value of woodland areas for pasture 
depends a great deal on the size and density of the trees, which 
in turn vary with the age and type of forest. In the Northern 
States, cutover hardwood forests, abandoned fields reverting to 
forests, and brush grown areas are often pastured. In the South- 
ern States, some of the forests have a low tree density which 
permits a good undergrowth of plants of value for grazing. 
This is particularly true of the open longleaf-slash pine belt of 
the Coastal Plain, the Ozarks, and semi-prairie areas in Florida 
and along the Gulf Coast. In the 17 Western States, the wood- 
land pastured includes arid woodlands, brush and shrublands, 
mixed woodland and grassland areas, open forests, and some 
cutover areas which have grass and other forage growth. 

Farm operators with grazing permits. — In the Western States, 
a large acreage of Federal- and State-owned land is used by 
formers under permits granted by the administering agencies. 
The land used by permit is complementary to owned or leased 
land. Much of it is grazed during only a part of the year. The 
United States Forest Service grants permits for grazing parts 
of the forest land which it administers. The distribution of 
farm operators with grazing permits is shown by the accompany- 
ing map. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



17 




WOODLAND AND 

The forest area of continental United States currently totals 
648 million acres according to the preliminary reports of the 
Timber Resource Review completed by the United States Forest 
Service in 1955. In arriving at this total forest land area the 
Forest Service used the following definition of forest land : 

Forest land area includes (a) lands which are at least 
10 percent stocked by trees of any size and capable of pro- 
ducing timber or other wood products, or of exerting an in- 
fluence on the climate or the water regime; (5) land from 
which the trees described in (a) have been removed to less 
than 10 percent stocking and which have not been developed 
for other use; (c) afforested areas; and (d) chaparral areas. 
Does not include orchard land. The minimum area that quali- 
fies as forest land is one acre in the East and 10 acres in the 
West. Roadside, streamside, and shelterbelt strips of timber, 
in addition to meeting above requirements, must be at least 
120 feet wide to qualify as forest land. 
It is important to note that chaparral areas are included under 
this definition. The chaparral land area is defined by the Forest 
Service as including "lands supporting heavily branched dwarf 
trees or shrubs, usually evergreen, the crown canopy of which 
covers more than 50 percent of the ground and whose primary 
value is watershed protection." 

Included in the total forest land area of 648 million acres are 
484 million acres of commercial forest land and 164 million 
acres of noncommercial woodland and forest land. The non- 
commercial area is made up of 13S million acres of unproductive 
and unreserved woodland and forest land and 26 million acres 
(including 11 million unproductive acres) reserved for special 
purposes such as parks and wildlife refuges. 

Commercial forest land is made up of all forest land which (1) 
"is producing, or physically capable of producing, usable crops 



FOREST LAND 

of wood (usually sawtimber), (2) economically available now 
or prospectively, and (3) not withdrawn from timber utiliza- 
tion." When the present commercial forest area of 484 million 
acres is broken down into stand-size classes, there are 178 mil- 
lion acres of sawtimber stands, 169 million acres of pole timber 
stands, 95 million acres of seedling and sapling stands, and 42 
million acres of nonstocked and other forest areas. Some of 
this 42 million acres of nonstocked forest land is probably re- 
ported uuder other uses of land in farms by the Census of Agri- 
culture. 

Forest Land Area in Continental United States, 
by Regions, 1953 ' 





Forest land 




Commercial J 


Noncommercial" 


Total 




1,0C0 acres 

63,023 

30,948 

53,272 

5,508 

67,868 
78,135 
51,631 
18, 210 

63,063 
62.682 


1,000 acres 

3,342 

281 

1,929 

244 

1,439 

1,683 

178 

29,827 

90,435 
33,988 


1,000 acres 
66,365 


Corn Belt - 


31,229 




65, 201 




6,752 




69, 307 




79, 818 


Delta States 


51,809 




48,037 




143, 498 




96, 670 






Total - 


484, 340 


163, 346 


647,686 







' As reported hy the U. S. Forest Service, 1955. 

' Forest land which (a) is producing, or physically capable of producing, usable crop; 
of wood (usually sawtimber), (6) economically available now or prospectively, and 
(c) not withdrawn from timber utilization. 

' Forest land (a) withdrawn from timber utilization through statute, ordinance, or 
administrative order but which otherwise qualities as commercial forest land, or (6) 
incepable of yielding usable wood products (usually sawtimber) becauso of adverse 
site conditions, or so physically inaccessible as to bo unavailable economically in the 
foreseeable future. 



18 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



WOODLAND IN FARMS 

ACREAGE. 1954 




WlV I DOT-25.000 ACRES 

(COUNTY UNIT 6fiS5) 



About 358 million acres of the commercial forest land are pri- 
vately owned and 126 million acres are publicly owned. The 
publicly owned forest land is held by Federal, State, and county 
and municipal governments. About 99 million acres are owned 
by the Federal Government ; 19 million acres, by State govern- 
ments ; and 8 million acres, by county and municipal governments. 
Farm forests accounted for 165 million acres of the privately 
owned commercial forest land in 1950. 

Distribution of forest land. — The distribution of the total forest 
area of the United States is shown on the accompanying map. 
Unproductive as well as productive forest areas are shown. Many 
of the unproductive areas are valuable for watershed protection 
purposes. The regional distribution of the total forest land 
area shown in the accompanying table will assist in locating the 
major areas of commercial and noncommercial forest land. 

From the map, the influence of topography on the distribution 
of forest land may be observed. In the 31 Eastern States, most 
of which were originally forested, several rough hilly areas have 
remained largely forested. In the Western States, rainfall has 
a marked influence upon the distribution of forest land. How- 
ever, topography is a major factor in determining rainfall dis- 
tribution and hence the distribution of the major forested areas. 
In the 11 Western States, the heaviest rainfall occurs on the 
windward western slopes of mountains. Because of the favorable 
rainfall conditions, these wet windward slopes in California, Ore- 
gon, and Washington have some of the most luxuriant forests in 
the United States. In contrast, many of the leeward mountain 
slopes and the lower parts of windward slopes are covered with 
chaparral and other noncommercial forest types. 

In parts of the Great Plains and 11 Western States, areas that 
were originally covered by grass vegetation have been invaded 
by brush-type vegetation which is detrimental to the grazing 
value of the land. One of the largest brush-invaded areas is in 
western Texas. The invasion of brush accounts for the relatively 
high density of woodland in such areas. 

Woodland in farms.— For the United States as a whole, wood- 
land in farms accounts for more than a sixth of the farm area. 
The highest regional proportion is in the Southeastern States 
where half of the land in farms is woodland. In the Western 
States, much of the woodland in farms has relatively little com- 
mercial value except for northern Idaho and western Oregon and 
Washington and California. In the East, farm woodlands are 
generally classified as commercial forest land, but the amount 
of income derived from the woodland part of the farm varies 
from practically nothing to a substantial part of the total farm 
income. 

The increase in total woodland and forest land, which amounted 
to several million acres, reflects a change taking place over the 
last two decades, particularly in parts of the Southern, North- 
eastern, and Lake States. Forest surveys completed since 1950 



WOODLAND PASTURED 
ACREAGE. 1954 




WOODLAND NOT PASTURED 

ACREAGE. 1954 




have more fully indicated the gradual reversion of considerable 
acreages of pastureland and cropland to forest land in these 
parts of the country. 

Much of the decline between 1949 and 1954 in woodland in 
farms occurred in Texas where more of the brushland area 
was included in other pasture not cropland and not woodland 
lather than as a part of woodland pastured. The decline in land 
in farms during the last 5 years in forested regions also accounts 
for an appreciable transfer of forest land from land in farms to 
the nonfarm area. 

Woodland pastured. — This part of the woodland area can either 
be considered as a part of the total pastureland area or part of the 
total woodland in farms. Its value as pasture has already been 
discussed under pastureland. In some areas, such as in the 
longleaf-slash pine forests of the Southeastern Coastal Plain, it 
is possible to use the forest for pasture without detracting very 
much from the timber value of the forest. In other areas such 
as the hardwood forests of the Northeastern, Lake, and Corn 
Belt States, the use of woodland for pasture is generally not 
compatible with good forest management. 

Woodland not pastured. — The heaviest concentration of non- 
pastured woodland in farms is located in the Appalachian and 
Southeastern States. These are also regions with much wood- 
land used for pasture as is shown by the accompanying map. 
The dominance of such cash crops as cotton, tobacco, and peanuts 
over extensive parts of these two regions is an important factor 
accounting for a high proportion of the farm area remaining in 
forests. Much woodland in this part of the South is physically 
suitable for crop production. On the other hand, a considerable 
acreage of woodland in farms in areas of rough topography is 
not likely to be used for crops or even pastured. These forest 
areas are often not operated properly from the standpoint of 
good forest management. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



19 



REGIONAL PATTERNS OF LAND RESOURCES AND USES 



Land resources differ markedly among the several regions of 
the United States. Numerous contrasts in the combination of 
physical conditions give rise to basic differences in the quality 
of land. These variations in quality in turn have a significant 
influence on how the land is used. Consequently, regional pat- 
terns of land use have developed along lines of relatively broad 
differences in physical conditions existing in different parts of the 
United States. Localized differences in physical conditions have 
more direct influences on land use. 

As a resource used in agricultural production, land is of basic 
importance. In spite of the large increases in the investment in 
machinery, buildings, and livestock that have occurred during 
the last 15 years, in 1949 land still accounted for more than half 
of the capital investment on commercial farms in the United 
States. In some areas where only a small proportion of the land 
resources can be used for crop production, land accounts for less 
of the total investment than in areas that have a high proportion 
of land of good quality, including land raised to a high level of 
productivity by irrigation and drainage. 

land quality. — Regional contrasts in the quality of land re- 
sources are mainly explained by the following physical condi- 
tions: (1) Temperature and the length of the frost-free season; 
(2) annual amount and seasonal distribution of precipitation ; (3) 
land relief, including degree and direction of slope; (4) soils; 
and (5) native vegetation wherever it remains nearly in its 
natural state. Transitions in climate are generally gradual 
changes, so that a zone rather than a sharp line of change char- 
acterizes the separation of one climatic region from another. The 
principal exception is in mountainous areas where climatic 
boundaries may be more sharply drawn. Topographic and soil 
conditions commonly change much more abruptly than climate. 

Physical conditions have a significant influence upon the de- 
velopment of general patterns of land use. Thus, grazing of 
native or improved rangelands is the principal use of millions of 
acres of land in the Western States which are too dry for crop 
farming unless irrigated. Rough or mountainous topography 
relegates large areas to forestry as the main use. The propor- 
tion of land used for cropland, pasture, and woodland in a region 
is also markedly affected by soil and topographic characteristics. 
Since some crops are sharply limited by climate, selective use of 
land may prevail in areas suitable for production of some crops, 
for example, citrus fruits. 

The natural environment may be substantially altered by man- 
made improvements so that land resources which in their orig- 
inal condition were considered of poor quality may become highly 
valuable when improved. Land improved by drainage and irri- 
gation falls into this category. 

Other influences on land use. — The influence of physical condi- 
tions on land quality is only one of several major influences 
affecting regional patterns of land use. The history of land 
settlement is often highly significant in determining certain 
characteristics of land use. Early production of cotton as a cash 
crop for export led to a pattern of land use in the South that 
placed the principal emphasis upon the production of row crops. 
Consequently, a less exploitative pattern of use with greater at- 
tention given to close-grown crops used to feed livestock has 
only recently made much progress in areas which from the stand- 
point of several natural conditions have always been well suited 
to livestock production. 

Control or ownership of the land may also affect its use. Large 
ownership units used for forestry or grazing may have sizable 
acreages suitable for use as cropland. If this land were in 
smaller farms, some of it would undoubtedly be used as crop- 
land. At present, when several farm commodities are in surplus 
supply, it does not appear probable that much shifting among 
major uses of land is likely to occur on large ownership units. 



Distribution of and change in population may have a marked 
influence on land use, particularly in localized areas within a 
region. These changes may in turn add up to a significant change 
in the regional economy. The large increases in population on 
the west coast offer an example of how suburbanization and in- 
dustrial expansion may replace existing agricultural uses of the 
land. In California, about 800,000 acres of cultivable land 
have been withdrawn from agriculture during the last 15 years. 
This represents between 5 and 10 percent of the total cropland 
acreage. At the same time that these agricultural lands are 
being transferred to nonagricultural uses associated with the 
expansion of population, the increased demand for agricultural 
products, particularly perishable commodities such as dairy 
products, is an inducement to transfer land from grazing and 
forestry uses to cropland. 

The physical requirements for using land resources for dif- 
ferent purposes are not static. They are constantly being 
changed by the introductiou of new varieties of plants, for 
example, those which are more resistant to drought or cold or less 
affected by high humidity and moisture conditions. Improved 
varieties of grain sorghum for the Great Plains, forage and pas- 
ture crops for the South, and fast-maturing hybrid corn for 
Northern States are examples of regional land use changes made 
possible by applying the results of experimentation. 

Likewise, experimental work in the breeding of livestock is 
facilitating changes in land use. The introduction of more heat- 
and disease-resistant breeds of cattle from southeastern Asia into 
the hot humid Southern States is a significant inducement to 
change established patterns of land use. 

Mechanization of crop production has led to far-reaching 
changes in the distribution of several crops, especially the small 
grains and more recently cotton. Less productive but level land 
on the arid margin of crop production, which is well adapted to the 
use of mechanized equipment, has been substituted for laud of 
good quality subdivided into farms too small for the efficient use 
of large-scale machinery that is now used in growing and harvest- 
ing wheat in the Great Plains. 

Regional patterns of land use may also be affected by other 
conditions, such as the presence of mineral production or in- 
dustrialization which may affect the labor supply and thus dis- 
courage use of the land for agricultural purposes. Compara- 
tively good land cleared and used as cropland may become idle 
and may gradually revert to forestry or grazing uses in areas 
where strong competition for labor exists. 

Shifts in use of land resources. — Regional shifts in the use and 
productivity of land resources are taking place. Among the 
most important changes are the following: (1) Shifting of the 
production of cash crops, particularly cotton, which has been 
moving from the Southeast to the Mississippi Delta, western 
Texas, and California. (2) Increased productivity of hay and 
other feed crops associated with higher yields and better quality 
in some regions. (3) Continuous increase in the acreage of im- 
proved pasture, including additions to the fenced acreage in 
some regions. This increase in pastures of better quality is accom- 
panied by an increase in livestock numbers, particularly beef 
and daily cattle. (4) Increases in the forest land area in regions 
where land formerly used for crop production is reverting to 
pasture and forest. 

Maps of regional patterns. — Maps included in this section are 
intended to give a general understanding of differences in the 
regional distribution of land resources and how they are used. 
Two maps present some of the principal geographical aspects of 
types of farming. Studies of types of farming are carried out 
iu order to classify the production patterns on individual farms 
in terms of crops grown, livestock and livestock products pro- 
duced, methods used in production, and sources of income. 



20 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



The map of "Major Land Use Regions" presents a region- 
alization based on a grouping of major land uses. The associa- 
tions of major uses are superimposed upon the principal natural 
land use regions which in turn are based on the differences in 
physical conditions that are significant determinants of land use. 

In the next two maps presented in this section, the major uses 
of all land and nonfarm land are compared with total land area 
by farm-production regions. 

Land capability is compared with total land area by farm-pro- 
duction regions in the last map in the section. This map is based 
on estimates of land capability compiled in 1948 and 1949 by the 
United States Soil Conservation Service on the basis of individual 



farm plans completed at that time and supplemented by estimates 
for areas where data from farm plans were not available. These 
land-capability estimates are the result of a program being car- 
ried out by the Soil Conservation Service to classify different 
kinds of land systematically on the basis of the characteristics 
that determine the capability of the land to produce permanently. 
Eight general classes are used. Land in Classes I, II, and III 
can be cultivated with differing degrees of attention to conserva- 
tion practices. Class IV land should generally be used for crops 
only once in 6 years or more. Land in Classes V, VI, and VII is 
unsuited for cultivation, but it can be used for pasture and fores- 
try. Class VIII land is suitable only for wildlife, watersheds, 
and similar uses. 



TYPE OF FARMING 



Early type-of-farming studies in the United States were con- 
cerned mainly with a geographic regionalization of agriculture. 
In the 1930 Graphic Summary of American Agriculture, a map 
was presented which divided the United States into 12 major 
agricultural regions. The eastern humid area was divided into 
8 regions. These regions were based mainly upon the domi- 
nance of a particular crop or type of farming. In the West, the 
4 regions were based on the use of land for grazing or crops. 

The most recent study of types of farming was completed in 
1950. In this study, the United States was divided into 165 
generalized type-of-farming areas, 61 subregions, and 9 major 
agricultural regions. 



The distribution of farming is closely related to a number of 
physical, biological, and economic conditions. The type-of-farm- 
ing pattern reflects the influence of these conditions or forces. 
Regional divisions show particularly the influence of climate, 
topography, and soils. In the humid Eastern States, type-of- 
farming regions tend to have an east-to-west orientation which 
reflects the significance of temperature. Soils are an important 
factor influencing the type of farming. This is indicated for 
example by the close agreement between the prairie soils and 
the Corn Belt. In the West, rainfall, altitude, and the availability 
of water for irrigation are the major physical influences upon 
type of farming. 



MAJOR TYPES OF FARMING IN 
THE UNITED STATES 




r I Range livestock 



Tobacco and 



general 



irming 



Fruit, truck, and special crops VJ* 
Feed grains and livestock (Corn Belt 

S3 General farming 

EHJ Cotton 



HWheat and small grains ^i i 



. \ CH Nonfarming 



U S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



NEC 47424 X 



BUREAU OF AGRICU1TURAL ECONOMICS 



LAND UTILIZATION 



21 



TYPE-OF-FARMING AREAS, BASED ON TYPE ACCOUNTING FOR 50 PERCENT 
OR MORE OF COMMERCIAL FARMS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 
TYPE-OF-FARMING AREA 

L33 CASH -GRAIN 

3 COTTON 

W6& OTHER FIELD -CROP 

tiS-Kjj VEGETABLE 

\ FRUIT-AND-NUT 

* NO FARMS 



^H LIVESTOCK (OTHER THAN 
DAIRY AND POULTRY) 

I I GENERAL (NO ONE TYPE 
50 PERCENT OR MORE) 



US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54-2I0 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Biological factors that affect the type of farming include weeds, 
plant and animal diseases, insect pests, and development of new 
varieties and strains of crops. The introduction of hybrid corn, 
for example, has brought about a significant enlargement of the 
Corn Belt, particularly on the drier and colder margins. The 
boll weevil has had a striking effect on the area of cotton pro- 
duction. 

Several economic forces operate to influence types of farming. 
The relative ease with which technological improvements can be 
adapted to regional patterns of farming is an important determi- 
nant of the type of farming. Distance of potential producing 
areas from markets may lead to adjustments in farming. Numer- 
ous changes in the technology of producing and marketing farm 
products have led to shifts in type of farming among regions. 
The westward migration of wheat production is an outstanding 
example of a major regional shift in American agriculture 
brought about to a marked degree by an improvement in produc- 
tion technology. 

Institutional influences such as tariffs, freight rate zones, and 
local sanitary regulations also play a part in the regionalization 
of farming. Sanitary regulations on the sale of fresh milk have 
an influence on milkshed boundaries. 

Major types of farming. — The accompanying map is based on 
the more detailed type-of-farming map which shows 165 gen- 
eralized type-of-farming areas which in turn are grouped into 61 
subregions. These 61 subregions have been summarized in the 
accompanying map in terms of 8 major types of farming. A 



ninth category shown on the map represents areas in which little 
or no farming exists. The fruit, truck, and special crops type is 
the most widely scattered of the major types of farming. Areas 
of this type are found in nearly every part of the United States. 
Tobacco and general farming is the most restricted type in terms 
of area. The feed grains and livestock or Corn Belt type is the 
most compact area. The cotton and dairy types are found mainly 
in extensive east-west trending belts in the Eastern States, al- 
though these types have their respective western counterparts 
in California and the Pacific Northwest. The biggest area of 
general farming is a transitional belt between the Cotton and 
Corn Belt types. The range livestock type is restricted to the 
17 Western States, with most of the area in the 11 Western States 
and the western parts of Texas, South Dakota, and Nebraska. 

Type-of-farming areas. — The distribution of type-of-farming 
areas in 1954 is shown on a county-unit basis, in the accompany- 
ing map. This map is based on type accounting for 50 percent 
or more of commercial farms. When this map is compared with 
the map showing major types of farming, which was compiled 
differently, it may be observed that the overall pattern remains 
essentially unchanged. The Corn Belt does not appear on this 
map as a large unbroken type-of-farming area, partly because the 
type classification has been changed somewhat. Cash grain 
has been substituted for wheat and small grains so that the cash 
corn area of Illinois and Indiana becomes a separate area. The 
increased emphasis on soybean production in the eastern part 
of the Corn Belt is another significant reason why the Corn Belt 
is not shown as a separate area. 



22 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



MAJOR LAND USE REGIONS 




REGIONS GROUPED 

ACCORDING TO 
MAJOR LAND USES 

5 CROPLAND PASTURE FOREST 

™ I Central Farm Sell 

2 Texas Black Pra>ne 

3 Lake Stales Farm Forest 

Reg.on 

/3 CROPLAND GRAZING 

™ 4 Dakota Plains 

5 Oklahoma Kansas Plains 

6 Llano Estacado 

7 Cenfal Highplams 



□ 



FOREST CROPLANO PASTUR 

S Mississippi Delta 

9 Southern Appalachian Mountain 
Plateaus, Valleys and Basins 

10 Piedmont 

11 Eastern Forest Farm Urban Reg, 

12 Eastern Upper Coastal Plain 

13 Western Coastal Plain 

14 Ozark and Ouachita Mountains 

CRAZING CROPLAND WOODLAND 

15 Crosstimbers and Flint Hills 

16 Gult Coast Prairie 



GRAZING CROPLAND 

17 Redbeds and Gypsum 

18 Northern Highplams 
GRAZING IRRIGATED AND OR* 

CROPLAND WOODLAND 

19 Columbia Basin 

20 Pacific Valleys and Southern 

California Coastal Regions 

21 Snake River Plains and 

Utah Valley 



(-.■TVyj tOREST PASTURE MATLAND 

k*^ 22 Northeastern Forest Region 

23 Lake States Cut over Region 
FOREST- GRAZING CROPLAND 

24 Atlantic and Gulf Coast 
Flatwoods 

25 Florida Peninsula 

| FOREST GRAZING MATLAND 

26 Southern Rockies 

27 Northern Rockies and 
Utah Mountains 

28 Sierra Cascade Forest Belt 

[-' 1 GRAZING WOODLAND 

I— 1 IHRIGATEO CROPLAND 

29 And Highplams 

30 Rio Grande Plateaus 

and Plains 

31 Intermountain Ba,sm 

32 Colorado Plateaus 

33 Southern Arizona 

["""] MOSTLY UNUSED 



34 Dei 



WENT OF AGRICULTURE 



MAJOR LAND-USE REGIONS 



In the accompanying map, the United States is divided into 
regions grouped according to the major uses of land. Eleven 
major combinations of land use are delineated. The land-use 
regions that make up the different combinations are to a marked 
degree based upon contrasts in physical characteristics. Five 
different combinations of land use are shown in the 31 Eastern 
States, 6 different ones are located in the Great riains States, 
and 6 are in the 11 Western States. 

Three regions are shown with the cropland-pasture-forest com- 
bination of uses. In each of these three regions, a high pro- 
portion of the total land area is used as cropland. In several 
counties in the Central Farm Belt, more than four-fifths of all 
land is cropland and in most of the remaining counties of this 
region, more than half of all land is used as cropland. 

Four land-use regions located in the Great Plains are character- 
ized by a combination of cropland and grazing. Cropland is the 
dominant use. More than three-fifths of the land is used for 
that purpose throughout most of the area included in these four 
regions. 

Adjacent to these regions are two other regions grouped under 
a grazing-cropland category. In these regions, grazing is a more 
important use of land than cropland. Considerable attention is 
given to moisture-conserving and wind-erosion control practices 
on land used for growing crops, for drought is a major threat to 
agriculture in these regions. 

In the Cross Timbers and Flint Hills of Texas, Oklahoma, and 
Kansas and in the Gulf Coast Prairie of Texas and Louisiana, 
the land-use combination is grazing, cropland, and woodland. 
In these two regions, cropland generally occupies less than half 
of the land area. Woodland areas are often grazed. 

Seven regions which comprise much of northeastern and south- 
ern United States are grouped under the land-use category of 
forest, cropland, and pasture. For the most part, cropland oc- 
cupies less than half of the land area over most of these regions. 

In the Northeastern forest and the Lake States cutover regions, 
the land-use combination is best described as forest, pasture, and 



hayland. Over much of the area in these two regions there is 
little or no cropland or pasture. In the areas where agriculture 
is carried on, pasture is an important use and much of the crop- 
land is used for growing hay crops. Most of the forest land is 
not grazed. 

Western counterparts of these two eastern regions are found 
in the southern Rockies, northern Rockies, and Utah Mountains, 
and in the Sierra-Cascade Forest Belt. Except for irrigated 
areas, cropland is of little importance in these three regions. 

A third combination of major land uses found in the south- 
eastern coastal plain is very similar in some respects to the 
two combinations just described for the Northern and Western 
States. A forest-grazing-cropland combination of uses best 
describes the land-use pattern of the Atlantic and Gulf Coast 
Flatwoods and the Florida Peninsula. In these two regions, a 
high proportion of the land is forested. Cropland accounts for 
loss than a third of the total area with many areas having little 
or no cropland. 

The grazing-irrigated and dry cropland-woodland combination 
of land use characterizes three regions in the Western States. 
The presence of a considerable acreage of dry cropland is a 
distinctive aspect of agriculture in these regions. Irrigated 
cropland is also of major importance. Land used for grazing 
generally accounts for a higher proportion of the total area than 
cropland. Woodland areas are widely grazed. 

The grazing-woodland-irrigated cropland combination of major 
uses is found over extensive areas in the 11 Western States and 
extends into the western part of the Great Plains States. The 
regions characterized by this combination of major uses differ 
from those of the grazing-irrigated and dry cropland-woodland 
group mainly in having smaller and more widely scattered areas 
of irrigated cropland and also in having less dry cropland. 

The two desert areas are little used for agriculture except 
where water for irrigation is available, as in the Imperial Valley 
of California. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



23 



MAJOR USES OF ALL LAND AS COMPARED 
WITH TOTAL LAND AREA 

By Regions, 1954 




Cropland 

Pasture and grazing land 
gg£3 Forest land 
V/A Special use areas 
[•:■:■] Miscellaneous other land 



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



NEC 56(51-2149 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



MAJOR USES OF ALL LAND BY FARM-PRODUCTION REGIONS 



Major Uses of Land in Continental United States, 
by Farm-Production Regions, 1954 



Region 


Crop- 
land ' 


Pasture 

and 
grazing 
land! 


Forest 
and 
wood- 
land a 


Special 
uses 1 


Miscel- 
laneous 
and 
other 
land a 


Total 


Northern: 


1,000 
acres 
18, 848 
39, 959 
80, 343 
95, 820 


1,000 
acres 
10,963 
11,990 
30, 546 
82, 354 


1,000 
acres 
63,537 
54, 451 
31,033 
5,428 


1,000 
acres 
11,634 

8,931 
10,851 

7,836 


1,000 
acres 
7,396 
7,380 
12,610 
3,994 


1,000 
acres 
112,378 




122,711 


Corn Belt 


165, 383 




195, 432 






Total 


234, 970 


135, 853 


154, 449 


39, 252 


31,380 


595, 904 






Southern: 


22, 870 
19, 964 
16, 179 
41,407 


20, 455 

14, 594 

14, 392 

114,076 


68, 021 
78,114 
51,641 
43, 099 


7,600 
8,476 
4,371 
7,531 


5,682 
3,094 
6,272 
6,715 


124, 628 


Southeastern 


124, 242 
92, 855 




212, 828 






Total.. 


100, 420 


163, 517 


240, 875 


27, 978 


21, 763 


554, 553 






Western: 


36, 462 
21,727 


334, 821 
64, 296 


130, 155 
89, 905 


26, 138 
16,830 


21,093 
11,941 


548, 669 


Pacific 


204, 699 


Total 


58, 189 


399,117 


220, 060 


42,968 


33, 034 


753, 368 








393, 579 


698, 487 


615, 384 


110,198 


86, 177 


1, 903, 825 





1 Includes cropland harvested (land from which one or more crops wore harvested), 
crop failure, cropland fallow, cropland used for cover and soil-improvement crops, and 
cropland temporarily idle. 

1 Includes cropland used only for pasture and all nonforested pasture and grazing land. 

3 Excludes forest land reserved for use in parks, wildlife areas, and other special uses 
of land. Includes forest and woodland pastured or grazed. 

* Includes urban areas, rural highways, rural railroads, rural airports, parks, wildlife 
areas, national defense areas, flood control areas, Atomic Energy Commission areas, 
farmsteads, farm roads and lanes, State-owned institutional sites, and miscellaneous 
other uses. 

8 Includes marshes, sand dunes, beaches, bare rock areas, and desert areas not other- 
wise included under special uses of land. 



The regional distribution of major uses of laud is shown in 
the accompanying map and table. In the Corn Belt and Northern 
Plains States, cropland, excluding cropland used only for pasture, 
occupies almost half of the total land area of those States. In 
the Northeastern, Appalachian, and Southeastern regions, forest 
land accounts for more than half of the area. Nearly half of 
the total area is in forests iu the Pacific and Lake States. In 
the Mountain States, pasture and grazing land accounts for well 
over half the total area. In the Great Plains States, nearly half 
of the land area is used for pasture aud grazing. 

Special uses of land occupy the highest proportion of the land 
area in the Northeastern, Pacific, and Lake States. Some of these 
uses have expanded rapidly in parts of these and other regions. 
Urban areas and highways have absorbed an appreciable acreage 
of good land, particularly in the vicinity of large cities. Reser- 
voirs are another special use of land but since the total land area 
is reduced as reservoirs are established, their occupation of land 
is not reflected in the accompanying map and table. 

The distribution of such special uses as urban areas, highways, 
railroads, airports, farmsteads, and farm roads is closely related 
to the distribution of population and farms. Many of the large 
areas in other special uses such as parks, wildlife areas, and 
national defense areas are located in the less populated parts 
of the country. 

Miscellaneous unaccounted-for areas occupy from about 2 to 8 
percent of the land area in the different regions. In some areas, 
a considerable acreage of desert land, marshland, sand dunes, 
and beaches is included in national defense areas, parks, wildlife 
areas, and similar special uses. Most of this land has little value 
for agriculture or forestry. Some of it has mineral and other 
subsurface value. 



24 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



MAJOR USES OF NONFARM LAND AS 
COMPARED WITH TOTAL LAND AREA 

By Regions, 1954 




Glazing Land 

Forest land not glazed 
252 Other land * 
| | Land in laims 



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



OTHER SPECIAL USES, AND MISCELLANEOUS 
LAND AREAS NOT OTHERWISE ACCOUNTED FOR 



NEG. 56(51-2150 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



MAJOR USES OF NONFARMLAND BY FARM-PRODUCTION REGIONS 



Major Uses of Land not in Farms, Continental United 
States, by Farm-Production Regions, 1954 



Region 


Grazing 
land' 


Forest 
land not 
grazed ' 


Other 
land s 


Total 
land not 
in farms 


Northern: 
Northeastern 


1,000 

acres 
2,237 
2,934 
6,572 
4,384 


1,000 

acres 

47, 927 

37, 955 
6,538 
1,525 


1,000 
acres 
16, 484 
10, 563 
15, 410 
5,187 


1,000 
acres 
66,648 




Corn Belt 


27, 520 
11, 096 


Northern Plains 






Total 


15, 127 


93, 945 


47, 644 


156, 716 




Southern: 


9,119 

22, 280 
25, 389 
12,766 


29, 504 
18, 775 
8,583 
7,283 


10, 018 
9,126 
8,795 

11, 336 


48,641 
50, 181 
42, 767 
31, 385 


Southeastern 


Mississippi Delta 


Southern Plains 




Total 


69, 554 


64, 145 


39, 275 


172, 974 




Western: 
Mountain 


211,617 
56, 341 


34, 212 

46, 008 


41, 898 
25, 867 


287, 727 
128, 216 


Pacific 




Total 


267, 958 


80,220 


67, 765 


415, 943 




United States 


352, 639 


238, 310 


154,684 


745, 633 





i Includes forests and arid woodland grazed. 

•Excludes forest area reserved for use in parks, wildlife areas, and other special uses 
of land. 
' Includes special uses of land and miscellaneous other land. 

Most of the grazing land not in farms is located in the Western 
States. A secondary concentration of nonfarm grazing land is 
found in parts of the South where extensive areas of relatively 
open forest land are grazed. 

The nonfarm grazing land is about equally divided between 
open grazing land and forest and woodland used for grazing. 
The open grazing land is almost entirely located in the 17 Western 
States. Only rough estimates of the total acreage of nonfarm 
forest and woodland used for grazing can be made from available 



information. From these estimates it was determined that about 
two-thirds of the nonfarm forest and woodland grazed is located 
in the 17 Western States. Much of the remaining nonfarm 
forest land used for grazing is located in the Southeastern and 
Delta States. 

This nonfarm forest land and woodland which is suited for 
grazing is made up mainly of open woodland and forest, scattered 
cleared and cutover areas, abandoned fields which are reverting 
to forests, and grazing land covered with high brush. In the 
West, much of the woodland grazing is in desert shrublands, and 
such open woodland types as chaparral, pinon, juniper, aspen 
groves, and brush. Some cutover areas in the Pacific Northwest 
are grazed. In the Southern States, the open longleaf-slash pine 
forests, parts of the Ozark forest land, cutover areas, abandoned 
fields reverting to forest and semiprairie areas make up most 
of the nonfarm forest land and woodland used for grazing. In 
the Northern States, cutover land and abandoned fields account 
for much of the nonfarm forest and woodland grazed. 

Nearly three-fourths of the total grazing land not in farms is 
publicly owned land. In the 11 Western States, about five-sixths 
of the grazing land not in farms is Federally owned land. In the 
Southern States, large privately owned forest holdings account 
for much of the nonfarm grazing land. 

Other land not in farms includes the special uses of land which 
are not a part of land in farms and other miscellaneous unac- 
counted-for areas not in farms. Special uses of land in farms 
include farmsteads, farm lanes and roads, and a part of the 
rights-of-way of highways and railroads. Although the rights- 
of-way for highways and railroads are not really a part of land 
in farms some of the acreage in these uses is included as land 
in farms because farmers tend to use round figures in reporting 
their acreage of land in farms. Frequently, this does not allow 
actual use of land for roads. This is particularly true in parts 
of the country that are covered by the rectangular land division 
of the public domain. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



25 



LAND CAPABILITY AS COMPARED WITH TOTAL LAND AREA 
BY REGIONS, 1950 



PACIFIC 




LAKE STATES* 



■NORTHEAST.: 




•APPALACHIAN 



LEGEND 

CLASS I 
CLASS II 
CLASS III 
CLASS IV 
CLASS V a VI 

W//\ class vii a viu 

~\ miscellaneous a unclassified land 



SOUTHERN 
PLAINS 




SOUTHEAST 



LAND CAPABILITY BY FARM-PRODUCTION REGIONS 



The accompanying map and table give a generalized picture 
of land capability by regions. The land capability inventory 
currently being made by the Soil Conservation Service eventually 
will obtain for the whole country the information needed about 
land conditions. This information will permit better decisions 
to be made pertaining to the uses most suitable for different 
kinds of land in order to maintain its productivity. 

The land-capability classification divides land into eight gen- 
eral classes which in turn are subdivided into subclasses and 
units according to more detailed characteristics pertaining to 

Land Classified According to Capability by Farm- 
Production Regions 1 



Region 


Classes 

I, II, and 

III 


Class IV 


Classes 
V and VI 


Classes 

VII and 

VIII 


Miscel- 
laneous 
and un- 
classified 


Land 
area 
total 




Million 
acres 
40.7 

101.9 
53.9 
97.1 

50.9 
56.1 
50.1 
98.6 

30.6 

24.2 


Million 
acres 
12.1 

17.0 
10.8 
17.6 

15.4 
13.8 
6.1 
12.3 

13.8 

13.0 


Million 
acres 
24.6 

15.8 
10.0 
42.5 

13.1 
20.4 
18.6 
45.3 

177.7 

67.8 


Million 
acres 
21.8 

16.3 

24.5 
30.1 

32.7 
17.7 
10.6 
51.0 

296.3 

70.8 


Million 
acres 
13.1 

14.4 

23.5 

8.1 

12.5 
16.3 
7.5 
5.6 

30.3 

28.9 


Million 
acres 
112.3 


Corn Belt 


165.4 




122.7 


Northern Plains 


195.4 
124.6 


Southeastern 

Mississippi Delta 
Southern Plains 


124.3 
92.9 
212.8 

548.7 


Pacific 


204.7 






United States 


604.1 


131.9 


435.8 


571.8 


160.2 


1,903.8 



' Estimates compiled In 1948-49 by Soil Conservation Service. Adjusted slightly on 
basis of 1950 Census of Agriculture figures. 



kind of limitations on use and necessary management practices. 
These land classes indicate the degree of risk involved in using 
the land for different purposes. Class I land is level and easy 
to farm with little or no danger from erosion. There are an 
estimated 72 million acres of Class I land for the country as a 
whole. More than half of this Class I land is located in the 
North Central States. 

Land in capability Classes II and III is also suited to cultivation 
if certain limitations such as slope, sandy soil, tight subsoil, or 
other permanent limiting features are kept in mind in using it 
Class II land needs such easily applied practices as contouring, 
protective cover crops, and simple water management practices. 
Class III land can be cultivated safely only if careful attention 
is given to such conservation measures as terracing and strip- 
cropping on slopes and good water management on flat areas. 
The regional distribution of this land in Classes II and III is 
shown in the accompanying map. The total acreage is about 
equally divided between Class II and Class III land. 

Land in capability Class IV must be cultivated with extreme 
care. It should be used only occasionally for cultivated crops. 
Its best use is for hay crops or pasture. 

Land in Classes V, VI, and VII is not suited to cultivation but 
it may be used for grazing or forestry. Class V land has few 
restrictions when used for grazing or forestry, while land in 
Classes VI and VII have moderate to severe limitations when 
used for these purposes. 

The land included in Class VIII is extremely arid, rough, steep, 
stony, sandy, wet, or severely eroded. Some examples of Class 
VIII land are rocky foothills, rough mountain land, bare rock 
outcrops, coastal sand dunes, much marsh and swamp land, and 
very arid land not suited for any grazing. 



26 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



CONSERVATION, DEVELOPMENT, AND IMPROVEMENT OF 

LAND RESOURCES 



Conservation.— The total land area of the United States is ap- 
proximately 1,904 million acres. This constitutes the total land- 
resource base, which is made up of land of differing qualities. 
Estimates made in conjunction with the laud-capability inven- 
tory conducted by the United States Soil Conservation Service 
reveal that only about a third of the total land area is suited 
to cultivation. Some of this cultivable land has severe limitations 
when cultivated and some of it should be cultivated only oc- 
casionally. The remaining acreage can be used for such pur- 
poses as grazing, forestry, wildlife, and watershed protection. 
Conservation of all the Nation's land resources for the uses for 
which they are best suited is needed. Using the land to produce 
as many of the products that are in demand while exercising 
care to protect and improve it constitutes the true meaning 
of conservation. 

A growing appreciation of the need for the conservation of 
basic resources such as soil, water, forests, grassland, and wild- 
life has resulted in the development of programs aimed at the 
wise use of the natural resources that are a vital part of the 
Nation's wealth. Past misuse of these resources has occurred 
and several abuses remain that need correcting before desired 
goals in conservation can be attained. 

Land used for cultivated crops creates the greatest opportunity 
for damage or loss to soil resources. Physical soil deterioration 
on these lands includes erosion by runoff water, wind erosion, 
deterioration of structure, alkali accumulation, and waterlogging. 
Not included are losses of organic matter and plant nutrients 
which are to be expected in crop production and which may be 
replaced. While physical soil deterioration is preventable, it 
continues to occur largely because of existing economic and insti- 
tutional obstacles to the increased use of conservation measures 
where they are needed. 

Through physical soil deterioration of one kind or another, 
35 million acres of land originally suited for cultivated crop 
production are no longer usable under present conditions for 
that purpose. This does not include 50 to 100 million acres of 
land that were not originally suited for cultivation, which were 
cultivated and which following deterioration have been aban- 
doned for cultivation. Also not included are several million addi- 
tional acres lost from cultivation through expansion of urban 
and industrial areas, building of transportation facilities, and 
the construction of reservoirs. 

Loss of cropland through soil erosion and other types of de- 
terioration is continuing at the rate of about one-half million 
acres a year. If no remedial action is taken, the soil may degrade 
one capability class within 10 to 15 years on 121 million acres 
of the 478 million acres of cropland reported by the 1950 Census 
of Agriculture. This may be considered a critical rate of de- 
terioration. On another 128 million acres, degrading to the next 
capability class may take from 15 to 30 years. Little or no 
deterioration is occurring on the remaining 229 million acres. 

In order to retard the Nation's loss of vital soil resources on 
its best land, a concerted effort is underway to carry out such 
needed soil and water conservation practices as contour farming, 
cover cropping, stripcropping, terracing, stubble mulching, and 
soil-conserving crop rotations. 

The natural grazing lands are another resource to which con- 
servation measures must be applied if this valuable resource is 
to be properly maintained. The Soil Conservation Service has 
estimated that roughly 150 million acres of rangeland are in need 
of brush control. This is largely in the Southwest where infes- 
tation of rangeland with undesirable vegetative growth has taken 
place over extensive areas. Another estimated 96 million acres of 
rangeland is in need of reseeding. Stock-water development is 
also needed for approximately 237 million acres of rangeland, if 



better distribution of grazing is to be attained and overgrazing 
is to be lessened near existing sources of water. 

When the forest resources are likewise reviewed, it is apparent 
that continuing improvement in the conservation of the Nation's 
forests is desirable. Although a fourth of the total land area of 
continental United States is in commercial forest land, the Nation 
does not have an excess of forest land in the light of estimates of 
future requirements for forest products. There is considerable 
room for improvement of the existing commercial forest land, 
which totals 4S4 million acres for continental United States. A 
fourth of it is poorly stocked or is not stocked at all. About 50 
million acres will need to be replanted before this land can become 
productive forest land. Long-range planning in the field of forest- 
resource Conservation is needed to provide adequately for future 
and present requirements. 

Development and improvement of land. — Present development 
and improvement of land is not comparable to the large-scale 
pioneering and homesteading of new areas that were so important 
during the settlement period in American history. However, 
considerable development and improvement of land, much of it 
on existing farms, is still taking place. The development of land 
includes the preparation of unimproved or presently nonarable 
land for crops and improved pastures by carrying out such prac- 
tices as installing drainage, clearing woodland or brush, removal 
of stones or old stumps, and leveling, ditching, or terracing unim- 
proved land for irrigation. Improvement of land refers to the 
application of these various measures to land that is presently 
used as cropland or improved pasture, but which can be made 
more productive by carrying out additional land improvement. 

Many farmers have only limited acreages of cropland avail- 
able with which to expand the farm business. On many small 
farms on which capital and land resources are limited, more 
effective use of existing land resources in the farm unit may be 
possible by carrying out certain development or improvement 
measures. Some farmers may be able to obtain more cropland 
by buying nearby tracts of land, but for many this opportunity 
may not be available. Operators of large farms may have a 
choice of making more intensive use of the existing acreage of 
improved land or of developing additional land in the farm. 

Development and improvement of land by irrigation continues 
to expand. During the last decade, the acreage irrigated has 
increased by 9 million acres. About half of this increase repre- 
sents the development of new cropland. The remainder is the 
irrigation of dry cropland in the West and the supplemental irri- 
gation of cropland in the humid Eastern States. The produc- 
tivity of some of the land already being irrigated in the West 
also may be increased by supplementing the existing sources of 
water with additional water from new irrigation works. Level- 
ing and releveling of land is an important aspect of development 
and improvement of land by irrigation in some areas. 

The drainage of land for agricultural uses has been a major 
practice in the development and improvement of land for many 
years. Approximately 65 million acres were in organized drain- 
age enterprises at the time of the first Census of Drainage taken 
in 1920. Land in organized drainage enterprises in 1950 totaled 
103 million acres, including about 4 million acres of drainage in 
irrigation districts. Only about 82 million acres of the land in 
drainage enterprises is improved. The Soil Conservation Serv- 
ice has estimated that supplemental drainage is needed on 31 
million acres presently used for cropland and pasture. An addi- 
tional 21 million acres are potentially drainable. About 17 mil- 
lion acres of the potentially drainable land are mainly outside 
existing organized drainage enterprises. The other 4 million 
acres are a part of the 21 million acres of unimproved land esti- 
mated to be a part of the land reported in organized drainage 
enterprises in 1950. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



27 



IRRIGATED LAND IN FARMS 

ACREAGE. 1954 




I D0T=200 ACRES 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 



UNITED STATES TOTAL 
29,552.155 



DOT= 10.000 ACRES 

(COUNTY UNI I BASIS) 




+ 



+ 



U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54-200 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



irrigated ACREAGE OF SPECIFIED CHOPS AND PASTURE IN THE 20 STATES: 1954* 



BE 


MILLION ACRES 


-LI*-. 


































mm 












•"• 






















**""■ 














' 


■-fEaia 


■HHUHLH 


"ftmJStfH 


qmBBHov r 
















!«t<'«« 


■BtfUHSBBUB ' 
















Sr» M >MI 


laMMJBm i 












1 




...... 


■■■■K 


















o.m-*o~.- 




4 


















KM MMm 




« 


















»<«tt i»i 


■MBI ■ 




















%TmhS 


h i 




















IM ft*. 


■ > 
1 °- 




















-«ffl 


1 o* 








































Ita 


Of 


















•• c»w baa 


.MM 




1 













+ 
+ 


IRRIGATED 


LAND-INCR 
IN ACREAGE 


EASE AND DECREASE 

1949-1954 /*~\ 
Jp' F \ ■■■' Y *' 


|"5~~~ TT ____ 


1 - 


\\ 


\ 




«»»-' , 


Eg 


j | 




k. vs 


^^^4*dw > 


3.764.700 OR 146 PERCENT "^ 






IPOT'LOM) INCREASE ^"V 
IDOT'fpWKCfle/.Sf w 
n urn »»5i 



IRRIGATED LAND 



Distribution, use, and trend in acreage are some of the sig- 
nificant aspects of irrigation shown by the accompanying maps 
and charts. 

Irrigated land in farms. — Most of the irrigated land is con- 
centrated in the 11 Western States and Texas. Lesser concen- 
trations are found in Nebraska, Kansas, Arkansas, Louisiana, 
and Florida. The accompanying map uses two different ratios of 
dots to acreage in order to show the distribution of irrigated land 
in Western and Eastern States. In the 2S Eastern States shown 
as a separate block in the accompanying map, the heaviest con- 
centrations of irrigated land are associated with the production 
of such crops as vegetables in New Jersey and Delaware, tobacco 
and vegetables in Connecticut, rice in the Delta of Mississippi, 
and fruit on the southeastern shore of Lake Michigan. 

Irrigated acreage of specified crops and pasture. — Pasture oc- 
cupies more irrigated land than any one crop. Some of the 



irrigated pasture is improved but pastures of native grasses ad- 
jacent to streams are also irrigated under favorable conditions. 
Alfalfa hay and cotton are the two leading crops on irrigated 
land. These are followed by rice ; barley ; sorghums ; orchards, 
vineyards, and nuts ; and wild hay. These crops and pasture 
account for about two-thirds of the irrigated acreage. 

Irrigated land, increase and decrease in acreage, 1949-54. — 
Widespread increases in the acreage of Irrigated land are shown 
by the accompanying map. Decreases are ruainlj concentrated 
in Colorado, Wyoming, and Nevada. Many of these areas of 
decrease are associated with a severe water shortage in 1951 and 
the decreases are probably only temporary. Smaller areas of 
decrease near metropolitan areas such as Los Angeles and San 
Francisco are explained by the suburban spread of population 
and growing competition between urban and agricultural uses 
for available water and land. 



28 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



AREAS IRRIGATED AND IRRIGABLE 



*£ RTH£R N 



1950 ACREAGE 

I Irrigated 
■:£;*:. Potentially irrigable 

17 WESTERN STATES 

lrrigated=24.3mil. acres 
Potentially irrigable=17.2 mil. acres 




U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



NEC 55(31-942 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



ACREAGE OF IRRIGATED LAND IN THE UNITED STATES: 1889-1954 



25 

£ 20 

< 

° 15 

m 

c 

I l0 

5 5 











1 1 1 
CENSUS OF IRRIGATION V 














i__u-^ 












/* 




' 


„.'■ 






SPECIAL CENSUS 
Of. 1902.5' i 






"•>' 








*< 

^2 CENSU! 


OF «GR 


CULTUR 


i» 





























1899 1902 1909 



1929 1934 1939 



1944 1949 1954 
54C-033 



'Total Irrigated land In faris for 1909, 1919, and 1929, Irrigation census Included the 17 Weatei 
Arkansas, and Louisiana; for 1939 and 1949, Florida also Included. 

a Totel Irrigated land, all states. 

'For 1889 and 1899, census total for Irrigated land In fame Included tne 17 Western States, 
Louisiana; for 1929, Irrigated land free uhlch crops wsre harvested, sans 19 States; for 1934, Irrigated 
crops, sane 19 States; for 1939, Irrigated cropland harvested plus Irrigated pasture, 48 States. For 1944, 
1949, end 1954, total Irrigated land 48 States. Data for 1909 and 1919 not available. 



In the 17 Western States the most pronounced increases oc- 
curred in the High Plains of Texas, where ground water supplies 
are being used for irrigation ; in the Central Valley of California ; 
in southern Arizona ; in the Willamette and Klamath Valleys of 
Oregon ; in the Columbia Basin of Washington ; along the Snake 
River in Idaho ; in south-central Nebraska ; and in western 
Kansas. Increases were also pronounced in the rice growing 
areas of Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas. In the Delta of 
Mississippi, irrigated acreage expanded rapidly as rice produc- 
tion increased in that area. The expansion of irrigation between 
1949 and 1954 in the Eastern States was much greater and more 
widespread than the increases in these States between 1944 and 
1949. 

Areas irrigated and irrigable. — In the above map, the 1950 ir- 
rigated acreage is compared with the potentially irrigable area by 
regions for the 17 Western States. Among the 5 regions shown, 
the 3 Pacific States have both the largest irrigated acreage and 
the greatest potentially irrigable area. The Northern Plains 
States have irrigated the smallest proportion of their total irri- 
gable area. 

With the available water supply and with present conservation 
practices and distribution methods only about 3 in each 100 acres 
in the West can be irrigated for crop production. Nearly a third 
of the 24 million acres irrigated in the 17 Western States in 1949 



needs additional water in order to have a full season's supply 
for crop production. 

Acreage of irrigated land in the United States, 1889 to 1954. — 
The acreage of land irrigated in 1954 totaled 29.6 million acres. 
This total is 3.8 million acres more than the acreage reported ir- 
rigated in 1949 and 9 million acres more than was irrigated in 
1944. The regional distribution of the net increase between 1949 
and 1954 is as follows: 

11 Western States 0. 5 million acres. 

6 Great Plains States 2. 2 million acres. 

31 Eastern States 1. 1 million acres. 

Decreases were reported for only 6 States ; and of these the 
amount was significant only in Colorado, Wyoming, and Nevada. 
The largest increase was reported in Texas. In the Eastern States 
where the total acreage of land presently irrigated is compara- 
tively small, large percentage gains in land irrigated were gen- 
erally characteristic. 

Some of the gain in the humid States took place in the rice- 
producing areas of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and south- 
eastern Texas; but an increasing number of farmers in the East 
were using irrigation to supplement rainfall, which may be 
deficient in some years. 

Supplemental irrigation is being used on a wide variety of 
crops and on improved pastures. For intensively grown vege- 
tables and fruits, irrigation in the East is generally accepted as 
profitable if other conditions are favorable. Tobacco is also a 
high-value crop for which many growers have successfully used 
irrigation. For field crops and pastures, fewer data are available 
on the returns from irrigation in humid areas. 

The recent widespread interest in irrigation in the humid 
Eastern States stems from several conditions. For one thing, 
new lightweight portable equipment for sprinkler irrigation has 
been developed. This eliminates ditches and leveling and makes 
it possible to control the application of water. Recent droughts 
in parts of the Eastern States, which have coincided with periods 
of higher prices for farm products, have encouraged many farm- 
ers to make an investment in irrigation equipment. During the 
years following World War II, farmers were financially able to 
make this substantial investment necessary to install an irriga- 
tion system. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



29 



FARM DRAINAGE* 

ACREAGE, 'I 947 "53 




UNITED STATES TOTAL 
21.329,423 (7-YEAR TOTAL) 



WITH FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE 
AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM SERVICE 



US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



NEG 56(3)783 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



DRAINAGE 



FARM DRAINAGE IN U. S.* 

THOUS. ACRES 



6,000 



4,000 



2,000 



ENCLOSED DRAINS 




1944 



1946 



1948 



1950 



1952 



. DEPARTMENT OF ACRICULTU 



T, CULTURAL CONSERVATION „Ol«1. SERVICE 

NEG 5«<*I-I'T» AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



The artificial drainage of land that does not have good natural 
drainage has brought millions of acres of good land into agricul- 
tural use. An important part of the Nation's most productive 
land has been improved by drainage. 

Organized group drainage enterprises, which are generally 
responsible for construction of canals and ditches, are frequently 
necessary prerequisites to the establishment of good farm drain- 
age works. Cooperative effort among farmers is necessary in 
order to build these main outlets for field drains. The success 
of both group and farm drainage enterprises is largely deter- 
mined by careful planning based on good soil and engineering sur- 
407763—57 3 



veys, by careful consideration of expected benefits in relation to 
costs, and by sound financial planning. After an enterprise is 
established, close cooperation must continue if the project is 
to be adequately maintained. 

Farm drainage. — The distribution of the acreage drained during 
a 7-year period from 1047 to 1953 for which county data were 
available indicates the chief areas in which farm drainage is 
being carried out in the United States. The North Central States, 
Mississippi Delta, and Southeastern Coastal Plain are the prin- 
cipal regions in which farm drainage has been a significant land- 
improvement practice. The acreage drained during the 7-year 
period covered by the map totaled more than a million acres for 
each of the following States : Michigan, Louisiana, Mississippi, 
Minnesota, Arkansas, and Wisconsin. Ten other States each 
had more than one-half million acres drained during the 7-year 
period. Most of the drainage was by open ditches (18 million 
acres). Tile drainage totaled approximately 3 million acres. 
Two-fifths of the tile drainage was installed in Ohio, Iowa, Indi- 
ana, and Michigan. 

Farm drainage in United States. — From 1944 to 1953, Agricul- 
tural Conservation Program assistance was rendered in drain- 
ing nearly 32 million acres of farmland, or an average of about 3 
million acres a year for this 10-year period. Much of this 
acreage was drained with the technical assistance of the Soil 
Conservation Service. The amount of farm drainage carried out 
annually is shown in the accompanying chart. Not all of this 
acreage is newly drained land. A considerable part of the drain- 
age carried out under the Agricultural Conservation Program 
is on land that has previously been improved to some extent by 
drainage. 



30 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



LAND CLEARED* 




UNITED STATES TOTAL 
740.451 

IN SOIL CONSERVATION DISTRICTS WITH 
TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE OF THE 
SOU CONSERVATION SERVICE 



US- DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



NEG 56(31 7B4 ' AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



LAND CLEARING AND BRUSH CONTROL 




Land clearing. — Land is still being developed for crops and 
pasture by clearing. Although the total acreage cleared for the 
country as a whole in any one year is relatively small, clearing 
of land has considerably greater significance in some areas. 

In recent years, the increased use of large-scale mechanical 
equipment has made possible rapid and economical clearing 
operations. Some of the new machinery and techniques were 
developed during World War II in clearing airfields and camp 
sites in jungle areas. These new machines and techniques 
make it possible to clear large tracts in a few weeks in contrast 
to the few areas that formerly could be cleared each year. 

The distribution of the acreage cleared in 1954 with technical 
assistance from the Soil Conservation Service gives a fairly good 
indication where land is presently being developed by clearing. 
In some areas, such as in Tennessee, Missouri, and Pennsylvania, 
the map shows practically no clearing because only a part of 
these States were included in soil-conservation districts in 1954. 
Most of the clearing is concentrated in the Southern States. 
For the most part the land currently being cleared has been 



previously cutover for timber or cleared for agriculture. Some 
of the clearing is being carried out in conjunction with drainage 
and irrigation. 

Land is being cleared for several different uses and purposes. 
Some farmers are clearing patches of woodland and brush in 
order to enlarge, consolidate, or reshape fields in order to make 
more efficient use of tractor-drawn equipment. For other farm- 
ers, clearing a few acres of woodland provides an opportunity to 
expand the cropland base of the farm. Land is also being 
cleared on farms in order to obtain land best suited for the pro- 
duction of certain specialized crops such as tobacco, rice, citrus 
fruit, and some vegetables which require rather specific soil and 
slope conditions. For example, land cleared in recent years in 
northeastern Arkansas has been cleared mainly for rice produc- 
tion. Another impetus to land clearing springs from the need 
for more improved pastureland on farms in the South which are 
making basic changes in type of farming. Increased emphasis 
on beef cattle production in the Black Belt of Alabama and Mis- 
sissippi and on dairy production in favorably located parts of 
the Piedmont have led to the clearing of land for improved pas- 
ture. On the cattle ranches of central Florida, land clearing 
must frequently precede the seeding of improved pastures which 
are needed to complement the forage supply from native range- 
land and woodland. 

Brush control. — Brush control is considered as a separate prac- 
tice from land clearing. It is an important practice in the South- 
west, particularly Texas, where undesirable woody plant species 
have invaded native rangelands. A wide variety of noxious 
plants such as mesquite, scrub oak, and creosote have become 
widespread on these rangelands. The spread of these plants has 
resulted partly from overgrazing and partly from unfavorable 
climatic conditions such as drought, flood, and hard winters. 
Fire and wildlife have also contributed to the spread of brush. I 
Mechanical and chemical controls of various kinds are being 
used in an attempt to eradicate or control further spread of these • 
noxious plants. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



31 



SEEDING AND RESEEDING OF PASTURE 

ACREAGE, 1950 "53 




UNITED STATES TOTAL 
23,565.303 (4"TEAR TOTAL) 

WITH FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE FROM THE 
AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION PROGRAM SERVICE 



US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



•*|f. 






t DOT = 2.000 ACRES 



NEG 56(3)765 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE I 



PASTURE IMPROVEMENT 



SEEDING AND RESEEDING OF PASTURE* 




3-Yeor Averages, United States 




THOUS. 


ACRES 




6,000 






■ . 


4,000 


■ ■ 1 




■ ■III 




2,000 


1 1 1 1 1 




.11111 




■ 


■ 11111 

1936-38 1939-41 1942-44 1945-47 1948-50 1951-53 


••llli 'IKinriJl AiSISTtHCC 110. lU'i.-'N-.Ui i -.'I r. . . r . ., ,,:.;.■.. U •.,..-. i 
| 0. 1. OEPAaTMCNT OF AGRICULTURE NEC It 1*)- Hit AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



Considerable progress in the improvement of public and private 
grasslands has been made in recent years. More farmers are 
recognizing the importance of having good improved pastures 
on their farms if they are to make the most efficient use of their 
land resources. Several different practices are associated with 
the improvement of pastureland. Application of lime, phosphate, 
and potash may be required. Weeds need to be mowed and com- 
petitive plants controlled. Seeding or reseeding of pastures with 
good seed and with the right kind or mixture of pasture plants 
for the soil, slope, temperature, and moisture conditions involved 
is also a major prerequisite to the establishment of an improved 
high-forage yielding pasture. 



The Federal Government has taken an active part in helping 
farmers to improve their pastures. Research has been carried 
out to develop the best plants and improvement practices. Tech- 
nical assistance in carrying out pasture-improvement practices is 
rendered by the Soil Conservation Service and financial assist- 
ance under the Agricultural Conservation Program benefits 
farmers in this phase of conservation. 

Seeding and reseeding of pasture, 1936-53. — Seeding and reseed- 
ing of pasture has been carried out under the Agricultural Con- 
servation Program since 1936. The accompanying chart indicates 
that the acreage of pasture being seeded or reseeded with finan- 
cial assistance from the Agricultural Conservation Program 
Service has gradually been increased. 

Seeding and reseeding of pasture 1950-53. — The distribution of 
the acreage seeded or reseeded under the Agricultural Conser- 
vation Program during a 4-year period, 19;")CM53, is shown by 
the accompanying map. The greatest emphasis on seeding and 
reseeding of pasture under this program is in the Southern 
States where cropland diverted from other uses and land re- 
cently cleared is being seeded to improved pastures. Some 
States, particularly Kentucky, have placed a strong emphasis on 
this practice in assigning funds available for payments to farm- 
ers. In other States, such as West Virginia and the New England 
States, more emphasis has been placed on using funds for the 
application of such materials as lime, phosphate, and potash. 
This means that the amount of seeding and reseeding of pastures 
in these States is not adequately reflected in the above map, 
which is based only on the acreage seedeil or reseeded with fi- 
nancial assistance given for that specific practice. 



32 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



\jWLAND IN COVER CROPS TURNED UNDER FOR GREEN MANURE 

ACREAGE. 1954 



* 



|.;'.^, -.".', • r '•'%--, lib: 






* i: 



m& 



UNITED STATES TOTAL 
9,278,572 

*NOT REPORTED FOR 17 WESTERN STATES 
EXCEPT EAST TEXAS 



I DOT=2.000 ACRES 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO. A54-I68 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



SOIL-CONSERVING PRACTICES 



H$~~-— 


LAND IN ROW CROPS OR CLOSE-SEEDED CROPS 
r^GROWN IN STRIPS FOR WIND EROSION CONTROL' 
l~~5m*r—. ACREAGE. 1954 




V '^W* •. ^3!%^ 








S. i'- ■ jifc 


' * 1 


f^^rs^rs^ ^-^ 






/~~t ti 


~sr\ 








/ / I 












11 r 






^s Y 


- — — -f - ' f i 


,- 






"&' 










UNITED STATES TOTAL \/""~\ 










5.216.112 

* REPORTED ONLY IN IT 

CflLlf OWllA. and EAST 


WSSTEHN ST.TT5 E«£PT ttFHZCWA. 




IDOT-2,000 ACRES \ | 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS, \ 1 




M ,..,»..«.• 0' cow. 


- ( 


3 


«** * •«■■" " ** 


.... 1 M » . 



For the first time, the Census of Agriculture obtained informa- 
tion in 1954 pertaining to the conservation of land resources. 
Since the passage of the first National Soil Conservation Act by 
Congress in 1935, greatly increased attention has been focused 
on the conservation of land resources throughout the United 
States. In 1937, States began to pass laws which permitted 
farmers and ranchers to organize soil-conservation districts for 
the purpose of carrying out needed soil-conservation measures. 
The United States Soil Conservation Service has worked in close 
cooperation with these districts. 



All States had laws by 194S which made it possible to organize 
soil-conservation districts. By the end of 1955, the number of 
soil-conservation districts totaled 2,677. Most of these districts 
are about the size of a county, and many of them have boundaries 
that coincide with county boundaries. By the end of 1955, basic 
conservation plans had been prepared for more than a million 
farms and ranches in these soil-conservation districts. The land 
area of these farms and ranches for which basic conservation 
plans have been prepared totaled more than 298 million acres at 
the end of 1955. 

Conservation practices have not yet been established on much 
of the land for which plans have been prepared because of the 
short time that has elapsed since the plans were completed. How- 
ever, much work is in progress, and each year several million 
acres are receiving the benefit of soil and water conservation 
practices. The job ahead still remains a big one. Even when all 
farms and ranches have completed conservation plans, the job of 
carrying out these plans on a permanent basis lies ahead. 

Land in cover crops turned under for green manure. — A cover 
crop is grown in a thick stand as a means of enriching and pro- 
tecting soil resources. Some cover crops are plowed under while 
still green which provides green manure. Organic matter and 
plant food are added in this way. Some cover crops are peren- 
nials ; and since they occupy the land for a period of years are 
thought of as a permanent cover crop. Annual crops grown for 
their cover value are generally planted either in the fall or in 
spring and early summer. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



33 



.CROPLAND USED FOR GRAIN OR ROW CROPS FARMED ON THE CONTOUR * 

ACREAGE, 1954 






W^f 



.gSf,-. 



UNITED STATES TOTAL 
22,434,812 

*NOT REPORTED FOR FLORIDA 

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



I DOT= 10,000 ACRES 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 



MAP NO. A54-I77 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Crops planted in the fall are known as winter cover crops. 
Winter protection of the soil is especially significant in much of 
the South where clean-cultivated crops, such as cotton, corn, and 
tobacco, are grown and where relatively high rainfall and the 
absence of frozen ground are conducive to severe erosion of 
sloping land left without cover during the winter. Some of the 
winter cover crops grown in this part of the United States are 
vetches, Austrian winter field peas, clovers, and abruzzi rye. 
Sweetclover grown in the northern Corn Belt and crimson clover 
in the Atlantic Coastal Plain from New Jersey to Georgia are 
other legumes used as cover crops. Rye, winter oats, and 
wheat are other nonlegume crops frequently used for their 
value for cover and green manure. Rye is the most commonly 
used grass or grain crop for winter cover in the Corn Belt and 
Cotton Belt. 

The accompanying map showing the distribution of land in 
cover crops turned under for green manure shows that such crops 
are grown widely in the Southern States, Corn Belt, southern 
parts of the Lake States, and in the Middle Atlantic Coastal 
Plain. Except for parts of Idaho, Washington, Oregon, and 
California, cover crops turned under for green manure is not a 
common practice in the 17 Western States, excluding eastern 
Texas. Inadequate moisture is a major reason for the infrequent 
use of cover crops in the 17 Western States. 

Land in row crops or close-seeded crops grown in strips for 
wind erosion control. — As indicated by the accompanying map, 
this conservation practice is concentrated chiefly in the western 
part of the Great Plains wheat-producing areas. Along this dry 
margin, wheat is being grown on land that is subject to wind 
erosion, particularly during the drier years. Wind stripcrop- 
ping, stubble mulching, and other conservation practices help 



l.o control soil blowing. The practice of wind stripcropping 
involves the planting of crops in strips of uniform width which 
are arranged at right angles to the direction of the prevailing 
wind. Cultivated summer fallow and small grain crops often 
occupy alternating strips. Not all land on which wind strip- 
cropping is a current practice is necessarily best suited to wheat. 
Some of the land on which wheat is presently produced is best 
adapted to a permanent cover of grass used for grazing livestock. 

Cropland used for grain or row crops farmed on the contour. — 
Crops are planted on the contour when the rows or strips are 
laid out at right angles to the natural slope of the land. Farm- 
ing land on the contour generally means that alternating strips 
or bands of different crops are also used in order to retard soil 
and water loss. Row crops alternated with close sown crops is 
a general arrangement. The different crops commonly grown are 
also rotated among the different strips of land. 

Farming on the contour is a widespread practice where slop- 
ing land is used for cropland. As shown by the accompanying 
map, there is widespread use of contour farming in those areas 
in the South where cotton is an important crop on sloping land. 
In some of the more rolling parts of the Corn Belt, a considerable 
acreage of crops are grown on the contour. In the central and 
southern Great Plains, growing crops on the contour is a widely 
used practice. Moisture conservation as well as the control of 
wind and water erosion is a major incentive to arranging crops 
on the contour. Yields are increased materially through the ap- 
plication of this moisture-conserving practice. In some parts of 
the Great Plains, where there is no dominant prevailing wind 
direction, strips of crops planted on the contour are likely to 
give more protection against wind erosion than strips planted 
at right angles to the prevailing wind. 



M 



r\ vji\iT.riii^v OLJiviivii^ivi 



FARM RESOURCES AND PRODUCTION 



Remarkable growth in the use of capital in American agricul- 
ture has been a dominant characteristic of the changes taking 
place. This has been especially true in the last, 15 to 20 years. 
Productive farm resources available to each of the 8.5 million 
farm operators, hired hands, and family workers averaged about 
$14,400 in 1955. In 1940, the comparable value was $3,500, which 
after allowance for changes in the price level means approxi- 
mately a 75 percent increase in capital per worker. For full- 
time commercial farms, the average investment per worker would 
be $20,000 or more. 

These productive resources are made up of land, service build- 
ings, livestock and feed inventories, machinery and equipment, 
and cash-on-hand used for operating expenses such as the pur- 
chase of fertilizer, lime, seed, pesticides, gasoline, oil, livestock 
feed, repairs for machinery, and other related materials. Other 
assets owned by farmers which are not among these productive 
assets are dwellings, household goods, financial savings, and 
automobiles. The total investment in these additional assets is 
in the neighborhood of $5,000 per worker. 

In 1955, the total farm output was nearly 50 percent more 
than that of 1935-39. This production came from about the same 
acreage of farmland, and it was produced with 30 percent less 
labor. However, the amount of investment capital and cash 
needed for operating expenses increased sharply. Using current 
dollars in comparing the 1935-39 period with 1955, the amount 
of investment capital used increased threefold and the cash out- 
lay for nonfarm goods used in farm production was four times 
as great. 

The percentage distribution of the value of inputs on com- 
mercial farms in 1949 indicates the relative importance of farm 
resources used in obtaining the present high level of farm pro- 
duction sold or used in farm households. Purchase of livestock 
and poultry ; feed for livestock and poultry ; seeds, bulbs, plants, 
and trees; fertilizer and lime, and gasoline and other petroleum 
fuel and oil constituted 31 percent of the total value of inputs 
on commercial farms. For tractor and other farm machinery 
repairs and for machine hire about percent of the inputs were 
needed. Depreciation on machinery and equipment and buildings 
accounted for 9 percent of the total inputs. Interest on invest- 
ment in land, buildings, machinery and equipment, and livestock 
made up 21 percent. The labor input totaled 33 percent. 

Changes in agricultural production. — The transformation of 
production in American agriculture has been nearly complete 
during the last 50 years. While this transformation started prior 
to World War I, the outstanding changes have taken place since 
1920. During and following World War II the rate of change 
was greatly accelerated. Production per acre and per animal, 
as well as the total farm output, has shown pronounced in- 
creases. Several factors have contributed to these upward 
changes in production. 

(1) Mechanization. — The substitution of mechanical power 
and associated machinery for animal power released about 80 
million acres of cropland between 1920 and 1955. This release 
of cropland and other resources accounted for about half of 
the total increase in farm output during the interwar years. 
Since 1940, the acreage released by this substitution of inani- 
mate for animate power has amounted to 33 million acres, 
which have accounted for about a fourth of the increase in 
farm output during this period. 

(2) Soil conservation and improvement. — The use of lime and 
fertilizer has expanded greatly in recent years. Four times 
as much fertilizer is used on farms today compared with the 
amount used in the years prior to World War II. Introduction 
of better conservation practices to more farms is also contrib- 
uting to the increase in farm output. Planting crops on the 
contour, stripcropping, terracing, better crop rotations, and 
other soil-conserving practices have also played a part in 
raising farm output. Altogether, these improvements including 
the increased application of fertilizer have accounted for about 
a fourth of the increase in farm output since 1940—11. 



(3) Improvement in crops. — The most frequently cited ex- 
ample of increase in ouput attributable to crop improvement 
has been the introduction of hybrid seed corn. Its use has 
spread to all of the major corn-producing areas and adoption of 
this improvement is nearly completed. Other improvements in 
crop varieties have also had their influence on yields. Use of 
new chemical and mechanical methods to control weeds, insect 
pests, and plant diseases have led to increases in yields. About 
a fifth of the total increase in farm output since 1940-41 can 
be assigned to improvements in crops. 

(4) Improvements in livestock breeding, feeding, and disease 
control. — Artificial insemination and cross breeding have been 
important factors leading to the genetic improvement of 
animals. Improvement in feeding methods, including a better 
balanced and more adequate ration and the use of antibiotics 
and hormones, have gone hand in hand with breeding im- 
provements to bring about significant increases in animal pro- 
duction. 

(5) Farmstead improvements. — The greatly increased use of 
electricity in recent years has reduced labor requirements 
around the farmstead. Pumping water, milking cows, cooling 
milk, and numerous other chores are rendered comparatively 
easy tasks through the use of electricity. Many other improve- 
ments around the farmstead such as the design, construction, 
and location of farm buildings have led to a large saving in 
labor on farms where such improvements have been introduced. 

When these various technological advances and improvements 
are brought together, there are additional increases in farm 
output which are attributable to the combined use of the improve- 
ments. 

Agricultural losses. — In spite of these many improvements that 
have led to the marked increases in the farm output, there is 
still room for further improvement. A summary of annual losses 
from 1942 to 1951, made by the Agricultural Research Service, 
reveals that these losses amount to nearly a third of the potential 
\ alue of our crops, livestock, and forest products. 

In the production of crops, weather, insects, diseases, mechani- 
cal damage, weeds, and harvesting waste contribute to a loss in 
output. After the crops are harvested, other losses in storage, 
marketing and processing ; disease and death of animals to which 
crops are fed ; destruction of nutrients in cooking : and waste of 
edible portions of food in the kitchen add up to a sizable amount. 
It has been estimated that such losses were equal to the production 
from 120 million acres of cropland each year between 1942 and 
1951. 

Losses in production also occur in the use of our pasture and 
range. These include plant diseases, fire, grasshoppers, and 
weeds. Such losses equal the potential production from about 
154 million acres of pasture and grazing land. (Pasture and 
grazing land totaled a billion acres in 1954.) 

Forests are also affected by such losses as fire, diseases, insects, 
and wind. Such losses are estimated as equal to the potential 
annual growth from 228 million acres of forest land. 

Not all of these losses are preventable. It is doubtful whether 
we will be able in the foreseeable future to eliminate many of 
the losses due to adverse weather, although it may be possible to 
reduce them. Knowledge of how to control or eliminate other 
losses may be available, but it may not be economically feasible to 
apply such knowledge. Still other losses are not preventable with 
present technological knowledge. However, much reduction in 
agricultural losses can be attained with present technical know- 
ledge and under current economic conditions. Further research 
will be needed to eliminate or reduce other losses. 

In this section of the graphic summary, maps and charts are 
presented to illustrate the use and distribution of farm re- 
sources in the production of the principal crop and livestock 
products. The principal features of the farm production picture 
are presented. Other aspects necessarily have not been in- 
cluded in this summary report. They are covered more com- 
pletely in other reports being issued in conjunction with the 
1954 Census of Agriculture. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



35 



NUMBER OF FARMS, 1954 




FARMS AND FARMLAND 



Number of farms. — In 1954, there were 4,782,416 farms reported 
by the Census of Agriculture. The highest densities of farms per 
square mile are found in parts of the South. 

Very low densities are found principally in the areas of eastern 
United States where much land has never been used for agricul- 
ture and in the Western States where a large acreage per farm 
or ranch is needed for the raising of livestock and in dry farming 
operations. 

Commercial farms. — A commercial farm is any farm on which 
the value of farm products sold is $250 or more provided the farm 
operator works off the farm less than 100 days, or provided the 
income the farm operator and members of his family receive 
from nonfarm sources is less than the value of all farm products 
sold. 



The number of commercial farms declined by 378,795 farms 
between 1950 and 1954. The number of large commercial farms 
increased but a pronounced drop in small commercial farms 
occurred. The relationship between the number of commercial 
farms and all farms remained practically the same between 1950 
and 1954. 

Other farms. — The three classes of other farms are part-time, 
residential, and abnormal. Two-fifths of the 1,455,404 other 
farms reported in 1954 were classified as part-time farms. On 
these farms, the value of farm products sold ranged from $250 
to $1,199 and the operator either reported 100 days or more of 
off-farm work or reported other income received by himself or 
members of his family exceeding the value of agricultural prod- 
ucts sold. Residential farms, which had less than $250 worth 
of farm products sold, accounted for practically all of the re- 
maining other farms. 



36 



J\ LrKAmiU 5UiMIYl/\KI 



PERCENT OF TOTAL LAND AREA IN FARMS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




1 20 TO 39 
WM 4 TO 59 



US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54- 102 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



ALL LAND IN FARMS 
ACREAGE. 1954 




IMTH) STATES T07RL 




1,156.191,511 


..**■--. 




■. 3f 




~-:i 



DOT -50.000 ACRES 



ACREAGE OF LAND IN FARMS AND NOT IN FARMS, 
FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1850-1954 

BILLIONS OF 
ACRES 







1 ' 1 

'.LAND NOT IN FARMS 





















"^^^ 






















. 






-- 












*. 












"-" 






X LAN 


> IN FAT 


MS 



LAND IN FARMS. BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITEO STATES <«« 



MANAGERS B«%-< 
M.841MT «£RE5 




1850 I860 1870 1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 I960 

54C-035 



LAND UTILIZATION 



37 



LAND IN FARMS ANO NUMBER OF FARMS FOR THE 
UNITED STATES: 1850 - 1954 



MILLIONS Of 
ACRES 



1200 














1 




^ 








-^T- 






NUMBER OF FARMS 


„'1 










1 1 \«' > 






*- 


50 




1 y-j/ 




























250 




^^ 


-'~ J 































7500 
6000 
4500 
3000 
1500 



1650 I860 1670 I860 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 I960 

54C-034 

All land in farms. — The total acreage of land in farms reported 
in 1954 was nearly the same as that reported by the 1950 Census 
of Agriculture, but significant regional changes have occurred 
during the last 5 years. In the Northern States (including Mary- 
land and Delaware), land in farms declined by nearly 7 million 
acres. Of the four farm production regions that make up the 
Northern States, only the Northern Plains had an increase in 
land in farms between 1950 and 1954. 

In the Southern States, the decline in land in farms amounted 
to more than 6 million acres with most of the decrease taking 
place in the Appalachian States. A slight increase in the 
Southern Plains was the only regional increase among the four 
Southern regions. 

Reversion of farmland to forest land ; encroachment of urban, 
transportation, and other nonfarm uses of land ; and discon- 
tinuation of agricultural operations on small farms in favor of 
industrial and other nonagricultural employment have all con- 
tributed to the decline in farmland in these regions. 

Offsetting nearly all of this decrease of more than 13 million 
acres in the Northern and Southern States was an increase of 
13 million acres in the 11 Western States, most of which occurred 
in the Mountain States. Inclusion of more grazing land formerly 
not included in farms and the irrigation of previously undeveloped 
land account for much of this increase in acreage of land in 
farms. 

Especially high densities of farmland shown for some counties 
result from showing the total acreage of large farms in the 
county in which the farm headquarters is located, even though 
the farm acreage may extend into other counties. 

Percentage of total land area in farms. — In the Great Plains, 
Corn Belt, and Dairy Belt, a high proportion of the counties have 
90 percent or more of their total land area in farms. West of 
the Great Plains, inadequate rainfall and mountainous topogra- 
phy explain the small proportion of land area that is in farms 
over extensive areas. Large acreages of land have remained in 
public ownership in the Western States. A considerable acreage 
of this public land is grazed by obtaining permits from the Fed- 
eral and State agencies administering the land. Land grazed 
under these permits rather than under a leasing arrangement 
is not included as land in farms. A major limitation upon the 
use of this western rangeland grazed under permit is the neces- 
sity of grazing much of it for only part of the year. 

In some parts of the States east of the Great Plains and Corn 
Belt, hilly topography, infertile soils, and poor drainage extend 



over sizable areas. These physical handicaps contribute to the 
relatively little use made of such land for farming purposes. 

Land in farms, by tenure of operator. — The tenure status of 
land in farms is shown by the accompanying chart in terms of 
the four principal types of tenure as reported by the Census of 
Agriculture. Operators who own part of their land and rent 
part of it account for about two-fifths of the land in farms. Full 
owners have a third of the land in farms in their units. About 
a sixth of the land in farms is rented out to tenants who rent 
all of the land that they operate. Less than a tenth of the land 
in farms is operated by managers. 

The most significant change in tenure status of land in farms 
since 1950 is the increase in the proportion of land in farms op- 
erated by part owners. All other tenure types have some de- 
crease in the proportion of land in farms that was operated 
under these types. 

Land in farms and number of farms. — While the acreage of land 
in farms remained nearly the same between 1950 and 1954, the 
n amber of farms reported by the 1954 Census of Agriculture 
was about 11 percent fewer than the number reported in 1950. 
This decrease represents extension of the nearly continuous de- 
cline that started in 1920. Only a brief period of increase (not 
shown by the accompanying chart, which is plotted at 10-year 
intervals) occurred between 1930 and 1935 when many persons 
from urban areas returned to farms. Most of the recent decrease 
in number of farms has been in the number of small farms. 
Availability of urban employment has been a major factor ac- 
counting for the decline in small farm numbers in the areas where 
industry is well developed. Some of the operators of these small 
farms have moved off their farms while others have continued 
to use their farmhouses as residences but have discontinued 
agricultural operations. In the South, the combination of small 
farms operated by share tenants and croppers into larger operat- 
ing units has contributed to the decrease in farm numbers. 

The increase in the number of farms of 500 acres or more 
reflects the increased use of machinery in agriculture. As more 
and more farm operators have increased the size of their farms 
the number of farms has necessarily declined, since the overall 
acreage of land in farms has not increased. 

Land in farms and not in farms, 1850-1954. — Less change in 
the acreage of land in farms occurred between 1950 and 1954 
than for any previous 5-or 10-year Census period since land in 
farms was first enumerated in 1850. Regional changes that oc- 
curred between 1950 and 1954 practically offset each other so 
that the total United States acreage declined by less than half 
million acres. 

Most of the increase in land in farms since 1880 has occurred 
in the 17 Western States, except for an appreciable increase in 
Florida in recent years. New settlement, which continued until 
about 1920, accounts for part of the increase. Since 1920, about 
half of the total net increase has resulted from the addition of 
about 100 million acres of Federal, State, and Indian reservation 
land to the area reported as land in farms. Most of the remain- 
ing net increase of another 100 million acres occurred on privately 
owned land. Changes in methods of controlling grazing rights 
and modifications in Census definitions and procedures rather 
than the expansion of farming into undeveloped areas account 
for much of this increase on privately owned land since 1920. 



407763—57- 



38 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



COMMERCIAL FARMS AS A PERCENT OF ALL FARMS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 

PERCENT 
I l uNnFR 85 E3339 75 TO R9 

i^MJ 25 TO 49 IHI 

LS&J 50 TO 74 

FARMS 
US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO ASA - 058 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 




LAND UTILIZATION 



39 



AVERAGE VALUE OF LAND AND BUILDINGS PER ACRE, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




* NO FiRMS 

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54-222 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Commercial farms as a percentage of all farms. — In 1954, about 
70 percent of all farms were classified as commercial farms. The 
accompanying map shows that more than three-fourths of the 
farms are commercial farms in most of the Corn Belt, the Great 
Plains, and the northern Mountain States. The lower Mississippi 
Valley, parts of the Middle Atlantic and Southeastern Coastal 
Plain, and some areas in the Northeast also have a high pro- 
portion of commercial farms. Very few commercial farms are 
located in parts of several Southern States. 

Average size of commercial farms. — Marked contrast in the 
average size of commercial farms between the Western and East- 
ern States is shown by the accompanying map. Only in Florida 
among the 31 Eastern States do commercial farms average 500 
acres or more in any of the State economic areas. 

The size of farm is affected by such factors as the type of 
agricultural operations, size of ownership units, topography, and 
climatic conditions. Small commercial farms a\eraging less than 
100 acres in size for State economic areas are found principally 
in parts of the South where small cropper-operated farms as- 
sociated with the growing of cotton and tobacco are numerous. 
In some areas in the Northeast where vegetable production is of 
particular importance, the average size of commercial farms is 
also less than 100 acres. 

Commercial farms and ranches average 500 acres or more in 
size over much of the 11 Western States and the western part 
of the 6 Great Plains States. Land that is suitable only for 
grazing and has a very low carrying capacity accounts for a 
considerable acreage in the West. This means that a commercial 
farm or ranch in that region must comprise a large acreage if 
it is to be an economic unit. Commercial farms which are lo- 



cated mainly on irrigated land are not nearly so large as the 
ranches that depend mainly on nonirrigated grazing land. 

Average value of land and buildings per acre. — The 1954 Census 
of Agriculture shows that the value of land and buildings per 
acre increased 29 percent over the value reported for 1950. 
Values increased most sharply in Arizona and Florida with In- 
diana, Georgia, Maryland, Montana, and Washington also show- 
ing significant increases. Only 8 States had increases of less 
than 15 percent. Most of these were New England States. 

The accompanying map shows the distribution of counties ac- 
cording to the 1954 average value of farmland and buildings 
per acre. The three largest concentrations of land and buildings 
having an average value per acre of $200 and over are in the 
Corn Belt, Northeastern, and Pacific States. The high values 
in the Northeastern States, which extend from southern' New 
England to Washington, D. C, reflect the influence of urbaniza- 
tion on the value of farmland located near large centers of 
population. A similar influence may be observed in the Pacific 
States where the highest average per acre values of land and 
buildings are in part associated with the large metropolitan 
centers of Los Angeles, San Francisco, Portland, and Seattle. 
Increases in the value of irrigated land are also reflected in 
overall increases in the value of land and buildings in the Pacific 
States and in some other parts of the Western States. 

The most extensive contiguous area with high land values per 
acre is in the Corn Belt States. In this area, high average values 
may be attributed primarily to the productive capacity of the 
land. 

Many scattered counties with high average per acre values 
for land and buildings can generally be associated with urban 
centers or with areas having a high proportion of irrigated land 
in the Western States. 



40 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



DISTRIBUTION OF SELECTED RESOURCES FOR THE UNITED STATES BY REGIONS AND BY COMMERCIAL 

AND OTHER FARMS WITHIN REGIONS' 1954 



PERCENT OF UNITED STATES TOTAL 

THE NORTH THE SOUTH THE WEST 

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 



ALL FARMS 

COMMERCIAL FARMS 

LAND IN FARMS 

CROPLAND HARVESTED 
TOTAL LAND PASTURED 
IRRIGATED LAND IN FARMS 

CATTLE AND CALVES 

HOGS AND PIGS 

CHICKENS, 4 MONTHS OLD AND 
OVER ON FARMS 

FARM WORKERSlfomily and hired) 
VALUE OF FARM PRODUCTS SOLD 




OTHER FARMS 



Distribution of selected resources. — The distribution of some 
of the principal farm resources among regions and between com- 
mercial and other farms is shown by the accompanying chart. 
Several marked contrasts among regions are readily observable. 
These regional differences are an important and interesting fea- 
ture of American agriculture. As this chart is studied, it is 
helpful to keep in mind that the total land area of the northern 
and southern regions each comprises about three-tenths of the 
total land area of the United States while the western region 
accounts for two -fifths of it. 

The distribution of all farms shows that the South has nearly 
half of the United States total while less than a tenth of the farms 
are located in the West. It should also be noted that other farms, 
which consist of part-time, residential, and abnormal farms, ac- 
count for a much greater number of the farms in the South than 
in the other two regions. Thus, about half of the commercial 
farms are in the North compared with about two-fifths in the 
South and less than a tenth in the West. 

Land in farms is more evenly distributed among the three major 
legions than is the number of farms. The North has 38 percent 
of the total, the South has 33 percent, and the West has 29 percent. 
This means that a greater proportion of the total land area in the 
North and South is in farms than in the West. While nearly 
a third of all farms are other farms, it should be noted that only 
about a tenth of the land in farms is in other farms. This means 
that most of these other farms, except for abnormal farms, have 
very limited land resources. 

Cropland harvested, which constitutes the most significant 
part of the land resources in farms, is strikingly concentrated 
in the North. More than three-fifths of the total acreage of 
cropland harvested is in this region. About a fourth of it is 
in the South and slightly more than a tenth is in the West. 



Of the total acreage of land pastured, the West accounts for 
two-fifths of it, the South has about a third of the total, and 
the North about a fourth. Considerable variation in the quality 
of pasture exists among these three major regions. Cropland 
used only for good quality pasture largely grown in rotation with 
crops is more heavily concentrated in the North than in the 
other two regions. Woodland pasture in farms is found to a 
greater extent in the South and West. 

Although there has been a marked increase in irrigated laud 
in farms in the North and South in recent years, the 11 Western 
States still have nearly 70 percent of all irrigated land. 

The concentration of three of the principal classes of livestock 
in the North is another significant fact in American agriculture. 
More than three-fourths of all hogs and pigs, nearly two-thirds 
of all chickens 4 months old and over on farms, and half of all 
cattle and calves are found in the North. 

The number of all farmworkers both family and hired is largest 
in the South, which has nearly half of the total. Two-fifths of 
the farmworkers are on farms in the North and a tenth in the 
West. Workers on commercial farms are also slightly more 
numerous in the South than in the North. 

This disparity between the distribution of human resources 
on American farms and the distribution of land and capital 
is further emphasized by the contrast in the distribution of the 
value of farm products sold. More than half of the total value 
of farm products sold comes from the North where only two-fifths 
of the farm workers reside. In the West, about a tenth of all 
farmworkers produced a fifth of the total value of farm products 
sold in the United States in 1954. On the other hand, the farm- 
workers of the South, which comprise nearly half of the United 
States total, produced less than three-tenths of the value of farm 
products sold in that year. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



41 



PERCENT OF TOTAL POPULATION REPRESENTED BY FARM POPULATION, APRIL 1,1950 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 
PERCENT 

I I UNDER 10 fcSga 40 TO 59 

ir—a 10 TO 19 888S 60 TO 79 

V//M 20 TO 39 ■ 80 AND OVER 



U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



AP NO V50-032 



BUREAU OF THE 



FARM POPULATION 





U. S. FARM POPULATION 






-y/ 32.0 > 


f 32.* \ ^_ 






* V U 'L- J 

1920 
1,, 


1933 ^-"V' ^k/juX 

1940 ^^T^_|/— \ 

1950 v^y 

1955 

, , 1 . . . . I , , . . 1 , . , . 1 , , , , 1 , , , , 1 , , , , 1 




oat 


* i*RO* THE BUREAU OF 1HE CfNJUJ AND THE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE 




U. 1. DEPARTMENT 


OF AGRICULTURE NBC U3S-JMI0) AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SER 


1 



The Nation's farm population continued to dec-line between 
1950 and 1955. The decline amounted to nearly 3 million per- 
sons. During the same period total population increased from 
151 million to 165 million persons. This means that the farm 
population comprised only 13.5 percent of the total population in 
1955 compared with 10.6 percent in 1950. 

Percentage of total population represented by farm population, 
1950. — Since the last complete population Census was taken in 
1950, the accompanying map shows the percentage of total popu- 
lation represented by farm population as of 1950. The overall 
pattern has not changed significantly during the last 5 years. 
The heaviest concentration of farm population still remains in 
the South. The proportion is particularly high in areas where 



small tenant-operated cotton and tobacco farms are numerous 
and where there are many part-time and residential farms. 
Counties with a very low proportion of farm population are 
widely scattered. Highly urbanized counties account for many 
of the counties with less than 10 percent of the total population 
living on farms. In some counties with very few farm people, 
mining and forestry are more important activities than farming. 

The regional distribution of farm population has changed only 
slightly during the last 35 years. In 1920, the regional distribu- 
tion was as follows : Northeast, 8 percent ; North Central, 32 per- 
cent ; South, 53 percent ; and West, 7 percent. In 1955, the North- 
east had 9 percent of the total ; the North Central, 32 percent ; 
the South, 50 percent; and the West, 9 percent. 

United States farm population. — The peak in farm population 
since 1920 was reached in 1933 when more than 32 million per- 
sons were living on farms. Since 1933, a persistent decline has 
occurred. A pronounced dip in the farm population curve during 
World War II accelerated this decline. Many who left the farm 
during the war did not return after its end. 

Between 1950 and 1955 all regions lost farm population. The 
decline was below the national average in the Northeastern, 
North Central, and Western States and above it in the South. 

A high degree of mobility is characteristic of the farm popula- 
tion of the United States. More than 2 million persons have 
moved to and from farms in nearly every year since 1921. Dur- 
ing most of this period, the movement away from farms has ex- 
ceeded the movement to farms. Only for a short time during the 
depression years and immediately after World War II was this 
trend reversed significantly. Net migration away from farms 
has been highest during periods of greatest opportunity for off- 
farm employment. These periods have also coincided with pe- 
riods when mechanization of farming was progressing rapidly. 



42 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 




HORSES AND MULES 




HORSES & MULES, AND TRACTORS 




ON FARMS JAN. 1 




Mil 


. HEAD 


MIL. TRACTORS 




. y ^~ s^. Horses and mules 






20 




\L/ 




S* 


4 




^v. / 




J.* 











/ 
' 1 




10 








2 






^-<X 






^'" 


Tractors T ^*. 




0. 


»"""' 




n 


19 


10 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 


* doc i «or ihcludc iTc*« tno ctooe" rwicToai 


U. i. DEPARTMENT OF AGSICULTUBE NEC- S»Ol-»0S AGRICUl TU ft AL SESEAftCH SERVICE 



POWER AND EQUIPMENT 



The introduction of inanimate power has brounght many 
striking changes to American farms during the last 50 years. The 
tractor has supplied the major part of this power. Trucks, 
automobiles, and electricity are other important sources of inani- 
mate power used on the farm. In 1910, an estimated 1,000 
tractors were in use on American farms. World War I brought 
a shortage of labor on farms, higher prices, and an increase in 
cash receipts which help to explain the fact that by 1020 there 
were nearly a quarter of a million tractors on farms. A nearly 
uninterrupted increase in numbers of tractors has occurred each 
year since 1920. The only exception was during the depression 
years of the early thirties. 

The use of electricity on farms has expanded rapidly during 
the last 30 years. Reports of the Edison Electric Institute show 
that in 1926 a total of 0.7 billion kilowatt-hours of electricity were 
used on farms. By 1954, the kilowatt-hours used had increased 
to 20.S billion kilowatt-hours. An average of 4,000 kilowatt-hours 
of electricity was used per farm in 1954. Among the principal 
uses of electricity on the farm, other than for lighting and ap- 
pliances in the home, are pumping water and milking cows. 

These new sources of power have greatly reduced the number 
of horses and mules needed on farms. The number of horses and 
mules on farms expanded rapidly during the 19th century. The 
peak number was reached during World War I when nearly 27 
million were estimated to be on farms. Since 191S an uninter- 
rupted decline in the number of horses and mules has occurred. 
The 1954 Census of Agriculture reported only 4.1 million horses 
and mules of all ages still remaining on farms. 

Since the introduction of these new forms of power, fewer 
farmworkers are needed to produce food and fiber for domestic 
use and for export. In 1820, the labor force engaged in agricul- 
tural pursuits comprised nearly three-fourths of the total number 
of persons engaged in all occupations. By 1870, this had been 



reduced to about one-half, and by 1920, to approximately a fourth 
of the total. In 1950, the persons engaged in agriculture made up 
only a little more than a tenth of the persons engaged in all oc- 
cupations. 

This means that today 20 persons are supported by one farm- 
worker compared with only 7 in 1910 and only 4 in 1S20. Farm 
employment has declined from a peak total of 13.6 million workers 
reached during the period, 1910 to 1917, as compared with only 
8.5 million workers in 1954. 

In addition to these important influences upon the number of 
farmworkers needed and the output per farmworker, the sub- 
stitution of inanimate power for horse and mule power on farms 
has had a major influence on the acreage of agricultural land 
required to supply the food and fiber needs of the Nation. This 
influence has already been indicated in a previous chart. How- 
ever, it reemphasizes the fact that a major reason for the stabil- 
ity in total cropland acreage since 1920 has been the substitution 
of tractors for horses and mides. Cropland and pastureland 
formerly used to produce feed for farm and nonfarm draft animals 
are now available for producing food and fiber for domestic use or 
for export. From the peak of 93 million acres used for feeding 
all horses and mules in 1915, the acreage used for such purposes 
declined to only 10 million acres in 1955. 

The accompanying maps and charts depict some of the major 
distribution and trend characteristics in the use of farm power 
and equipment. 

Tractors on farms. — Tractors were reported on 2.9 million farms 
in 1954. Since the total number of tractors reported was 4.7 
million, there were many farms with more than one tractor. Half 
of all tractors in the United States are concentrated in the 12 
North Central States. The distributional pattern for tractors 
corresponds closely to that of cropland harvested. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



43 



Horses and mules. — Between 1945 and 1954, the number of 
horses and mules on farms declined from 11.6 million to 4.1 million 
head. As shown by the accompanying map much of the remaining 
horse and mule population is found in the Southern States, where 
tractors have not been as widely used as in the Northern and 
Western States. 

Tractors — increase and decrease, 1950-54. — In most parts of the 
United States, the number of tractors has increased. On many 
farms in the Corn Belt the increase is associated more with the 
addition of a second tractor to farms rather than with the re- 
placement of horses and mules by tractors. In the Southern States 
many more farms substituted tractors for horses and mules as a 
source of power between 1950 and 1954. The tobacco-producing 
areas of eastern North Carolina and South Carolina have marked 
increases in the number of tractors. Two other areas outside 
the Corn Belt and Lake States which have had especially large 
increases are southeastern Pennsylvania and adjacent areas in 
Maryland and Delaware. Some of this increase has occurred on 
farms where tradition and custom delayed the substitution of 
tractors for horses and mules. It is also an area where the use of 
small garden tractors has expanded on part-time farms and resi- 
dential farms around cities. In the Western States, tractors have 
increased mainly in the irrigated areas. 

Horses and mules and tractors on farms, 1910-56. — The number 
of tractors on farms has expanded from only a very few in 1910 
to 4.5 million, not including steam and garden tractors. A sharp 
persistent decline in the horse and mule population has accom- 
panied the increased use of tractor power. Horses and mules 
now furnish only a small part of the present farm power needed. 
Also significant is the fact that further reduction in the acreage 
of land needed to furnish feed for horses and mules will no 
longer be a significant factor contributing to greater production 
of food and fiber for domestic use and for export from the same 
total cropland acreage. 



PRINCIPAL MACHINES ON FARMS, 
1940 AND 1955 




MILKING MACHINES 

17S T HOI 

"I 7J0 THOUS 




.1940 
'1955 



MECH.CORN PICKERS 



*ICULTU»AL «CS£*»CH SEBviCE 



Principal machines on farms, 1940 and 1955. — World War II 
and postwar prosperity have been strong incentives to farm 
mechanization. The amount of farm machinery that farmers 
buy in most years is determined mainly by present and prospec- 
tive income and by availability of the machinery. During the 
depression years of the early thirties purchases of machinery 
and equipment were low mainly because of the income factor, 
but during World War II, limitations on the manufacture of farm 
machinery meant that farmers could not buy all of the ma- 
chinery that they wanted. Annual purchases of farm machinery 
and equipment, including motortrucks and automobiles, exceeded 
$3 billion a year from 1948 to 1954, which equals about a 
tenth of the cash receipts from farming during these years. The 
highest previous total expenditure for a single year was in 1947 
when about $2 billion were expended for this purpose by farmers. 



Investment of savings accumulated during the War and early 
postwar years and installment buying are the major forces that 
explain this high level of machinery and equipment buying. 

The accompanying chart presents a comparison between 1940 
and 1955 for some of the principal farm machines. All ma- 
chines shown in the chart, except automobiles, have had a marked 
increase in numbers during this 15-year period. There were 
nearly as many automobiles on farms in 1940 as in 1955. All 
other types of machinery have had high proportional increases. 
There were about 3 times as many tractors and trucks in 1955 
as in 1940 ; 4 times as many milking machines ; 5 times as many 
combines ; and 6 times as many mechanical cornpickers. Num- 
bers of other machines such as cottonpickers and pickup balers 
have also increased rapidly. 

The use of the mechanical cottonpicker has been one of the 
newest and most widely discussed innovations in the farm ma- 
chinery field. A comparison of the method of harvesting used 
in the 1947^8 harvesting season with that used in the 1954-55 
season reveals the fact that most of the mechanical picking of 
cotton has been introduced during these years : 

Estimated percentage of 
crop harvested 
Method of harvesting 1947-48 1954-55 

Hand-picked 77. 5 54. 2 

Hand-snapped 20. 6 24. 3 

Machine-picked 0.1 15.9 

Machine-stripped 1. 8 5. 6 

The use of the machine-picker is restricted mainly to certain 
parts of the cotton-producing areas. For the 1954-55 season, 62 
percent of the California cotton crop was machine-picked. For 
Arizona, machine picking accounted for 44 percent of the crop. 
Louisiana ranked next with 28 percent, followed by Missouri, 
22 percent ; Arkansas, 16 percent ; Mississippi, 11 percent ; and 
New Mexico, 8 percent. In all other cotton-producing States 
less than 5 percent of the cotton was machine-picked in the 
1954-55 harvesting season. 

Regional differences in the use of other kinds of farm ma- 
chinery also exist. These differences are explained partly by 
contrasts in type of farming but also by the rate at which farmers 
have been able to mechanize their operations. Thus for example, 
nine-tenths of the cornpickers are on farms located in the 12 
North Central States, but these 12 States account for only seven- 
tenths of the Nation's corn acreage. 

Another kind of farm machinery and equipment that is of 
growing importance is that used in the control of insects, plant 
diseases, and weeds through spraying and dusting. The intro- 
duction of new pesticides has been accompanied by improvements 
in the methods of application. The leading developments in 
spraying and dusting equipment include high-pressure sprayers 
for tree fruits and nuts, low-pressure or low gallonage sprayers 
used principally on field crops, and increased spraying and dust- 
ing from airplanes. The Production Economics Research Branch, 
Agricultural Research Service, has estimated that in 1952 about 
31 million acres of farmland were treated one or more times for 
the control of weeds and brush and 29 million acres were sprayed 
or dusted for the control of insects and diseases. 

Much of the land treated for control of weeds and brush is 
located in the Corn Belt, Northern Plains, Mountain, and Pacific 
regions. Acreage sprayed or dusted for control of insects and 
diseases is mainly concentrated in the Southern and Western 
States. 

The use of machinery on American farms will undoubtedly 
continue to increase. Machines and equipment already in use on 
some farms will become more widely used. New machinery and 
equipment are introduced every year. Existing machines are 
being improved to do a better and more efficient job. These 
expected changes will continue to affect the use of land resources 
and further adjustments in the regional pattern of land use may 
be anticipated. These will be related in part to technological 
advances in mechanizing farm operations. 



44 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



FARM PRODUCTION PER ACRE 
AND PER ANIMAL 




1920 1930 1940 1950 



1920 1930 1940 1950 



♦ ESTIMATED ACREAGE FROM WHICH ONE OR MORE CROPS WERE HARVESTED 

PLUS ACREAGE OF CROP FAILURE AND SUMMER FALLOW 
OINCLUDES ALL BREEDING LIVESTOCK EXCEPT HORSES, AND ALL LIVESTOCK PRODUCTION 
EXCEPT FARM-PRODUCED POWER OF HORSES AND MULES 



U. S. DEPARTMENT Oh AGRICULTURE 



NEU. 55 (9)-901A AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION 



TRENDS IN POPULATION, CROPLAND 8 FARM OUTPUT IN U.S. 

































Pop- Ctop- 






















;rop 


AND 






m.\- ml 

160 400 






















x 




































120 300 




















A 








































































F 


ARM 
IN 


OUTPL 
DEX 


T y 




-POPt 


LATIC 


N 








40 100 






















































































100 
90 
80 
70 
60 
50 
40 
30 
20 



1820 30 40 50 60 70 



80 ^0 1900 '10 '20 '30 40 '50'54 
54C-036 



Total farm output has nearly doubled during the last half 
century. A record farm output in 1955 was more than a third 
greater than the output of 1940. Population was only a fourth 
greater in 1955 than in 1940. The accompanying two charts in- 
dicate some of the changes that have occurred. 

Farm production per acre and per animal. — Rising production 
per acre and per animal unit has characterized American farming, 



particularly since the mid-thirties. Drought and depression in 
the early thirties interrupted a general upward trend since World 
War I. Since 1940, production per acre has increased by a fifth 
and production per breeding unit by nearly a fourth. This in- 
crease in productivity since 1940 means that the current high 
farm output has been reached with about the same acreage of 
cropland, 15 percent more breeding units of livestock, and 30 
percent fewer man-hours of farm labor. Substitution of resources 
nought off the farm for land, labor, and workstock has been a 
significant economic change in American farming during recent 
years. 

High crop production per acre during recent years has been 
associated with increased application of fertilizer, use of hybrid 
corn and other improved seed and plants, better control of insects, 
and good weather. Greater efficiency in livestock production has 
come about through more and better feed per animal unit, less 
loss through disease, and improvement in breeding stock. 

Trends in population, cropland, and farm output in United 
States. — Population in the United States continues to increase. 
Since World War II this increase has been at an accelerated rate 
compared with the lower rates of increase for much of the decade 
of the thirties. In 1950, the total United Stales population was 
151 million. By 1954 it had reached 162 million, increasing by 
about 3 million persons per year. 

Until about 1920 the curves that represent cropland and the 
farm output index on the accompanying chart closely paralleled 
each other. Much of the increase in farm production necessary to 



LAND UTILIZATION 



45 



ACREAGE ON WHICH COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER WAS USED, 1954 




UNITED STATES TOTAL 
122,730.363 



U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54-3I8 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



CHANGES IN USE OF FERTILIZER 
AND FARM INCOME 



% OF 1947-49 



.Fertilizer*. 



W-^ 




1950 



*Ouahtjtiei or '>i*ii'.i "I'nif.n hied in following tear 

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEC. ii(Wl-1Sl AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



feed the growing population was coming from the rapid expansion 
of the cropland acreage. Since 1920, the acreage of cropland has 
remained nearly stationary. However, farm output continued to 
increase after 1920 and since 1940 the rise has been very sharp. 
This means that it has been possible to feed the increasing popu- 
lation of the Nation and with a substantially improved diet. 
Acreage on which commercial fertilizer was used, 1954. — Some 
striking regional changes in the use of fertilizer in the United 
States have occurred in the last 25 years. In 1929, very little 
fertilizer was used in the Corn Belt, Great Plains, and Western 
States. Most of the fertilizer used a quarter of a century ago 
was used in the following States or areas : North Carolina, South 
Carolina, Georgia, Florida, Alabama, Mississippi, New Jersey, 
Delaware, Maryland, southeastern Virginia, southeastern Penn- 
sylvania, northeastern Maine, the Connecticut River Valley of 



Connecticut and Massachusetts, and the Los Angeles area of 
California. 

In 1954, commercial fertilizer was used on 123 million acres 
of cropland and pasture. Lime was applied to 11 million acres. 
The accompanying map shows the distribution of fertilizer use in 
1954. When this map is studied against the background of the 
above statements relative to the use of fertilizer in 1929 the fol- 
lowing striking changes in the distribution of its use may be 
noted. Half of the acreage fertilized in 1954 was in the Corn 
Belt, Great Plains, and Western States. In 1929, these areas 
accounted for only a sixth of the total expenditure made for com- 
mercial fertilizer used in the United States. About two-fifths 
of the expenditure for fertilizer in 1929 was concentrated in the 
Piedmont and Coastal Plain parts of North Carolina, South Caro- 
lina, Georgia, and Alabama. 

Most of the fertilizer used in 1929 was applied to the more 
intensively cultivated crops, especially to cotton, tobacco, fruit, 
truck, and potatoes. These crops have continued to absorb an 
important part of the fertilizer applied, but several other crops 
and pasture that were not formerly fertilized to any great extent 
are now widely fertilized. 

In 1954, commercial fertilizer was applied to IS million acres 
of hay and pasture, to 47 million acres of corn, to more than 
11 million acres of wheat, and to about 3 million acres of oats. 
Cotton, tobacco, fruits, vegetables, and potatoes, which were 
widely fertilized in 1929, were other major crops on which 
fertilizer was extensively used in 1954. About 10 million acres 
of cotton, more than 1 million acres of tobacco, and 6 million 
acres of fruit, vegetables, and potatoes were fertilized. This 
means that nearly all of the tobacco ; two-thirds of the fruit, 
vegetables, and potatoes ; three-fifths of the corn ; about half of the 
cotton ; and a fourth of the acreage of wheat had some application 
of fertilizer in 1954. 



46 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



AVERAGE VALUE OF FARM PRODUCTS SOLD PER ACRE OF ALL LAND IN FARMS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




| | UNDER 5 SSSSj 25 TO 49 

E115 TO 9 H50 TO 74 

] 10 TO 14 ' !■ 75 AND OVER 

II 6 TO 24 
* NO FARMS 



US- DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO. A 51- 329 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



VALUE OF ALL CROPS SOLD AS A PERCENT OF ALL FARM PRODUCTS SOLD, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 
PERCENT 

I I UNDER 20 ',8888 60 TO 79 

mffA 20 TO 39 ^H BO AND OVER 

8§SH 40 TO 59 

X NO FARMS 

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54- 327 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



LAND UTILIZATION 



47 



Ufe 



VALUE OF ALL FARM PRODUCTS SOLD 

DOLLARS. 1954 



•*«=:;■ /'. 



m&': 




UNITED STATES TOTAL 
$24,644,477,087 



U.S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 









r+ ':'i', .;'- i 







>>&■'■' 



w 



DOT = $ 2.000,000 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 



MAP N0A54- 323 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



SPECIFIED CROPS HARVESTED-- ACREAGE AND VALUE OF PRODUCTION 



M 








Tl 

a 1 


MflL 












'• 










■ 
1 


0, 










zz 


,, 










■ 


I.I 












" 












11 










1 


" 










1 


0. 










■ 


1.1 












" 



FOR THE UNITED STATES! 1984 

SPECIFIED 

CROPS 
HARVESTED 



VM.UC OF WWJQUCT10M 



Changes in use of fertilizer and farm income. — Use of fertilizer 
has increased sharply in the United States during the last 25 
years. Prior to about 194S the curve showing the quantity of 
fertilizer used coincided closely with the curve showing realized 
gross income. But during the last few years, the use of ferti- 
lizer has continued to rise sharply even though gross farm income 
has declined. This increased use of fertilizer is additional rea- 
son for the small change in cropland since 1920. Increased ap- 
plications of fertilizer are enabling farmers to produce more 
on the present acreage of cropland and pasture. 

Average value of farm products sold per acre of all land in 
farms. — The average value of farm products sold per acre of all 
land in farms is highest in those areas with inherently fertile 
soils and where a high proportion of the land in farms is used 
as cropland. Such areas include the Corn Belt and the lower 
Mississippi Valley. Another group of areas with high average 
values are those in which high value crops make up an important 



part of the farm products sold. Areas in which average values 
of farm products sold per acre are low are most extensive in 
the Western States, where large acreages of pasture and grazing 
land are needed for livestock production. In the Eastern States, 
rough topography and poor soils are commonly associated with 
a low value of production per acre in numerous areas, 

Value of all crops sold as a percentage of all farm products 
sold. — Crops sold in 1954 were valued at $12.2 billion, which ac- 
counts for half of the total value of all farm products sold. In 
1949, crops sold accounted for only 44 percent of this total. 

Several of the areas in which the value of crop production is 
high, as shown by the accompanying map, have very little live- 
stock production. Such areas include the Middle Atlantic and 
Southeastern Coastal Plain where such crops as tobacco, cotton, 
vegetables, and fruit are important; the lower Mississippi Valley 
and the Southern High Plains cotton areas ; and the Columbia 
River Basin wheat and small grains area. In parts of the Corn 
Belt and in many of the irrigated valleys of the West, the value 
of livestock and crop production is more nearly equal. 

Value of all farm products sold. — The value of all farm products 
sold totaled !?l!4.U billion in 1954. In California, the value of farm 
products sold exceeded $2 billion ; and in Iowa, Texas, and Illinois 
the amount exceeded $1 billion. The Corn Belt has the largest 
area of contiguous counties with a high value of farm products 
sold, but some of the heaviest concentrations are in irrigated 
areas in the West. Similar high-value production areas are as- 
sociated with such products as tobacco in eastern North Carolina 
and in the Connecticut River Valley, cotton in the lower Missis- 
sippi Valley, citrus fruit and vegetables in Florida, and vegetables 
and broilers in the Delmarva peninsula. 

Whereas only about two-fifths of the value of all crops sold 
comes from farms located in the Northern States, about two- 



48 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



ACREAGES IN FOOD GRAINS, FEED GRAINS, OIL SEED CROPS, AND COTTON 
FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1879-1954 



Millions of Acres 
150 




1909 



CHANGES IN HARVESTEO ACRES OF PRINCIPAL CROPS, 
1949-54 

DECREASE INCREASE 

MILLION ACJ3ES 




i'OATs'd 1 



ft. fffyvi/A f 3 4 



MQsSaiJMi 



i% ffi.' i °i'"i %3 t4 3 



5 SOYBEANS 'FOR BE ANs'/d t6 3 



^t0.4 ^ FLAXSEEO 
+0 7 < RICE 



NET CHANGE * I 



For Crops Shown 



thirds of the total value of all livestock and livestock products 
sold is from the Northern States. Forest products sold from 
farms, which totaled $130 million in 1954, are concentrated prin- 
cipally in the Northeast, Southeast, and the Pacific Northwest. 

Specified crops harvested — acreage and value of production. — 
Corn is the leading crop in the United States both from the 
standpoint of acreage harvested and value of production. All hay 
crops (excluding sorghum hay and specified annual legumes) oc- 
cupy the next largest acreage but cotton and cottonseed rank 
second in value of production. Corn, cotton, wheat, hay, and 
oats account for about three-fourths of the total acreage of 



specified crops harvested and about two-thirds of the farm value 
of all crops produced in 1954. 

Acreages in food grains, feed grains, oilseed crops, and cotton: 
1879-1954. — The long-run changes in the acreage used for the 
production of these different categories of crops are shown in the 
accompanying chart. Considerable fluctuation in acreage used 
for the production of food grains has been characteristic. The 
acreage used for these food grains — wheat, rice, rye, and buck- 
wheat — dropped by more than 19 million acres between 1949 and 
1954. This sharp decline is closely related to the existence of 
acreage controls on the production of wheat in 1954 and the 
absence of such controls in 1949. The total acreage of feed 
grains — corn, oats, barley, grain sorghum, and mixed small 
grains — occupied about the same acreage in 1954 as in 1949 ; but 
some important shifts occured within this group of crops. Corn 
harvested for grain declined while the acreage of sorghum har- 
vested for grain increased markedly. Acreages of barley and oats 
also increased. The acreage of cotton declined sharply during 
this period and the acreage used for oilseed crops continued to 
increase. The acreage used for oilseed crops has increased in 
nearly every decade covered by the accompanying chart. The 
principal oilseed crops other than cotton are soybeans, flax, and 
peanuts. 

Expanding use of vegetable oils for food and industrial pur- 
poses has contributed greatly to the long-run increase in the 
production of these crops. Between 1949 and 1954 most of the 
increase in acreage used for oilseed crops was in soybeans, which 
increased from 10.1 to 16.4 million acres. Diversion of acreage 
from allotment crops to soybeans is a significant reason for 
this substantial increase in soybean acreage. Acreage in peanuts 
was reduced sharply, mainly because of the allotment program. 

Changes in harvested acres of principal crops, 1949-54. — Major 
shifts in the acreage used for different crops occurred between 
1949 and 1954 mainly because of acreage allotment programs. 
The acreage of wheat and cotton was reduced by about 28 million 
acres. Much of the acreage taken out of these crops is used to 
produce feed grains, soybeans, and hay. The acreage of oats, 
barley, all sorghums, all hay, and soybeans increased by nearly 
24 million acres. Cultivated summer fallow also increased. As 
acreage allotments for wheat were lowered, many farmers decided 
to grow a higher proportion of their wheat crop on cropland that 
had been fallowed in order to increase yields. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



49 



is :i *kuX 


«5S 


ALL WHEAT 
ACREAGE 

.SB 


THRESHED 
1954 






,-W~" 


i SJPn_ 




Jrii$gfS&?% ■ 




~JZ~\~ 




V 'v\ L 




Jan 


T\v. LAi/^ 




tlr '.. \r 




cjtsrjt ..! 






H, 




flP 








UNITED STATES TOTAL 
51.361.664 




& 












1 DOTHO.000 ACRES V 

(COUNTY UHlT BASrS) 




KlMMaiMrrarMHwei 




~ 


U* « «. 071 


"' "■.■•..,. 0# t-« U-.5U5 



OATS THRESHED 
ACREAGE. 1954 




BARLEY THRESHED 

ACREAGE. 1954 




RICE THRESHED 

ACREAGE. 1954 




PRINCIPAL CROPS 



Wheat. — Wheat threshed in 1954 was 20 million acres less than 
in 1949. This sharp reduction in wheat acreage reflects largely 
the existence of an acreage allotment program in 1954 as con- 
trasted with 1949 when acreage controls did not apply. This 
large reduction in acreage affected all of the major wheat areas, 
but the general pattern of wheat distribution remains essentially 
the same as that for 1949. 

At present spring wheat is grown chiefly in North Dakota, 
South Dakota, and Montana. Secondary areas are found in 
Washington, Oregon, Idaho, and western Minnesota. Only very 
scattered acreage is found elsewhere. Winter wheat is much 
more widely grown as may be observed by looking at the ac- 
companying map. In a few instances, spring and winter wheat 
are grown in the same areas. 

Oats. — The major concentration of oats is situated just east 
of the leading wheat-producing areas in the Great Plains States. 
The major oat-producing area also includes Iowa, southern Min- 
nesota and Wisconsin, and northern Illinois. In the eastern part 
of the Corn Belt, oats are a less important crop than in the west- 
ern part. Winter oats rather than spring-planted oats are grown 
in the Southern and the Pacific States. 

Oats rank next to corn as the principal feed grain in the 
United States. The reliance formerly placed upon horses and 
mules for farm power and the widespread acceptance of oats 
as a good nurse crop for clover, timothy, and other tame grasses, 
along with the tolerance of oats for poor soils, help to explain 
the present importance of this crop in American agriculture. 

Barley. — Most of the barley in the United States is produced 
in the 17 Western States and in Minnesota. The leading barley- 



producing area is in eastern North Dakota and the adjacent Red 
River Valley area of Minnesota. Nearly a third of the total 
United States acreage is found in these two States. California is 
now second to North Dakota in acreage harvested, having lost its 
position as the leading State which it held during the last quarter 
of the 19th century and the first quarter of the present century. 
Widespread diversion to barley of land taken out of wheat pro- 
duction in 1954, under the allotment program resulted in a 
marked increase in acreage of barley for that year. Some of the 
areas formerly important for their production of barley for malt- 
ing purposes such as southeastern Wisconsin, southeastern South 
Dakota, southwestern Minnesota, and northwestern Iowa now 
grow very little barley. About two-thirds of the barley crop is 
now used for feed and one-third for malting. The latter use has 
increased from less than a fourth in 1939 to about a third now. 

Rice. — The total acreage of rice threshed in 1954 was nearly 
three times as great as that in 1939. Production was greatly 
accelerated to accommodate export needs for areas where prewar 
trade channels had been disrupted by war. The production of 
rice in the United States is now mainly concentrated in 4 States, 
although production of rice has increased sharply during the last 
5 years in some of the Delta counties of Mississippi. The coastal 
prairies of Louisiana and Texas, the prairie and lowland areas 
of eastern Arkansas and the adjacent lowlands of Mississippi, 
and the Sacramento Valley of California are the present rice- 
producing areas. All of these areas have heavy subsoils that 
retain irrigation water well and all areas have climates favorable 
to rice culture. Highly mechanized methods are now used in 
producing rice in the United States. 



50 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



CORN FOR ALL PURPOSES 
ACREAGE. 1954 




SOYBEANS GROWN FOR ALL PURPOSES' 




Corn. — The total acreage of corn for all purposes was reduced 
by about 5 million acres between 1949 and 1954. The 12 North 
Central States continued to have about seven-tenths of the total 
acreage in the United States. Corn is more widely grown than 
wheat in the United States, although very little is raised in the 
11 Western States, the western part of the Great Plains States, 
and the New England States. During the last 50 years, the 
acreage of corn declined by 20 to 25 million acres. Much of this 
decline has occurred in Kansas, Oklahoma, and Texas where 
sorghums have replaced corn as an important feed crop. During 
this period the acreage of corn in southeastern South Dakota and 
southwestern Minnesota has increased substantially. Hybrid 
varieties adapted to a shorter growing season have been a factor 
in this northward shift of corn production. 

Sorghums. — Nearly all sorghums grown in the United States 
are grown to feed livestock, either as grain, forage, or fodder. 
The use of sorghums as a source of livestock feed in the Southern 
Plains helps account for the major concentration of acreage. As 
sorghums require less rainfall and withstand drought better than 
corn, this crop has become an important feed crop in Kansas, 
Oklahoma, and Texas. More than four-fifths of the total acreage 
of sorghums grown for all purposes except sirup is found in 
these three States. Three heavy concentrations are located in 
southwestern Kansas and adjacent Oklahoma and Texas, in the 
high plains of western Texas, and in the Corpus Christi area of 
Texas. 

Sorghums are not grown for grain in the Northern Plains be- 
cause of climatic limitations. For the varieties of grain sorghum 
now grown in the United States, a frost-free season of 140 days 
and a mean summer temperature of at least 70° F. is required. 
Annual rainfall should total 15 inches or more. Some sorghum 
is grown for forage north of the principal grain-producing areas. 



SORGHUMS FOR ALL PURPOSES EXCEPT FOR SIRUP 

ACREAGE. 1954 




FLAX THRESHED 
ACREAGE. 1954 




Soybeans. — The acreage of soybeans grown for all purposes 
iu 1954 totaled 18.2 million acres compared with 12.3 million acres 
grown in 1949. The diversion of acreage from crops included in 
the crop-allotment program is important in explaining this sub- 
stantial increase. Nearly all of the increase occurred in the 
areas that were growing soybeans in 1949. 

Three major and two secondary concentrations of soybean 
production are shown by the accompanying map. The leading 
area of soybean production is centered in the eastern part of the 
Corn Belt running from south-central Illinois to northwestern 
Ohio. The acreage of soybeans in Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio 
comprises two-fifths of the total United States acreage. Another 
major concentration is in the Mississippi Delta area stretching 
from southern Illinois to Louisiana. Northwestern Iowa and 
southwestern Minnesota is the third major area. The south- 
western part of the Corn Belt in Missouri and eastern Kansas 
and the southeastern coastal plain are two secondary areas of 
soybean production. 

Flax. — Most of the acreage of flax in the United States is con- 
centrated in North Dakota, northern and eastern South Dakota, 
and western Minnesota. Two secondary areas of production are 
located in the Imperial Valley of California and north of Corpus 
Christi, Texas. The total acreage in flax in 1954 was greater 
than that for 1949. This may be attributed mainly to the wheat 
acreage-allotment program in effect in 1954. The acreage sown 
to flax has been subject to wide fluctuations from year to year. 
Nearly all flax in the United States is grown for the seed rather 
than for the fiber. 

Peanuts. — The production of peanuts is almost entirely re- 
stricted to the southeastern coastal plain and to eastern Texas 
and Oklahoma. From the accompanying map, it may be noted 
that there are two principal concentrations in the southeastern 



LAND UTILIZATION 



51 



PEANUTS GROWN FOR ALL PURPOSES* 




TOBACCO HARVESTED 
ACREAGE. 1954 




coastal plain — one in northeastern North Carolina and south- 
eastern Virginia and the other in southwestern Georgia, south- 
eastern Alabama, and northern Florida. In Texas and Oklahoma, 
the Cross Timbers area has the largest acreage used for peanuts. 

Peanuts need summers that are long and warm. The best 
seasonal distribution of precipitation provides a good moisture 
supply when nuts are developing, followed by drier weather and 
plenty of sunshine during the harvest period. Both nuts and 
hay are subject to considerable damage if wet weather coincides 
with harvesting. Fine sandy loam soils are preferred for the 
growing of peanuts. Dark colored soils are avoided where pea- 
nuts are grown for roasting in the shell, as discoloration of the 
shell reduces the market value. 

Cotton. — The acreage from which cotton was harvested dropped 
sharply in 1954 and 1955 from the high acreages reported har- 
vested from 1951 to 1953 by the United States Department of Ag- 
riculture. The existence of an acreage-allotment program dur- 
ing the last 2 years is mainly responsible for this decline. 

In 1954, cotton was grown across the entire southern part of the 
United States from the Atlantic to the Pacific. Nearly all cotton 
is grown south of latitude 37° N. The two most northern ex- 
tensions of cotton production are in southeastern Missouri and 
the southern tip of Illinois and in Merced County, Calif., in the 
central part of the San Joaquin Valley. 

In 1909, practically no cotton was grown west of the 101st 
meridian which passes through the west-central part of Texas. 
Today, there are major concentrations of cotton production in 
the High Plains of western Texas, the Phoenix area of Arizona, 
and the San Joaquin Valley of California. Much of the cotton 
grown west of the 100th meridian in Texas is now irrigated, 
while practically all of that grown in New Mexico, Arizona, and 
California is irrigated. 



j \ rJ 

\ — s>. ^ / 

si ? -■ 1 

UNITED STATES TOTAL 
16.858.145 


COTTON HARVE 

ACREAGE. 195 


STED 
4 












~ ^ 


1 DOT -10.000 ACRES \ 

(COUN1T UNIT BASISI S. 





VJi 




SUGAR BEETS HARVESTED FOR SUGAR 






' : / \ 




ACREAGE. 1 


!54 




If 




-— ^Lc__^y r.7 


~ r ^l 




( FX-jfl 








p.* \ 
























UNITED STATES TOTAL 


~V lir 








864.318 


\ -f \ DOT- 1.000 ACRES \ 

I i tXXJHTt UWT BASS \^ 




111 to«n» 


».«« 


V -., .*««-„, • 


- UU..XOX 



The westward shift of cotton production has been one of the 
important regional shifts in American agriculture during the 
last 50 years. In 1909, nearly two-fifths of the acreage of cotton 
was found in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Ala- 
bama ; but in 1954 these four States accounted for less than a 
fifth of the cotton acreage. 

Tobacco. — The four leading States growing tobacco in 1954 
were North Carolina, Kentucky, Virginia, and South Carolina. 
During the last 15 years, the acreage of tobacco has changed 
very little mainly because of the acreage-allotment program 
which is attempting to keep supply in line with demand for dif- 
ferent types of tobacco. Some regional shifting of production 
occurred between 1949 and 1954, when the acreage of tobacco 
grown in Kentucky declined by about 14 percent while that in 
North Carolina, Virginia, and South Carolina increased by about 
11 percent. This shift in acreage reflects some of the continuing 
changes in demand for different types of tobacco. In 1909, Ken- 
tucky had twice as much acreage in tobacco as North Carolina, 
but in 1954 the North Carolina acreage was more than twice that 
of Kentucky. 

The two major tobacco-producing areas are in southern Vir- 
ginia, North Carolina and northeastern South Carolina, central 
and western Kentucky, and adjacent northern Tennessee. Other 
smaller concentrations of tobacco are also found in southern 
Georgia and Northern Florida ; southern Maryland ; Lancaster 
County, Pa. ; Connecticut Valley of Connecticut and Massachu- 
setts; eastern Tennessee; and southwestern Wisconsin. 

Sugar beets. — Sugar beets are grown almost entirely in the 
Western and North Central States. Most of the acreage is irri- 
gated, although some of the eastern areas continue to grow beets 
without irrigating. Sugarcane is the other principal crop from 
which domestic sugar is refined in the United States. Practically 
all of the sugarcane grown for sugar is located in southeastern 
Louisiana and just south of Lake Okeechobee in Florida. 



52 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



\AJj-_^LAND IN FRUIT OR 


2HARDS. GROVES. VINEYARDS ANO PLANTED NUT TREES 

ACREAGE. 1954 


JH 






— T * 








t^L \ r ■ . 


1 1 


V )/-y^ 1[ 






y/ ( 


As y 


UMTED STATES TOTAL V 
4.003,426 


\ -f 1 DOT- 1.000 ACRES \T ^ 

I l (COUNTY UWT BASIS) "\ 1 


'.. im*mm « «—«« 


v «....„. - 





IPJSH POTATOES 

ACREAGE. 1954 




■'" mjiui or nc a«*A 


J ;* / L 


1 








/ 


■ J 


\ 2i ■. >'Y *-*•? 














UMTED STATES TOTAL \V~~N 

1,210.872 

1 0OC5 NOT INO.UW ACREAGE FOT fAJJvs WITH LESS 
•nth 20 BUSHELS HORYESTtD i 


-. 


' 1 DOT-500 A 

1 COUNTY UMT 


CRES \ 



Land in orchards. — The total acreage reported in bearing and 
nonbearing fruit orchards, groves, vineyards, and planted nut 
trees in 1954 was 4 million acres compared with 4.7 million acres 
reported in 1950. Part of this decline may be attributed to the 
fact that the 1950 data include acreage for farms reporting half 
of an acre or more in this use, whereas in 1954 the acreage is 
reported only for farms having 20 or more trees or grapevines. 

California is the leading fruit-growing State, from the stand- 
point of both total acreage and variety of fruit produced. A 
third of the total acreage in fruit orchards, groves, vineyards, 
and planted nut trees is in California. Other major concentra- 
tions are found in central Florida ; in the Yakima, Wenatchee, 
and Okanogan Valleys of Washington ; in the Willamette and 
Hood River Valleys of Oregon ; the lower Rio Grande Valley of 
Texas ; southwestern Mississippi ; the eastern shore of Lake Michi- 
gan ; the southern shores of Lake Erie and Ontario ; and the 
ridge and valley section of the Appalachians in West Virginia, 
Virginia, Maryland, and south central Pennsylvania. Many 
lesser concentrations are also indicated on the accompanying map. 

Climate plays an important role in accounting for the distribu- 
tion of fruits, nuts, and grapes in the United States. Sometimes 
striking local differences in temperature and frost hazard asso- 
ciated with topography and nearness to the influence of water 
account for concentrations of fruit production. The growing of 
citrus fruits is limited chiefly to the warmer subtropics in areas 
where topography and soils are also favorable. Deciduous fruits 
generally have both a northern limit beyond which the winters 
become too severe and the hazard of frost too great and a south- 
ern limit where the period of dormancy becomes too short. 

Vegetables. — Vegetables were harvested for sale from about 3.7 
million acres in 1954. An undetermined part of this acreage 
grew more than one crop of vegetables during the year. The 
vegetable crop harvested for sale is appropriately divided into 
two categories — that harvested for processing and that harvested 



/* 


. ■-*'■ M-l 




VEGETABLES 


HARVES 
ACREAGE. 


TED FOR SALE' 
954 


















Tv~ 






i $K mC *k 


r0^- 


.-• 




V 












>> / "'/ 


















j* j 








n 






UMTED STATES TOTAL 
3.739,994 






t-' P^~~~~****rS^> 










ANO SWEET 


POTATOES 




•Y 1 DOT- 1.000 ACRES 

IT ICOLffTT UMT BASI3 








• • «-™ 


***** 


*. 






utwm 


>. ... - 




..a. 



u \ 

UMTED 


w / 

STATES 
455. 239 


DRY FIELD AND S 


IED BEANS HARVESTED 

ACREAGE. 1954 


FOR BEANS 




\ 








i 


















TOTAL V/~~ 


\ J IDOT-1.000 ACRES \ ) 

V 1 ICOUMTY UNIT BiSISl *V 1 



for the fresh market. In recent years, slightly more than half 
of the acreage has been harvested for the fresh market. 

The accompanying map showing the distribution of the acreage 
of vegetables harvested for sale reveals several major concen- 
trations and many widely scattered secondary areas in which 
vegetables are grown for sale. The leading States are California, 
Texas, Florida, Wisconsin, New York, Georgia, Minnesota, New 
Jersey, and Illinois. The combined acreage of vegetables har- 
vested for sale in these nine States accounts for more than three- 
fifths of the total United States acreage. The five leading vege- 
tables in terms of acreage harvested were sweet corn, tomatoes, 
watermelons, green peas, and green snap beans. 

Irish potatoes. — The commercial crop of Irish potatoes is pro- 
duced mainly in the Northern States, although several early 
potato areas in the South and in California account for the wide 
climatic range of this crop in the United States. Potatoes are 
best adapted to a fairly humid and cool climate. 

Five relatively small but especially heavy concentrations of 
Irish potato acreage are found in Aroostook County, Maine ; Long 
Island, N. Y. ; the Eastern Shore of Virginia ; the Red River 
Valley of North Dakota and Minnesota ; and the Snake River 
Valley of eastern Idaho. These five areas account for about two- 
fifths of the total commercial acreage shown by the accompanying 
map which does not include acreage on farms with less than 20 
bushels harvested. In 1954, Idaho had the largest acreage of 
potatoes followed by Maine, North Dakota, California, New York, 
and Minnesota. 

Dry beans. — Dry beans are produced in both eastern and west- 
ern areas. Central Michigan and western New York are the 
major eastern areas and together these two areas account for 
about a third of the total acreage. In the Western States, dry 
field beans are produced both with and without irrigation. Most 
of the dry beans are produced where the mean August tempera- 
ture does not exceed 70° F. 



LAND UTILIZATION 



53 



LAND FROM WHICH HAY WAS CUT* 
ACREAGE. 1954 




Ui eOMIKUT & 



h^T 










ALFALFA CUT 


FOR 


HAY 






>■*£ 


? V?.-, 




_ A i» *='■... 




ACREAGE. 


954 






: J ." 


:^^b- 




*« 


' ^ 


< ' 




,,, 








/.« .* - - 












^*>W- ---- 




1 ^m^^^^M 




1 




■ * 

I, Jt v -.• 




3? ■■ 


: ;%« 




















"(pp 


















UNITED STATE 






V_V 














> TOTAL 






26.007.771 






























IDOT-2,000 ACRES \ 

(COUNTY UNIT BfiSKI \_^ J 




KBHHTMI 


..-,... 












«w> wo«M-*s -*" wiu or r 


<««« 



Land from which hay was cut. — The distribution of the acreage 
of all tame and wild hay except soybean, cowpea, peanut, and 
sorghum hay is shown for 1954 by the accompanying map. When 
the distribution of cattle is compared with that of land from 
which hay was cut, it may be noted that areas growing hay are 
usually areas where cattle are also reported. But in several 
areas in which hay is a minor crop considerable numbers of 
cattle are grown. These are located mainly in the southern third 
of the country where cool-season temperatures are high enough 
to permit grazing during most of the year provided moisture is 
adequate and plants that will yield forage in all seasons are 
available. 

In 1954 in the Northeastern States, the land from which hay 
was cut accounted for half of the cropland harvested. This re- 
gion, in which dairying is a major type of farming and which 
has relatively long winters, needs a big hay crop. In the Appa- 
lachian, Lake States, Northern Plains, Mountain, and Pacific 
regions, land from which hay was cut accounted for approxi- 
mately a fifth to a third of the cropland harvested. In the Corn 
Belt, about a sixth of the cropland harvested was in hay crops ; 
and in the Southeastern, Delta, and Southern Plains States only 
about a tenth of the cropland harvested was accounted for by 
hay crops. 

The principal tame hay crops are alfalfa, clover, and timothy, 
small grains cut for hay, and lespedeza. In 1954, alfalfa ac- 
counted for 45 percent of the total acreage of tame hay. Clover 
and timothy, which are grown together and separately, accounted 
for 29 percent of the acreage. Small grains and lespedeza, re- 
spectively, accounted for S and 6 percent of the tame hay acreage. 

Wild hay. — Most of the wild hay is cut in the Northern Plains 
States where selected areas of pasture and grazing land are cut 
for hay. The principal wild hay area, which is a north-south 
trending belt in North Dakota, South Dakota, and Nebraska lies 



N^--r^ 




WILD HAY CUT* 

ACREAGE. 1954 






!»■ • ~"*-1i!&m! 


ffifi%M&'" ^~~^^—J^ 






hkLF ''''"■ A^^Vjp^ 




( y V ^"'f 


1 1 ~ Tr ^'^^ 


HBjlB ' if i ? ^^vT'Jii^S ~""%^ 






ffliii.'- •'■"■ftM 










W Y 


— h-&~Jc 


Ps&"-*>:\ j 






^U \j 






v^U.. 7 




UNITED STATES TOTAL 




I ^^ 






12.473,387 








* SEPARATE DATA AVAILABLE 


ONLY FOR PRINCIPAL STATES 


^ f ID0T-2.0O0ACRES ', 
V. 1 (COuhtv uwrr basgi 




U5 KMMIKHT OF UMMftCC 




^3 »,»«*« . 


""' ttx.ii or t>e cms* 



CLOVER OR TIMOTHY CUT FOR HAY' 

ACREAGE. 1954 




LNTED STATES TOTAL 
16.930.114 



mainly to the west of the areas where nonirrigated alfalfa is 
most heavily concentrated. In the Western States some of the 
wild hay is cut from land along streams that can be irrigated by 
spreading water over bordering rangeland. 

Alfalfa. — The most widely grown hay crop is alfalfa and alfalfa 
mixtures. The only major area in which alfalfa is of little im- 
portance is in the Southeastern States, where a humid climate 
and sandy soils are not conducive to its production. Soils with 
adequate lime are the most favorable soils for growing alfalfa. 
In the Western States, it is a major irrigated crop. It has been 
widely used in irrigated areas to build up organic matter in soils 
which under semiarid and arid climates had very little natural 
organic matter. In the Northern Plains, a considerable acreage 
of alfalfa is grown without irrigation. It is grown not only for 
hay but also for seed. Hardy varieties grown in these States 
are not so easily damaged by winter killing as are varieties grown 
in warmer areas. 

The largest concentration of alfalfa acreage is in the southern 
part of the Lake States and the northern part of the Corn Belt 
where soils favorable for its production coincide with areas in 
which dairying is the major type of farming. 

Clover and timothy. — In 1909, the acreage of clover and timothy 
hay amounted to nearly 37 million acres. In 1954, only 17 mil- 
lion acres were cut for hay. Less emphasis on timothy as a hay 
crop is noticeable. Part of this decline in the acreage of timothy 
is associated with the decrease in number of horses used as draft 
animals. 

Most of the timothy and clover cut for hay is grown in the 
North Central and Northeastern States. It is still the major 
hay crop on many soils that are not suited to production of the 
higher yielding and better quality alfalfa hay. Timothy and 
clover as a hay crop is not as expensive to seed and is less likely 
to suffer damage from winter killing than alfalfa. 



54 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 





FEED FOR ALL LIVESTOCK 


Percenta 


ge 


of All Feed From All Concentrates, 1949-50* 






~~~W 777 ^m, lJr " $fe 


:i*$$m& \ 




ymflf'-i' -••"> <■ ■: wf 






~ ^Mmm 


v~~~~ 




- — ^~^wi>y^~ 'Jilll^ 


\ > 




f~^^^^^m 


^il 




"~.'~..-.t, ; -...}.. yMMMg PERCENT 

•r- — ' \y--) ■ \ wizlA □ Und "' " 

\ r : ^|*^«* " ' V E3 25lo49 


• MCXUDmC PAITUfiE 


^-4 U. S AVERAGE »4* 


U i. OCPARTMENT OF AGOIC 


ULTU 


l»E NEC. U(l|-m AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH iEBYICE 



FEED FOR ALL LIVESTOCK 

Percentage of All Feed From Pasture and Grazing, 194950 




. Mur.iNt of AGRI ■ I i' "i 



PERCENT 

f~1 Under 20 

£22 65 & over 
U S AVERAGE 37S ^3-< 

NEC SJtl)-S»* AGBICULTUOAL BEKABCH JEBVICE 



U.S. PIG CROPS 



MIL. HEAD 



100 



Total 




1940 



1945 



1950 



1955 



FEED FOR ALL LIVESTOCK 

Percentage of All Feed from Hay, 1949-50* 







• WCLUDJNC P kllUHE 



ITHtHT Of ASBICULTUIX 



)• ■__!__! OUnd.rlO 

L r-I 1/SE^T~\ Eg 10-19 

"%-A l ; \ BZ! 20 lover 

U. S AVERAGE US V 

NEC. JJ(D-S17 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH 1EBV1C 



CATTLE ON FARMS JAN. I 




I960 



• minis i c 'nii ndi roi miiii. and am hkh * inns '■■! MS, * oidea not fOi miir 

HOWS » MtrfEtS J r»S A OlDM FOB Mil* DATA FO* I9JS A*E P»fUMINA»r 



HMENt OF AGBICULTURE 



NEC «0A.Jtll| AGRICULTURAL ".ABU E TING SERVICE 



STOCK SHEEP AND LAMBS 
ON FARMS JAN. I 

MILLIONS 




1880 



960 



' II WESTERN ITATEi 4N0 I. DAK. 



J.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



ata cot; nn tre menimnKT 

NEC. «JI-SA(11I AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE 



LIVESTOCK 



Livestock and livestock products are a major source of food 
in the American diet. Two-fifths of the total food energy was 
contributed by these products in 1954. Although this is ap- 
proximately the same proportion that was contributed by these 
products during the 1909-13 period, there have been shifts in the 
quantities of various livestock products used. More dairy 
products, except for butter, and more eggs were consumed per 
capita in 1954 compared with 1909-13. Less animal fats and oils, 
particularly butter, are now consumed per capita than formerly. 

The high proportion of the total nutrients contributed by live- 
stock and livestock products has an important bearing on land 



use in the United States. Many countries of the world with dense 
populations have inadequate land resources to permit much 
consumption of animal products, as a greater amount of food 
energy from a given amount of land can be obtained by \ising crops 
directly for food. 

Feed for livestock. — In terms of the relative importance of 
different feeds for livestock, pasture is the most important feed 
for all livestock with 37 percent of all feed coming from this 
source in 1949-50. Corn, which was the next most important feed, 
supplied 26 percent and hay 14 percent. Oats, barley, and other 
grains accounted for 9 percent. Animal protein feeds, oilseed 



LAND UTILIZATION 



55 



CATTLE 

NU*ER.t954 




f^~~-~- 






HOGS 

NUMBER. 1954 










'.w&E&' y ' : j&i ( -&y ^sF* 










T^^R 




^# 




i\ - '] — ft 


UNITED STATES TOTAL 
57092 J9I9 


~^v 


\ J^ IDOT-10,00 


3 HEAD \ 

BASIS) *V 




UIKMtKirVCW 






J -« « »*«»» " 


UUJ Of '•* COKU* 


:als, other 


high-p 


roteii 


i feeds, and otbe 


r byprodi 


cts also si 



plied 9 percent. Silage, beet pulp, skim milk, and seeds made 
up the remaining 5 percent of the feed for all livestock. 

The accompanying maps show the relative importance of con- 
centrates, hay, and pasture and grazing as sources of feed for 
all livestock by States. Grains and other concentrates are most 
important as feed for all livestock in the Northern and Southern 
States except for Texas. Hay accounts for more than 15 percent 
of all livestock feed in most Northern and Western States. Pas- 
ture and grazing account for the highest proportions of livestock 
feed in Florida, Texas, and the Mountain States. 

Cattle. — The number of cattle reported on farms as of January 1 
reached an all-time high of more than 95 million head in 1955. 
Beef cattle have accounted for most of the increase during the 
past 5 years. During this period, the total number of cattle has 
increased by more than 17 million head, of which 16 million were 
beef cattle. Numbers of dairy cattle have remained fairly stable. 

The upward trend in cattle numbers has been accompanied by 
an increase in cattle productivity. This has amounted to a 38 
percent gain during the last 30 years. Better animals, better 
care, more feeding, and greater emphasis on beef types account 
for this rise in productivity, which has amounted to an average 
increase of about 5 pounds of live weight of cattle and calves 
produced per year for each cow on farms at the beginning of the 
year. 

As shown by the accompanying map, cattle are widely raised 
throughout the United States. The heaviest widespread concen- 
tration located in southern Wisconsin, northern Illinois, Iowa, 
eastern Nebraska, and southern Minnesota includes both the 
heavy concentration of dairy cattle in the Dairy Belt and large 
numbers of beef cattle which are more highly concentrated in 
the western part of the Corn Belt. In the Western States, where 
cattle are grazed on the extensive rangelands, the highest densi- 
ties coincide with areas of irrigated agriculture where cattle are 
fattened for market or where dairying is important, as it is near 
main centers of population. 

The distribution of milk cows is less widespread than that 
shown for all cattle. The northeastern Dairy Belt centered in 
Wisconsin and Minnesota in the North Central States and New 
York in the Northeast is a conspicuous feature. In California, 
the influence of metropolitan centers of population on dairying 



MILK COWS 
NUMBER. (934 




f# 




SHEEP 












/ ' i ' *"""* T~ 


NUMBER. 19 


M 


-. 












h //TT^r^r 








(Ha 




rT"J^ 






pi 
















\ L ? 1 ■* 








,'kL/ 






\ 


^\, 


\ / -i_ - ■ 














> * ' r 










__i/ - "/ .( 


















,- ,S' ■■"«-, \ 










LNTEO STATES TOTAL S r~- 
31.618.909 


S 


- J *sv^ 












\ f 


IDOT'10,000 HEAD 










Vi 


icawr. w 


«TB*S6I 






.i 


,«caa» 


^3 




■Uf - 


■" ft. 


nu » n* cr*M 



is apparent. Elsewhere, the main concentrations are associated 
with the distribution of urban population or with physical condi- 
tions particularly favorable for dairying. 

Hogs. — The 1955 pig crop was the fourth largest reported during 
the last 30 years. Only in 1942, 1943, and 1951 were more pigs 
reported saved than in 1955. About three-fifths of the pig crop 
is farrowed in the spring. The demand for pork has declined 
sharply since 1947. In 1955, a smaller percentage of the con- 
sumer's dollar was spent for pork than in any other year since 
1913 except in 1945. 

Several reasons for this loss of demand for pork are indicated. 
There is less demand for fat pork cuts as shown by the fact that 
demand and price for lean cuts have been more favorable than 
for fat cuts. As a result of regional shifts in population oc- 
curing during the last decade or two, more people are now living 
in beef-eating regions than formerly. Increased use of home 
freezers and new ways of selling meat may be more favorable to 
consumption of beef. 

Sheep. — The number of sheep and lambs on farms decreased 
sharply during the 10 years from 1942 to 1951. A slight rise in 
numbers in 1951 and 1952 has been followed by subsequent de- 
cline. Today, only about half as many sheep and lambs are on 
farms as compared with the number on farms during the early 
forties or during the earlier peak period of 75 years ago. The 
decline in the number of sheep and lambs during the last 15 years 
has been considerably greater than that occurring between 1909 
and 1923. Increased use of synthetic fibers and competition from 
foreign sheep-raising areas have been major reasons for this 
sharp decline in the number of sheep. 

In addition to the change in the total number of sheep for the 
United States that has occurred, there has been a major shift in 
sheep numbers among regions, as shown by the accompanying 
chart and map. The long-term decline in sheep numbers in the 
Eastern or native States had already started before 1870. In 
that year, the native sheep States still had three-fourths of the 
total sheep population. Since World War I, these States have 
had only about a third of the total sheep population. In 1955, 
the 11 Western States and South Dakota accounted for half of 
the total sheep population while Texas accounted for the re- 
maining sixth. 



56 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



OUTPUT OF POULTRY AND EGGS 
COMPARED TO OTHER PRODUCTS 



% OF 1935-39 

^^— Poultry 4 eggs 

— — Meat animals 
Dairy products 

— — ■ All farm commodities 



200 



150 



100 




1940 



1945 



1950 



1955 



CEP.OIuEhi OF AGRICULTURE 



NEC 10*1-11(10) AGRICULTURAL NMHCITMS lEftviCE 



POULTRY MEAT SUPPLY 



(READY-TO-COOK BASIS) 



LB. PER PERSON 




1947 



1950 



1953 



IISS DATA fiTIMATEO 



1956 







CHICKENS SOLD 

NUMBER. 1954 


If ' "7 L 




1 - • ."] 


^~/S? ' \ J rfJ&X 




'Wm 




■'- \-*A 




w\J-~~~4 


)-■ 




L - '^IN 














r r • 


JiBrja^K 




\ 


♦ 


«| 


* > ^ 


UNfTEO STATES TOTAL 
968.687652 






IDOT-100.000 CHICKENS \ \ 
county uwr basts \.^ i 


».. «»—*.*«-«« 






uu- w in .jj -"' bu^iu or r-« tosui 



Poultry. — The per capita consumption of poultry and eggs has 
increased markedly during the last half century. The per capita 
consumption of chickens and turkeys nearly doubled between 1909 
and 1954. Consumption of eggs per person increased by 50 percent 
during the same period. 

During the last 15 years, the output of poultry and eggs has 
risen much more rapidly than that of meat animals and dairy 
products. Significant gains in the efficiency of poultry production 
have contributed to this relatively greater output of poultry and 
eggs. 

One of the accompanying charts shows the increases in effi- 
ciency that have occurred. Annual egg production per layer in- 
creased from 112 to 184 eggs between 1925 and 1954. Broiler 
meat production per 100 pounds of feed increased by 9 pounds 
between 1925 and 1952. Adoption of practices that are based 
on findings in genetics, nutrition, disease control, and poultry 



INCREASES IN EFFICIENCY 
IN POULTRY INDUSTRY 



ANNUAL EGG ||| 
PRODUCTION ' 
PER LAYER 



BROILER MEAT ^ 
PRODUCTION 
( LB.) PER 100 
IB FEED* 



TURKEYS 
RAISED PER 
100 BROODED 




LL'Nott i iisii 



*ETINC (EOVICE 



BROILER CHICK PLACEMENTS 

For 1954 ond 1955 Production, Selected Reporting Areos* 



100 



MIL. 

200 



300 



400 



S. ATL. A 

DEL-MAR-VA 

NE. AND 
N. CENT." 

TEXAS 

PAC. COAST' 

SHENANDOAH 
VALLEY 



■//////////////////////////////////////////////////// 



7m 



"3 



mmma^Bk 



^ 



£22^ 



.1954 
'1955 



• AREAI tO* *MIQH COHPAft.lt LE PLACEMENT DATA E0« OCT.-lCPr, l*SI-U AMD l»J«-JI 

*(ȣ AVAlLAtLE 
* ALA., FLA., CA., Hill. AND N. C. ° CONN., MAIM* AND (NO. I CALIF. ANO OftEC. 



, I. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



MEG. lflt - ■ ■■ i I" ■ AGRICULTURAL MARKETING IfRVlCE 



^&--_ VALU E 0F POULTRY AND POULTRY PRODUCTS SOLD 

DOLLARS. 1954 




management have led to more economical egg and poultry meat 
production. 

The growing importance of broilers from specialized enter- 
prises is one of the striking changes that has been taking place 
in the supply of poultry meat. In 1947, only a fourth of the 
chicken production was composed of broilers from specialized 
enterprises. In 1955, three-fifths of the chicken production came 
from broilers grown on specialized enterprises. 

Production of broilers on specialized enterprises is concentrated 
in a relatively few areas. This is indicated by the accompanying 
chart and maps. The heaviest concentration of broiler produc- 
tion in a single area is found on the Delmarva peninsula of Dela- 
ware, Maryland, and Virginia. The Shenandoah Valley is another 
area in which heavy local concentration exists. Localized areas 
of concentrated broiler production are found in several of the 
Southern States where production of broilers has been on the 
increase. 



CHAPTER 2 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



CONTENTS 



59 



INTRODUCTION 

Page 

Source and reliability of data 61 

Definitions and explanations 61 

A farm 62 

Farms by size 62 

Farms reporting 62 

Farms by economic class 62 

Farms by type 62 

Farms by tenure of operator 63 

Farms by class of work power 63 

FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 

Farm power 65 

Farm tractors 66 

Number of tractors on farms 66 

Types of tractors 67 

Farms reporting tractors 68 

Growth of tractor power 68 

Farms reporting one or more field tractors 70 

Field tractors by size of farm 71 

Field tractors by tenure of operator 71 

Farms reporting field tractors, by economic class of farm. 72 

Automobiles on farms 75 

Farms reporting automobiles 75 

Number of automobiles, by size of farm 77 

Number of automobiles, by tenure of farm operator 77 

Number of automobiles, by economic class of farm 78 

Motortrucks on farms 80 

Farms reporting motortrucks 80 

Motortrucks per farm 80 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES— Continued 

Page 

Motortrucks on farms — Continued 

Number of motortrucks, by size of farm 82 

Number of motortrucks, by tenure of farm operator 82 

Number of motortrucks, by economic class of farm 82 

Electric power on farms 85 

Horses and mules 86 

Horses and mules by type and economic class of farm_. 87 

Displacement of work stock by motor vehicles 89 

Harvest machines 91 

Grain combines 91 

Grain combines by size of farm 92 

Corn pickers 93 

Number of corn pickers by size of farm 94 

Pick-up balers 95 

Field forage harvesters 97 

Combinations of harvest machines 98 

Chore equipment 104 

Milking machines 104 

Power feed grinders 106 

Electric pig brooders 107 

Service equipment 109 

Telephones 109 

Television sets 110 

Home freezers 111 

Piped running water 111 

Combinations of service equipment 112 

Some results of farm mechanization 113 

More work off the farm 113 

Machinery investment costs have increased 115 

Purchased machine work has increased 116 

Greater dependence on petroleum fuel and oil 116 



MAPS AND CHARTS 



Page 

Tractors on farms, number, 1954 66 

Cropland harvested, acreage, 1954 66 

Farms with 200 or more acres of cropland harvested, num- 
ber, 1954 66 

Tractors — increase in number, 1950-1954 67 

Crawler tractors, number, 1954 67 

Garden tractors, number, 1954 67 

Percent of farms reporting tractors, 1954 68 

Number of farms reporting field tractors for United States 

and areas, 1920-1954 69 

Crop acres per field tractor on farms, all farms, United 

States, and areas, 1920 to 1954 69 

Number of farms reporting 1, 2, 3, 4 or more field tractors 

for United States and areas: 1954 70 

Number of field tractors on farms by size of farm for the 

United States and areas, 1954 71 

Number of farms reporting field tractors by tenure of 

operator, for the United States and areas, 1954 72 

Number of farms reporting field tractors, by economic class; 

for United States and areas: 1954 72 

Crop acres per tractor, all farms, by economic class; for 

United States and areas: 1954 73 

Automobiles on farms, number, 1954 75 

Number of farms reporting automobiles for the United 

States and areas, 1920-1954 76 

Number of farms reporting 0, 1, 2, and 3 or more automo- 
biles for United States and areas: 1954 76 

Number of automobiles on farms by size of farm, for the 

United States and areas, 1954 77 

Number of automobiles on farms by tenure of operator, for 

the United States and areas, 1954 77 

Number of farms reporting 1, 2, and 3 or more autombiles 

by tenure for United States and areas: 1954 77 

Number of farms reporting 1, 2, and 3 or more automobiles 

by economic class for United States and areas: 1954 78 

Motortrucks on farms, number, 1954 80 

Motortrucks — increase and decrease in number, 1950-1954. 80 
Number of farms reporting motortrucks for United States 

and areas: 1920-1954 81 

Number of farms reporting 1, 2, 3 or more motortrucks for 

United States and areas, 1954 81 

Number of motortrucks on farms by size of farm, for the 

United States and areas, 1954 82 

Number of motortrucks on farms by tenure of operator, for 

the United States and areas, 1954 82 

Number of farms reporting 1, 2, and 3 or more motortrucks 

by tenure for United States and areas: 1954 83 

Number of farms reporting 1, 2, and 3 or more motortrucks 

by economic class for United States and areas: 1954 83 



Page 
Farms reporting electricity — increase and decrease in 

number, 1950-1954 85 

Percent of farms reporting electricity, 1 954 85 

Horses, number, January 1, 1920 86 

Mules, number, January 1, 1920 87 

Horses and mules, number, 1954 87 

Horses and mules — increase and decrease in number, 1950- 

1954 87 

Number of farms reporting different number of horses and 

mules by type of farm, for United States and areas, 1954. 88 

Number of farms reporting different numbers of horses and 

mules by economic class; United States and areas: 1954.. 88 
Farms with tractor and no horses or mules, number, 1954. 89 

Farms with tractor and horses and/or mules, number, 1954. 89 

Farms with horses and/or mules and no tractor, number, 

1954 89 

Farms with no tractor, horses or mules, number, 1954 89 

Grain combines, number of farms reporting, 1954 91 

Grain combines — increase in number, 1950-1954 91 

Number of grain combines on farms, United States and 

areas, 1945-1954 92 

Number of grain combines on farms by size of farm, for the 

United States and areas, 1954 92 

Number of farms reporting 0, 1, 2, and 3 or more combines 

by acreage of small grain harvested, United States and 

areas, 1954 93 

Corn for all purposes, acreage, 1954 94 

Corn pickers, number of farms reporting, 1954 94 

Corn pickers — increase in number, 1950-1954 94 

Number of mechanical corn pickers on farms by size of 

farm, for the United States and areas, 1954 94 

Number of farms reporting 1, 2, and 3 or more mechanical 

corn pickers by acres of corn harvested for United States 

and areas, 1954 95 

Land from which hay was cut, acreage, 1954 95 

Hay acreage as a percent of cropland harvested, 1954 96 

Pick-up hay balers, number of farms reporting, 1954 96 

Pick-up hay balers — increase in number, 1950-1954 96 

Number of pick-up balers on farms by size of farm for the 

United States and areas, 1954 96 

Number of pick-up balers on farms by acreage of hay 

harvested, for the United States and areas, 1954 97 

Field forage harvesters, number, 1954 97 

Number of field forage harvesters on farms by size of farm, 

for the United States and areas, 1954 97 

Number of farms reporting 0, 1, 2, and 3 kinds of field 

machines by economic class for the United States and 

areas: 1954". 98 



60 



CONTENTS 



MAPS AND CHARTS— Continued 



Page 

Milking machines, number of farms reporting, 1954 104 

Whole milk sold, number of pounds, 1954 104 

Number of farms with milking machines, by type of farm, 

for the United States and areas: 1954 104 

Number of farms reporting milking machines by number of 
cows milked, for commercial farms for the United States 

and areas, 1954 106 

Power feed grinders, number of farms reporting, 1954 106 

Number of farms with power feed grinders by type of farm 

for United States and areas: 1954 106 

Number of dairy farms with power-feed grinders by size of 

herd for the United States and areas, 1954 

Electric pig brooders, number of farms reporting, 1954 

Number of farms reporting pig brooders by size of enter- 
prise, for the United States and areas, 1954 107 

Percent of farms reporting telephones, 1954 109 

Telephones — increase and decrease in number of farms 

reporting, 1950-1954 110 

Television sets, number of farms reporting, October 
November 1954 



107 
107 



110 



Pago 

Percent of farms reporting home freezers, 1954 110 

Percent of farms reporting piped running water, 1954 111 

Piped running water, number of farms reporting, 1954 112 

Percent of all farm operators working 100 or more days off 

their farms, 1954 114 

Percent of all farm operators working off their farms in 

1954 114 

Number of farm operators working off their farms, by 

number of days worked, for the United States and areas: 

1930-1954 

Farm operators working off their farms 100 days or more — 

increase and decrease in number, 1949-1954 

Expenditures for machine hire, dollars, 1954 116 

Number of farms reporting machine hire, by economic 

class for the United States and areas, 1954 

Expenditures for gasoline and other petroleum fuel and 

oil for the farm business, dollars, 1954 

Total cost of petroleum products on farms by economic 

class; for United States and areas: 1954 

Cost of petroleum products per farm by economic class ; for 

United States and areas: 1954 



1954. 



115 
115 



116 

117 
117 



118 



TABLES 
Table- . Pa e e 

I Sampling reliability of the estimated number of farms and farms reporting and estimated totals for the United States and 5 

areas: Census of 1954 63 

2 Number of farms, average size of farm, and farms reporting specified number of tractors, for the United States and areas: 1954. 73 

3 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of field tractors, by size of farm, for the United States: 1954 73 

4 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of field tractors, by tenure of operator, for the United States: 1954 74 

5 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of field tractors, by economic class of farm, for the United States: 1954.. 74 

g Percent distribution of all farms, and number of field tractors, by economic class of farm, for the United States and areas: 1954— 74 

7 Percent distribution of all farms, and number of field tractors, by tenure of operator, for the United States and areas: 1954.. 74 

g Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of automobiles, by size of farm, for the United States: 1954 78 

9 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of automobiles, by tenure of operator, for the United States: 1954 79 

10 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of automobiles, by economic class of farm, for the United States and areas: 

1954 79 

1 1 Percent distribution of all farms and number of automobiles, by economic class of farm, for the United States and areas: 1954... 

12 . Percent distribution of all farms and number of automobiles, by tenure of operator, for the United States and areas: 1954... 

!3 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of motortrucks by size of farm, for the United States: 1954 

14 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of motortrucks, by tenure of operator, for the United States: 1954 

15 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of motortrucks, by economic class of farm, for the United States: 1954.. 

lg Percent distribution of all farms, and number of motortrucks, by economic class of farm, for the United States and areas: 1954.. 

17 Percent distribution of all farms, and number of motortrucks, by tenure of operator, for the United States and areas: 1954. _ 

lg Number of farms, and farms reporting by number of horses and mules reported, by economic class of farm, and by type of 

farm, for the United States and areas: 1954 

19 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of grain combines, by size of farm, for the United States: 1954 

2o' Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of grain combines, by tenure of operator, for commercial farms, for the 

United States: 1954 

2i Farms reporting and acreage of small grains harvested, and number of grain combines, by the acreage of small grains harvested, 

for the United States and areas: 1954 

22. Number of farms, farms reporting small grains harvested and farms reporting grain combines, for the United States and areas: 



79 
79 
82 
84 
84 
84 
84 

90 

99 

99 

99 

99 

23 Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of corn pickers, by size of farm, for the United States: 1954 100 

24 Farms reporting and acres of corn harvested for all purposes, and number of farms reporting corn pickers, for the United States 

and areas: 1954 1°0 

25 Farms reporting and acres of corn harvested for all purposes, and number of farms reporting corn pickers, by acres of corn 

harvested, for the United States: 1954 100 

2g_ Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of pick-up balers, by size of farm, for the United States: 1954 101 

27. Number of farms, and farms reporting and number of forage harvesters, by size of farm, for the United States: 1954 101 

28^ Number of farms, farms reporting and acres of all hay harvested, and farms reporting pick-up balers, by acres of hay harvested 

and by size of farm, for the United States and areas: 1954 101 

29 # Number of farms, and number of farms reporting 1, 2, or 3 kinds of field machines, by economic class of farm, and by type of 

farm, for the United States and areas: 1954 . • _-- 102 

30. Farms reporting milk cows and farms reporting milking machines, by number of milk cows, for all commercial farms and dairy 

farms, for the United States and areas: 1954 

31_ Number of farms, and percent of farms reporting milking machines, by type of farm, for the United States and areas: 1954.. 

32. Number of farms, and percent of farms reporting power feed grinders, by type of farm, for the United States and areas: 1954. 

33] Number of farms, expenditure, for feed, and farms reporting feed grinders, for dairy farms, classified by size of herd, for the 

United States: 1954 1°8 

34. Farms reporting sows farrowing between December 1, 1953, and June 1, 1954, and farms reporting electric pig brooders, for the 

United States and areas: 1954 1° 8 

35 — Number and percent of farms reporting electricity, telephones, and piped running water, for the United States and areas: 1954. 112 
3g — Number and percent of farms reporting electricity, telephones, and piped running water, by economic class of farms, for the 

United States: 1954 n2 



105 
105 
108 



61 



INTRODUCTION 



The introduction of mechanical power has brought many 
striking changes to our farms during the last 3 or 4 decades. 
The tractor has supplied a major part of this power. Motor- 
trucks, automobiles, and electricity have also been sources of 
farm power of growing importance during the last quarter of a 
century. The increases in these new sources of power have been 
accompanied by large scale reductions in animal work power 
on farms. With the increased use of new sources of power, 
the number of farmworkers required to produce food and fiber 
for a rapidly increasing population has declined significantly. 
Farm mechanization has had important influences not only upon 
the number of farmworkers and the output per worker but also 
upon the amount of agricultural land used to supply the food 
and fiber needs of the Nation. This report summarizes the 
important changes in farm mechanization since 1920, indicates 
the present status of mechanization, and summarizes the effects 
of increased use of mechanical power and equipment on farms. 

Since 1920, the Censuses of Agriculture taken at 5-year intervals 
have provided information on machinery and facilities on farms. 
The farm machinery and facility items for which Census statistics 
have been collected include a considerable number that are used 
for the farm business, some that are used in the farm operator's 
home as well as for the farm business and others such as 
television sets that are used primarily in the farmer's home. 
Farm machinery was enumerated on the farm on which it was 
located at the time of the Census. The X's in the following 
tabular statement indicate the items for which the nationwide 
Censuses of Agriculture have obtained information during the 
period, 1920 to 1954. 



The number of machines as reported by the Census represents 
the number on farms. It does not include machines not on farms. 
In the case of automobiles, the number includes automobiles 
owned by the farm operator and members of his family and also 
those owned by hired employees living on the farm. 

Source and reliability of data. — The maps and charts presented 
in this report are based upon statistical data published in the re- 
ports of the 1954 and prior Censuses of Agriculture. The data 
presented in tables 2 to 33 of this chapter and used for the 
preparation of a number of maps and charts were obtained from a 
special tabulation of data for a sample of 5 percent of the speci- 
fied and 1 percent of the remaining farms for the 1954 Census of 
Agriculture. (For a description of specified farms, reference 
may be made to the Introduction to Volume II of the reports of 
the 1954 Census of Agriculture.) As the data given in Tables 
2 to 33 are estimates based upon data for a sample of farms, 
they differ slightly from data for the same items published in 
other reports of the 1954 Census of Agriculture. The estimates 
given in these tables are subject to sampling errors. Table 1, 
page 63, provides measures of the sampling reliability for the data 
in Tables 2 to 33. 

DEFINITIONS AND EXPLANATIONS 

The maps, charts, and text employ terminology consistent with 
the 1954 Census of Agriculture. Definitions and explanations 
are given for only a few items. For more detailed definitions 
and explanations of items related to the Census of Agriculture, 
reference may be made to the Introduction of Volume II of the 
reports for the 1954 Census of Agriculture. 



Farm Facility and Equipment Items for Which 


\n Inquiry Was Included in the Census 


of Agriculture: 1920 to 1954 


Item on Census questionnaire 


1954 


1950 


1945 


1940 


1935 


1930 


1925 


1920 


Item on Census questionnaire 


1954 


1950 


1945 


1940 


1935 


1930 


1925 


1920 




X 
X 


X 
X 


X 
X 


X 




X 

X 




X 
X 




X 
X 
X 
X 


X 
X 
X 


X 






(') 
















































X 
























X 
































X 
































X 


X 
X 

X 
X 


X 
X 

X 

X 

X 


X 
X 

X 
X 

X 
X 




X 




X 




X 


X 
X 
X 
X 


X 


X 
X 




X 














X 




X 












X 


Amount of last monthly bill 


















X 
















X 


X 














X 


X 








X 


X 






























Wheel tractors other than gar- 
den or crawler. 


X 


X 

X 
X 
X 
X 


X 

X 
X 
X 
























X 






















X 
X 
















X 








X 


















X 


X 






















X 
































X 


















X 
X 












Artificial ponds, reservoirs, and 
earth tanks. 


X 


























X 






















X 

X 

X 
X 
















X 


X 
X 


X 


































X 


X 




X 


X 
X 

X 




















X 

X 




































Value of implements and ma- 
chinery. 




X 


X 




X 


X 




X 
























X 






X 

























' Inquiry asked for number of "combines" on this farm. Data requested were for grain combines used for harvesting and threshing grains or seeds in one operation 
however, many types or combinations of equipment were reported instead of the type desired and the results of this inquiry were considered not satisfactory for publication. 



407763—57- 



62 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



A farm. — For the 1954 and 1950 Censuses, 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 agricultural 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. 

For the 1945 and earlier Censuses of Agriculture, the definition 
of a farm was somewhat more inclusive. From 1925 to 1945, 
farms, for Census purposes, included places of 3 or more acres 
on which there were agricultural operations, and places of less 
than 3 acres if the agricultural products for home use or for 
sale were valued at $250 or more. For places of 3 or more 
acres, no minimum quantity of agricultural production was 
required for purposes of enumeration ; for places of under 3 
acres, all the agricultural products valued at $250 or more may 
have been for home use and not for sale. The only reports 
excluded from the tabulations were those taken in error and 
those with very limited agricultural production, such as only 
a small home garden, a few fruit trees, a very small flock of 
chickens, etc. In 1945, reports for places of 3 acres or more with 
limited agricultural operations were retained if there were 3 or 



more acres of cropland and pasture, or if the value of products 
in 1944 amounted to $150 or more when there were less than 3 
acres of cropland and pasture. 

Farms by size. — Farms have been classified by size on the basis 
of the total land in the farm. The total land includes cropland, 
pastureland, woodland, and wasteland. 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. 

Farms reporting. — Farms reporting represent the number of 
farms with the kind of machinery or facility indicated. 

Farms by economic class. — Farms have been classified by eco- 
nomic class for the 1950 and 1954 Censuses of Agriculture. 
The three criteria used for classifying farms by economic class 
were: Total value of all farm products sold; number of days 
the farm operator worked off the farm ; and 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 were classified into two broad economic groups, namely, 
"commercial farms" and "other farms." Each of these major 
groups was further classified. 

The "commercial farms" were classified into 6 groups and 
"other farms," into 3 groups. The following table indicates 
the criteria for each economic class of farm and the number 
of farms in each economic class for 1954 and 1950. 



CRITERIA FOR THE ECONOMIC CLASSES OF FARMS AND NUMBER OF FARMS IN EACH CLASS, FOR THE 

UNITED STATES: CENSUSES OF 1954 AND 1950 



Class 


Number of farms 


Criteria 


Farms excluded 


1954 


1950 


Value of farm products sold 


Other 


United States, total... 


4. 783. 021 

3, 327. 617 
134. 003 
448, 945 
706. 929 
811.965 
763. 348 
462, 427 

1, 455. 404 
574, 575 

878, 136 
2,693 


5, 379, 250 

3, 706, 412 
103. 231 
381, 151 
721.211 
882, 302 
901, 316 
717, 201 

1, 672, 838 
639, 230 

1, 029, 392 
4,216 


XXX 


XXX 


XXX. 


Commercial farms, total ._ 


XXX 


XXX.. _ 


XXX. 


Class I. 






Class II 


$10,000 to $24,999 


do.... 




Class III 


$5,000 to $9,999 . . 


do 




Class IV.... 


$2,500 to $4,999 


...do 




Class V 


$1,200 to $2,499 


. do.... 




Class VI 


$250 to $1,199 


Less than 100 days of off-farm work by operator, and in- 
come of operator and members of his family from non- 
farm sources less than value of all farm products sold. 

XXX 






XXX 


XXX. 




$250 to $1,199 


100 days or more of off-farm work by operator or income of 
farm operator and members of his family from nonfarm 
sources greater than value of all farm products sold. 




Residential ... 


Less than $250 




Abnormal 




Institutional farms, experimental farms, grazing associa- 
tions, community-project farms, etc. 


XXX. 









Farms by type. — Commercial farms have been classified by type 
on the same basis for the 1954 and 1950 Censuses of Agriculture. 
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 fami product, such as 
determined on the basis of sales of a broader group of 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 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, 
together with the product or group of products on which the 
classification is based, are : 

Type of farm Product or group of products amounting to SO 

percent or more of the value of all farm products 
sold 

Cotton Cotton (lint and seed). 

Cash-grain Corn, sorghums, small grains, field peas, 

field beans, cowpeas, and soybeans. 

Other field-crop Peanuts, Irish potatoes, sweetpotatoes, to- 
bacco, sugarcane, sugar beets for sugar, 
• and other miscellaneous crops. 

Vegetable Vegetables. 

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

fruits, nuts, and grapes. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



63 



Type of farm Product or group of products amounting to SO 

percent or more of the value of all farm products 
sold 

Dairy Milk and other dairy products. The cri- 
terion 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 — 

(n) Milk and other dairy products ac- 
counted 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, together 
with the sales of cattle and calves, 
amount to 50 percent or more of 
the total value of farm products 
sold. 

Poultry Chickens, eggs, turkeys, and other poultry 

products. 
Livestock farms 
other than dairy 

and poultry Cattle, calves, hogs, sheep, goats, wool, and 

mohair, provided the farm did not qualify 
as a dairy farm. 

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, hut for which the value of sales for 
all these groups of crops represented 70 
percent or more of the value of all farm 
products sold. 

Primarily livestock farms are those which 
did not qualify as dairy farms, poultry 
farms, or livestock farms other than dairy 
and poultry, but for 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 classified as either 
crop farms or livestock farms, but for 
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 accounted for by sale of horti- 
cultural products, or sale of horses, or sale 
of forest products. In 1950, this group of 
farms also included those that had 50 per- 
cent or more of the total value of farm 
products accounted for by the sale of fur 
animals or the sale of bees, wax, and 
honey. 

Farms by tenure of operator. — Farm operators have been classi- 
fied by tenure on the basis of how they hold the land they operate. 

Owners are farm operators who own all or part of the land 
they operate. 

Full owners own all the land they operate. 

Part owners own land they operate and rent from others 
additional land which they operate. 



Managers operate farms for others and are paid a wage or 
salary for their services. Farms operated for institutions or 
corporations are considered managed. 

Tenants rent from others, or work on shares for others, all 
the land they operate. 

Tenants were further classified on the basis of their rental 
arrangement, as follows: 

Cash tenants pay a cash rental, such as $10 per acre, or 
$1,000 for the use of the whole farm. 

Share-cash tenants pay a part of the rent in cash and a 
part as a share of either the crops or of the livestock or live- 
stock products, or both. 

Share tenants pay a share of either the crops or livestock or 
livestock products, or a share of both. In the South, share 
tenants with all work power furnished are not included with 
share tenants but are classed separately as croppers. Share 
tenants were further classified as : 

Crop-share tenants if they paid a share of the crops and 
no share of the livestock. 

Livestock-share tenants if they paid a share of the live- 
stock or livestock products. Livestock-share tenants may or 
may not also pay a share of the crops. 

Croppers are crop-share tenants whose landlords furnish 
all work power. The landlords either furnish all the work 
animals or furnish tractor power in lieu of work animals. 
Croppers usually work under the close siipervision of the 
landlords, or their agents, and the land assigned them is 
often merely a part of a larger enterprise operated as a 
single unit. 

Farms by class of work power. — Farms have been classified ac- 
cording to kind of work power on the basis of the presence on 
the farm of horses and/or mules, and tractors. This classifica- 
tion is based on the presence of the sources of work power on the 
farm, and not on the use or extent of use of various kinds of 
work power. Many farms do not need work power. Some of 
these farms represent rural homes with very limited agricultural 
production. Others are poultry farms, dairy farms, livestock 
ranches, greenhouses, etc., with little or no cropland. For some 
farms, all the work power may be furnished by the landlord. 
Work power was to be reported on the farm where located at 
the time of the enumeration regardless of ownership. Some 
I'arcns classified as having work power may have horses or mules 
kept only for nonfarm work, or for purposes other than for work 
power. Some farms may have tractors, work power, etc., only 
for the purpose of performing custom work or furnishing work 
power to others. Some farms without work power may hire 
all or part of their work power from others. 

Table 1. — Sampling Reliability of the Estimated Number 
of Farms and Farms Reporting and Estimated Totals 
for the United States and 5 Areas: Census of 1954 



If the estimated number of farms reporting is- 



1,000.. 
2.500-. 
5,000.. 
10.000. 
25,000. 
50,000. 
100,000 
250,000 
600,000 



Then the chances 
are about 2 in 3 
that the estimat- 
ed total would 
differ from the 
results of a com- 
plete tabulation 
of the items by 
less than '— 



Percent 



31 

20 

14 

10 

6.3 

4.4 

3.1 

2.0 

1.4 



i For Tables 14 and 15 the percent error may be obtained by dividing the percent error 
in this table by 5. 



65 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



The 168 million people of the United States are better fed 
and clothed, as a group, than the people of almost any other 
country. Yet our farm population is only about 22 million, and 
only 1 worker out of 9 in our entire labor force is engaged chiefly 
in farming. More than a century ago, in 1830, 7 workers in 10 
were engaged in agricultural pursuits. At that time, 1 farm- 
worker produced enough agricultural products for himself and 
about 3 others. Now, 1 farmer produces agricultural products 
for himself or herself and almost 19 other persons. 

Technological progress has been the compelling force in the 
large increase in efficiency in agriculture. During the last 
quarter century physical output in farm production has in- 
creased by a half. Each hour of farm labor now produces two 
and a half times as much farm output as it produced at the 
conclusion of World War I. 

Several phases of farm technology have worked together to 
increase farm production and to make each hour of direct farm 
labor more effective. New and better machines, new production, 
harvesting and marketing methods, and improved arrangements 
in and around farm service buildings have operated to reduce 
labor requirements in the production and marketing of crops 
and livestock. Improved roads, electricity and running water 
in the home, and other home facilities, have brought the farm 
nearer to hospitals and trading centers, and have made the farm 
a better and more comfortable place for living and rearing a 
family. On the other side of the productivity picture is in- 
creased production per acre and per animal because of a host 
of technical advancements in all of the many phases incident 
to the raising of crops and livestock. 

This report is concerned with that side of technological effi- 
ciency that relates to farm power, machinery, and facilities, as 
portrayed by data released over the years by the Bureau of the 
Census. For the most part the report deals with the farm situa- 
tion as it is today with some indications of the future. In some 
cases, historical changes since 1920 are indicated. 

In a way, 1920 may be taken as a starting place from which to 
measure the beginning of modern farm mechanization. At that 
time, shortly after the close of World War I, farmers in the 



United States were just beginning to take the possibilities of 
using the gas tractor seriously. At the beginning of that year, 
farmers reported possession of 246,000 tractors (exclusive of 
steam), compared with 4,692,000 reported on farms in November 
1954. Oxen still were being used to some extent in remote areas, 
and horse and mule numbers had just started their long down- 
ward trend from a peak of about 27 million head 2 years earlier, 
or in 1918. Motortrucks on farms were only one-twentieth as 
numerous as they are today, but the number of automobiles on 
farms in 1920 was half the number in 1954. 

Grain combines were being used in a limited way but improve- 
ments in design and adaptability for smaller farms were yet to 
come. Mechanical corn pickers were beginning to replace hand 
picking in the principal corn States. Milking machines were 
being used in a limited way, primarily by the larger dairymen 
who had access to electricity. Windmills were being used ex- 
tensively in the Central and Plains States. Less than 2 percent 
of the farmers had the benefit of electric power. Today 94 per- 
cent of the farms have central-station electric service. 

The windmill, without which early settlements in the barren, 
dry areas of the Plains would not have been possible, has largely 
passed out of the picture. Tear by year, with the coming of 
electricity to the farm, rural people are installing more refrigera- 
tors, freezers, washing machines, water systems, television sets, 
and other equipment in their homes. The electric light has largely 
replaced the coal oil lamp in the home, and the lantern in the 
barns and other service areas. Only in the last 15 years or so 
has the automatic tie pick-up baler and modern field forage har- 
vester been available to farmers. Electric farm shops, and elec- 
trically operated barn cleaners, elevators, blowers, driers, and 
lifting devices are relatively new on the farm. 

The machines and facilities reported on in this report do not 
cover all details of farm mechanization. Included here are the 
machines and facilities reported on by the Bureau of the Census — 
basic machines and facilities around which mechanization has 
been built. The presentation is organized in five parts, dealing 
with farm power, harvest machines, farm chore equipment, serv- 
ice equipment, and some results of mechanization. 



FARM POWER 



Use of mechanical power on farms in the United States had 
its beginning in the 19th century. Adoption of power machines 
for fieldwork was at first almost entirely limited to steam trac- 
tors. Internal-combustion engines of small size and largely 
adapted for stationary work only, were first reported at the end 
of the 19th century. Use of internal-combustion engines as a 
source of farm power in tractors, trucks, automobiles, and as 
stationary engines made little headway until the beginning of 
World War I. Now internal-combustion engines are used in 



more than 11 million farm motor vehicles, and to some extent as 
auxiliary mounted engines on heavy equipment, such as grain 
combines, hay balers, and forage harvesters. Their use as sta- 
tionary engines for pumping water, grinding feed, and other 
chore work about the service buildings has decreased as more 
farms received central-station electricity. This section of the 
report contains Census graphic material for tractors, automobiles, 
motortrucks, horses and mules, and farm electricity. 



66 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 
FARM TRACTORS 



The internal-combustion tractor was first used in farming in 
the United States shortly before 1910. The early tractors were 
heavy, crude machines compared with later models. For the 
most part they were used for performing heavy operations, 
such as threshing, silo filling, plowing, disking, and harrowing. 
In many cases they were used at first for belt work and to draw 
horse and mule implements already available on the farm. 

Gradually, tractor design and adaptability for farm jobs were 
improved. Following introduction of the general purpose tractor 
in the 1920's, and rubber-tired wheels in the 1930's, tractor num- 
bers and uses increased widely. Old style horse-drawn imple- 
ments were discarded for more suitable and efficient tractor ma- 
chines and tools. Improvements in tractor design and in tractor- 
drawn and mounted machines for fitting land, cultivating and 
harvesting crops, lifting and moving farm materials and sup- 
plies, followed rapidly and continues even today. Recently, more 
powerful and versatile tractors with improved power take-off 
units, and tractor-machines have speeded up farmwork in the 
fields and service areas. Many farm families are now doing the 
work formerly done with the aid of one or more hired hands. 
Generally, all kinds of farmwork are being done better and 
more in season. In many cases the farmer has reduced the 
average length of many very long work days during rush sea- 
sons of the year; he has lessened materially the drudgery which 
at one time was so evident in farming. 

NUMBER OF TRACTORS ON FARMS 

There now are on farms of the United States approximately 
4.7 million tractors of all types, sizes, and ages, compared with 
246,000 on farms in 1920. And in addition, farmers now have 
between 150,000 and 200,000 self-propelled machines, most of 
which are harvest machines. In little more than a third of a 
century, and in the memory of many farmers of today, mechani- 
cal power has almost completely displaced animal power for 
farming purposes. This displacement has resulted in a decrease 
in horse and mule numbers on farms from 27 million head in 
1918 to less than 4 million head at present. Many of the work 
animals remaining on farms are used little for farmwork. 

Tractor numbers of all types on farms have almost doubled 
since the last year of World War II (1945). This large increase 



TRACTORS ON FARMS 
NUMBER. 1954 




has taken place even though the level of total agricultural pro- 
duction has increased only moderately. Thus, while total agri- 
cultural output has increased since the War by 17 percent, tractor 
numbers have doubled, increasing from about 2.4 million to 4.7 
million. Only a small part of the increase in tractor numbers 
since 1945 has been caused by loss of work animals. The in- 
crease is a part of the general pattern of more fully mechanizing 
farming operations in the face of rising farm wages, higher value 
of farm products per acre, and in the general movement through- 
out all types of industry to reduce labor inputs and excessive 
drudgery. 



CROPLAND HARVESTED 

ACREAGE. 1954 




The country distribution of number of tractors in 1954 fol- 
lows closely the distribution of cropland harvested in 1954. 
Naturally, the greatest concentration of tractors is in areas 
where the greatest concentration of crops occurs, as, for ex- 
ample, in the Corn Belt, Lake States, Eastern fruit and vege- 
table areas, the important cotton areas, and the western irrigated 
and other crop-growing areas. Tractors are relatively less 
numerous in the eastern Appalachian region where much of the 
land is in trees and permanent pastures. In the Western States 
where mountain and arid acreages are large, and where much 
of the land is in forests and range pastures, tractor numbers 
per square mile are exceptionally low. 



FARMS WITH 200 OR MORE ACRES OF CROPLAND HARVESTED 
NUMBER. 1954 




FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



67 



Although the number of farms in the United States decreased 
from April 1950 to November 1954 by about 600,000, numbers 
of tractors of all types actually increased by more than a million. 



TRACTORS-INCREASE 
IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




TYPES OF TRACTORS 

Of the 4.7 million tractors on farms in November 1954, about 
89 percent were field wheel type tractors, 3.5 percent were field 
crawler type tractors, and 7.5 percent were garden type trac- 
tors. The field wheel type of tractor so completely dominates 
the situation so far as numbers are concerned, that the distribu- 
tion chart for all types gives an equally accurate general view 
of the distribution of field wheel tractors. 

The earliest gas tractors were of the wheel type. They were 
used almost exclusively for land preparation and belt work. 
Their use was confined largely to the larger farms, primarily 
in the Great Plains and Western States. Gradually, newer 
models were developed which were suitable for farms which 
were smaller than the large sizes, located in most areas of the 
United States. 

With the development of the general purpose wheel tractor 
in the 1920's, use of wheel tractors spread rapidly in all areas, 
especially in those areas where row crops are grown. The gen- 
eral purpose tractor, as the name implies, is used for many 
kinds of farmwork, including crop cultivation and other row 
crop work. Introduction of rubber tires in the 1930's, and de- 
velopment of wheel tractors suitable for the smaller family sized 
farms as well as for the larger farms speeded up the change 
from animal to mechanical power. 

The crawler type of tractor has an endless beltlike type of 
track on which it operates as it moves over the terrain. This 
type of tractor probably was first used for farmwork along 
about 1910. Although the number of crawler tractors on farms 
is small, compared with the number of wheel tractors, it has a 
distinct place under some farming conditions. It is well suited 
for pulling heavy loads, especially where the ground is soft or 
steep. Because of construction some models can be operated 
under overhanging limbs of trees and close to tree trunks. This 
feature makes it well suited for cultural operations and other 
work in commercial orchards. 

Although crawler tractors are used to some extent in all areas, 
their number is greatest in the Pacific Coast States and in Idaho. 
About 55 percent of all crawler tractors on farms in 1954 were 
in the Mountain and Pacific States. They are used extensively 
in the principal fruit and truck areas of Washington, Oregon, 
and California, and in the wheat area of eastern Washington, 
northern Idaho, and central Oregon. 



CRAWLER TRACTORS 
NUMBER. 1954 




Garden tractors, as the name implies, generally are used to 
cultivate small acreages of vegetables and other garden crops. 
They were first reported by the Census of Agriculture in 1945, 
although some garden tractors were used on farms as early 
as 1940 or 1941. Their use has expanded rapidly. The number 
en farms has increased from 68,000 in 1945 to 347,000 in Novem- 
ber 1954. Concentration of garden tractors is particularly heavy 
in the Corn Belt and Eastern States, and in the western part 
of the Pacific Coast States. More than half of those reported 



GARDEN TRACTORS 

NUMBER. 1954 




in 1954 were in the Corn Belt and Northeastern States, 10 
percent were in the Appalachian States and 11 percent were in 
the Pacific Coast States. Many commercial farms have garden 
tractors for cultivating the home garden and truck patch. 



Numbers of Field Wheel, Crawler, and Garden Tractors 
on Farms by Farm-Production Areas, November 1954 





Field wheel 


Crawler 


Garden 


Area 


Number 
(000) 


Percent 
distribu- 
tion 


Number 
(000) 


Percent 
distribu- 
tion 


Number 
(000) 


Percent 
distribu- 
tion 




382.3 

1,091.6 
619.2 
540.8 
365.5 

219.1 
205.8 
365.1 
214.4 
181.5 


9.1 
26.1 
14.8 
13.0 

8.8 

5.2 
4.9 
8.7 
5.1 
4.3 


16.5 
14.0 
10.8 
9.3 
6.4 

5.0 

3.7 

5.5 

22.1 

66.6 


10.3 
8.7 
6.8 
5.8 
4.0 

3.1 
2.3 
3.4 
13.9 
41.7 


59.3 
118.7 
37.4 
15.4 
34.6 

10.3 
7.3 
12.9 
11.9 
39.1 


17.1 


Corn Belt 


34.2 




10.8 


Northern Plains 


4.4 

10.0 




3.0 


Delta States 


2.0 


Southern Plains 


3.7 
3.4 


Pacific 


11.3 






United States... 


4. 185. 


100.0 


159.9 


100.0 


346.9 


100.0 



68 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



FARMS REPORTING TRACTORS 

Although agriculture in the United States is highly mechanized, 
only about 60 percent of our 4.8 million farms reported tractors 
in November 1954. For the most part, those reporting tractors 
are the farms that are most suitable for some degree of modern 
mechanization and that actually need mechanical field power. 
They are the farms that produce a very large part of total agri- 
cultural production. The actual agricultural output on farms 
not having tractors is not available. Census data for 1954 do 
show, however, that 40 percent of all farms produced less than 
$1,200 worth of products for sale in 1954. As a group, this 40 
percent of the farms produced only 3.4 percent of the total value 
of products sold in that year. Less than one-third of these low 
production farms reported tractors in 1954. 

The largest percentage of farms that reported tractors In 1954 
is in the northern and central farming areas, and the smallest 
percentage is in the Southeastern States. From 60 to 80 percent 



houses and some commercial poultry enterprises who cultivate no 
land may have no reason to own field tractors. On many such 
farms, motortrucks may represent the important motive power 
unit. 

GROWTH OF TRACTOR POWER 

It is not surprising that in the beginning, farmers' unqualified 
acceptance of the farm tractor was slow to develop. The limited 
capacity of the early tractor to do various types of farmwo-rk 
meant that few work animals were disposed of when a tractor 
was bought. Even after tractor models and tractor-drawn equip- 
ment were greatly improved, many jobs still were done by horses 
and mules. In the severe depression of the 1930's, cash with 
which to buy gasoline, oil, and repairs was very limited. But 
farmers could produce their own power in the form of corn, oats, 
and hay, at little cash cost. In many instances, jobs which had 
been done with tractor power were again done with animal power 



PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING TRACTORS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 
PERCENT 

I I UNDER 10 ET3ij 40 TO 59 

EMU 10 TO 19 SSS60 TO 79 

111120 TO 39 IHsO AND OVER 

*NO farms 

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54-OS2 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



of the farm units in most of the northern and central areas 
apparently are of a size and type suitable for some degree of 
mechanization, and, therefore, suitable for individual owner- 
ship of tractor power and equipment. In the Southeastern States 
less than 40 percent of the farms in many of the counties reported 
tractors. 

The fact that a farmer does not have a tractor does not mean 
that he does not use tractor power. Custom operators, many of 
whom are farmers, are available in all sections for preparing 
land, tending crops, and for performing harvesting operations. 
Sharecropper farms in the South are operated with equipment 
owned by the "home farm." Many fruit farmers in some areas 
hire all or a part of their field work done. Operators of green- 



and equipment and the tractors remained idle. Even after more 
versatile tractors were developed and farm economic conditions 
began to improve, many farmers felt obliged to keep a well-shod 
team or two for work in icy and muddy places. Pioneering 
farmers led the way in complete displacement of work stock with 
tractors. The movement grew rapidly from the beginning of 
World War II. Few commercial farmers now depend on work 
stock for doing field work. 

The increase between 1920 and 1954 in number of farms re- 
porting tractors was 2,648,000. About 24 percent of this increase 
occurred between 1920 and 1930, 21 percent occurred between 
1930 and 1940, 42 percent occurred between 1940 and 1950, and 13 
percent since 1950. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



69 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING FIELD TRACTORS FOR 
UNITED STATES AND AREAS, 1920-1954 




1920 1930 1940 (945 1950 1954 



A-54 -SM 



CROP ACRES PER FIELD TRACTOR ON FARMS, ALL FARMS, 
UNITED STATES, AND AREAS - 1920 TO 1954 



'NORTHEAST 



-71 I U™ ^rk&- 



I9ZO 1930 ©40 I94S 1950 1954 





407763—57- 



70 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



In 1954, almost 58 percent of all farms reporting field tractors 
were in the Corn Belt, Lake, and Great Plains States, distributed 
as follows: Corn Belt, 24.4 percent; Lake States, 14 percent; 
Northern and Southern Plains States, 19.3 percent. It was in these 
areas that farmers bought tractors most rapidly in the early days 
of farm mechanization. It is in these States and in the North- 
east area where number of farms reporting tractors has increased 
considerably less than average during the last 10 years. The 
greatest relative increase in farms reporting tractors during the 
last 10 years has been in the Appalachian, Southeast, and Missis- 
sippi Delta areas, where mechanization was relatively slow in 
getting started. 

Although the number of field tractors on farms in 1954 is 18 
times the number in 1920, the number of crop acres has changed 
very little. Consequently, total crop acres per field tractor de- 
creased during the period from 1,417 to 71, or by almost twenty- 
fold. The downward trend has been pronounced in each of the 
10 areas shown in the map. In November 1954, the smallest 
average crop acres per field tractor was 35.5 in the Northeast and 
the largest was 140.1 in the Northern Plains States. 



FARMS REPORTING ONE OR MORE FIELD 
TRACTORS 

As farmers became more dependent on tractor power and 
tractor-drawn and tractor-mounted equipment, many bought a 
second or a third tractor. Consolidation of farms into larger 
operating units also helped to increase the average number of 
tractors per farm. In the early days of tractor use, few farms 
had more than one tractor. As late as 1940 the average number 
of field tractors per farm reporting tractors was 1.1. By 1954 
the average had risen to 1.6. 

In November 1954, 61 percent of the 2.8 million farms report- 
ing field tractors reported one tractor, 28 percent reported 2, 8 
percent reported 3, and 3 percent reported having 4 or more 
tractors. 

Regionally, the largest percentage of tractor farms reporting 
4 or more field tractors per farm in 1954 was in the Western 
States (7 percent), and the second largest was in the Great 
Plains 'States (4.4 percent). A relatively large proportion of 
the farms reporting only one field tractor each was in the 
Southern States (82 percent), followed in rank by the Eastern 
States where 69 percent of the tractor farms reported only one 
tractor each. 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING 1,2,3,4 OR MORE FIELD 
TRACTORS FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 




FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



71 



FIELD TRACTORS BY SIZE OF FARM 

Many farms, small ia terms of acreage, are difficult to mecha- 
nize economically. This is particularly true of those that are 
general in type and have low incomes; Many small fruit and 
vegetable farms, and other types having intensive production 
enterprises require much field work per acre and are economically 
suitable for tractor power and tractor equipment. Many small 
part-time farms are effectively equipped with tractors and tractor 
equipment. Although the machinery investment per acre for part- 
time farms may appear unreasonably high, from the standpoint 
of income both on and off the farm it may be quite reasonable. 

In 1954 more than a third of all farms in the United States 
were under 50 acres in size. This group had 11 percent of all 
the tractors reported that year. At the other end of the scale, 
farms of 500 or more acres represented 6.7 percent of all farms 
and had 17.2 percent of the total number of field tractors. Al- 
most 60 percent of all field tractors reported were on farms 
having from 100 to 499 acres. 

Small farmers reported field tractors in all regions. Field 
tractors were relatively numerous on small farms in the Southern 
and Western States, and relatively numerous on large farms in 
the Great Plains and Western States. 



FIELD TRACTORS BY TENURE OF OPERATOR 

Farm owners, part owners, and farm managers operated 76 
percent of all farms in 1954, and tenants of all classes operated 
24 percent. The share tenant and cropper group represented 62 
percent of all tenants. Within each tenure group are both small 
and large farms. Farmers in each group have access to custom 
operators for major field operations. 

Number of Farms Reporting Tractors and Average Number 
of Tractors per Farm, by Tenure, United States: 1954 





Farms reporting tenure 


Percentage 
reporting 
tractors 


Average 
number of 


Tenure 


Number 


Percent 
distribution 


tractors 
per farm 
reporting 




2, 760, 840 
871, 780 
22, 220 

1,150,860 
159, 500 
165,000 
716, 700 
109,660 


57.4 
18.1 
0.5 

23.9 
3.3 
3.4 

14.9 
2.3 


52.7 
80.3 
80.9 

53.1 

45.7 
92.2 
47.9 
38.7 


1.4 




1.8 




3.4 




1.6 




1.6 




1.8 


Share tenants and croppers. 

Other and unspecified tenants 


1.6 

1.5 


Total 


4, 805, 700 


100.0 


57.9 


1.6 







PERCENTAGE DISTRIBUTION OF NUMBER OF FARMS AND NUMBER OF FIELD TRACTORS, BY SIZE OF FARM, 

FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 





United States 


Area 


Size of farm (total acres) 


Eastern 


Southern 


Central 


Great Plains 


Western 




Farms 


Tractors 


Farms 


Tractors 


Farms 


Tractors 


Farms 


Tractors 


Farms 


Tractors 


Farms 


Tractors 








Percent 

38.3 

22.2 

22.2 

8.3 

6.9 

1.6 

0.4 


Percent 
14.0 
18.6 
30.8 
14.0 
15.8 
4.6 
2.2 


Percent 

53.0 

21.4 

13.3 

5.2 

4.3 

1.9 

1.0 


Percent 
18.8 
20.7 
20.0 
10.9 
11.8 
9.6 
8.2 


Percent 
21.0 
18.3 
29.5 
16.4 
12.6 
1.9 
0.3 


Percent 

7.9 

13.7 

31.5 

21.3 

20.5 

4.1 

1.0 


Percent 
18.5 
10.5 
17.4 
11.2 
22.0 
12.7 
7.8 


Percent 
3.9 
5.3 
14.2 
11.8 
28.1 
15.8 
20.9 


Percent 
46.4 
11.4 
12.0 
4.4 
7.5 
6.6 
11.7 






Percent 

35.6 

18.0 

19.8 

9.8 

10.1 

4.0 

2.7 


Percent 
10.7 
13.4 
24.3 
15.2 
19.2 
8.2 
9.0 


Percent 
19.6 




11.4 


100 to 179 acres - 


15.4 




6.9 


260 to 499 acres -- 


11.4 


500 to 999 acres,. 


11.1 




24.2 






Total 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 







NUMBER OF FIELD TRACTORS ON FARMS BY SIZE OF FARM 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS. 1954 




The owner group contains a large number of small farms, 
many of which are low-income places, and many of which are 



part-time farms for families who work off the farm. Because 
of the large number of small units in this group it is not surpris- 
ing that only 53 percent of such farms reported one or more trac- 
tors in 1954. Part-owner farms are owned farms with additional 
rented land. Renting additional land is one way of increasing 
size of farm and making the unit more suitable for tractor power 
and tractor equipment. More than 80 percent of the farms in this 
group reported having tractors in 1954. Full-owner and part- 
owner farms are important tenure types in all regions of the 
United States. 

Manager and share-cash tenant farms are found in a limited 
way in each of the five areas shown, and tend to be larger than 
average in size. A high percentage of farms in each of these 
groups reported tractors in 1954. Share tenants and croppers 
are important groups in all regions. Many farms of these types 
of tenure are small in size. In 1954 less than half reported 
tractors. 



72 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



<, yi NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING FIELD TRACTORS BY TENURE OF OPERATOR. 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS. 1954 




FARMS REPORTING FIELD TRACTORS, BY 
ECONOMIC CLASS OF FARM 

Generally, the volume of tractors and other farm machinery 
bought by farmers is closely related to farm cash receipts and 
size of farm operation. Individually, and by groups, the larger 
the cash sales are, the more need farm operators have for the 
more expensive types of machines and equipment, and the better 
able they are financially to fully equip their farms. 

About 85 percent of all commercial farmers in Economic Classes 
I, II, III, and IV in 1954 reported one or more field tractors. 
These were the farmers whose products sold ranged from $2,500 
to more than $25,000 per farm. This group made up less than 
half of all farms in 1954. Of the remaining commercial farms, 



less than half reported tractors in 1954. Many of these low- 
income operators sold less than $1,000 worth of products in that 
year. Few of them worked off the farm as much as 100 days. 
Only 28 percent of the 1.5 million noncommercial farms reported 
field tractors in 1954. Regionally, a relatively large proportion 
of the farmers reporting tractors that are in the higher economic 
classes are in the Western, Central, and Great Plains States. 
Large proportions of the residential and part-time farmers that 
reported tractors in 1954 are in the Eastern and Southern States. 

Farms Reporting Tractors, Average Number of Tractors 
per Farm Reporting, and Average Crop Acres per Tractor, 
by Economic Class of Farm: 1954 





All 
farms 
(000) 


Farms reporting 
tractors 


Average 
number 
of trac- 
tors per 
farm re- 
porting 


Average 
crop 


Economic class of farm 


Number 
(000) 


Percent 
ofaU 
farms 


acres 
per trac- 
tor 


Commercial farms: 
Class I 


135.5 
442.8 
726.3 
821.1 
769.1 
457.7 


122.5 
409.7 
648.4 
620.1 
430.2 
145.7 


90.4 
92.5 
89.3 
75.5 
55.9 
31.8 


3.4 
2.2 
1.6 
1.4 
1.2 
1.2 


117.1 


Class II 


96 4 


Class III 


83 2 


Class IV _ 


70.5 


Class V. 


57.2 


Class VI 


56 4 






Commercial farms, total 
Other farms: 


3, 352. 5 

575.6 

874.6 

3.0 


2, 376. 6 

241.1 

164.4 

1.9 


70.9 

41.9 

18.8 
61.6 


1.6 

1.1 
1.1 
4.3 


82.4 
30.7 




21.2 




87. 1 








1,453.2 


407.4 


28.0 


1.1 


28.0 






United States, total 


4,805.7 


2, 784. 


57.9 


1.6 


76.9 



^......UNITED STATES 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING FIELD TRACTORS. BY ECONOMIC CLASS; 
FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 







FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



73 



CROP ACRES PER TRACTOR. ALL FARMS. BY ECONOMIC CLASS; 
FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 



CENTRAL 








Closely related to the proportion of farmers in each economic 
class that reported tractors, are average number of tractors per 
farm and average crop acres per tractor. For example, farms 
with tractors in the Economic Class I group had an average of 3.4 
tractors per farm and those in Economic Class VI had an average 
of only 1.2 tractors per farm reporting tractors. The abnormal 
farms reporting tractors had the highest average number per 
farm, and the residential and part-time farms had the lowest 
average number per farm reporting. Crop acres per tractor, 
based on all crop acres in each economic class, was highest (117) 

Table 2. — Number of Farms, Average Size of Farm, and 
Farms Reporting Specified Number of Tractors, for the 
United States and Areas: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





United 
States 


Area 


Item 


Eastern 


South- 
ern 


Central 


Great 
Plains 


West- 
ern 




4.806 
242.2 

2,784 

42.1 
3S.4 
16.1 
4.5 
1.9 


779 
110.5 

396 

49.1 
35.1 
11.4 
3.0 
1.3 


1,477 
109.1 

482 

67.4 

26.7 

3.8 

1.1 

1.0 


1.366 
153.9 

1,088 

20.4 

43.0 

27.6 

7.0 

1.8 


761 
482.9 

543 

28.7 
37.0 
24.0 
7.2 
3.2 




Average size of farm acres . . 

Farms reporting 

tractors farms (000) - . 

Percentage of farms reporting by 
number of tractors reported: 
No tractors .. .percent. . 

1 tractor.. percent. . 

2 tractors percent.. 

3 tractors percent.. 

4 or more tractors. ..percent.. 


798.2 
275 

35.0 

38.4 

16.2 

6.1 

4.4 



in Economic Class I, and lowest (21) in the residential group. 
Generally, when the farms were grouped by economic class the 
crop acres per tractor declined as sales per farm decreased. This 
relationship was less evident in the Eastern and Southern States 
than it was in the other three regions. 



Table 3. — Number of Farms, and Farms ReportingJand 
Number of Field Tractors, by Size of Farm, forithe 
United States: 1954 



3 7 a 



[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms 


Field tractors 


Size of farm 




Farms reporting 


Number of tractors 




Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
distri- 
bution 


Num- 
ber 

(000) 


Percent 
of all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
(all farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
reporting 


Total 


4,806 


100.0 


2,784 


67.9 


4,375 


0.9 


1 6 






Under 10 acres 

10 to 29 acres 


489 
719 
497 
348 
519 
492 


10.2 
15.0 
10.4 
7.2 
10.8 
10.2 

9.6 
5.4 
4.4 
10.2 
4.0 
2.7 


61 
174 
190 
163 
322 
358 

388 
220 
183 
434 
176 
115 


12.5 
24.3 
38.2 
46.8 
62.0 
72.8 

83.7 

84.7 
87.2 
89.0 
92.1 
87.7 


66 
192 
212 
185 
399 
487 

576 
351 
314 
841 
358 
394 


.1 
.3 
.4 

.5 
.8 
1.0 

1.2 
1.4 
1.5 
1.7 
1.9 
3.0 


1.0 


30 to 49 acres 




50 to 69 acres... 




70 to 99 acres... 




100 to 139 acres 


1.4 


140 to 179 acres 

180 to 219 acres 

220 to 2S9 acres 

260 to 499 acres 

500 to 999 acres 

1,000 acres and over.. 


463 

259 
210 
488 
191 
131 


1.5 
1.6 
1.7 
1.9 
2.0 
3.4 



74 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Table 4. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Field Tractors, by Tenure of Operator, for 
the United States: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms 


Field tractors 


Tenure of operator 




Farms reporting 


Number of tractors 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
distri- 
bution 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
of all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
(all farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
reporting 


Total 


4,806 


100.0 


2,784 


57.9 


4,345 


0.9 


1.6 








2,761 

872 

22 

1,151 
160 
165 

717 

110 


57.4 

18.1 

.5 

23.9 
3.3 
3.4 

14.9 

2.3 


1,455 

700 

18 

611 
73 
152 

343 

42 


52.7 
80.3 
SO. 9 

53.1 

45.7 
92.2 

47.9 

38.7 


2,022 

1,269 

61 

992 
114 
269 

546 

64 


.7 
1.5 
2.7 

.9 

.7 
1.6 

.8 

.6 


1.4 




1.8 




3.4 




1.6 


Cash tenants 
Share-cash tenants 
Shire tenants and 

croppers.. 

Other and unspec- 
ified tenants — 


1.6 
1.8 

1.6 

1.5 



Table 5. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Field Tractors, by Economic Class of Farm, 
for the United States: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms 


Field tractors 


Economic class 
of farm 




Farms reporting 


Number of tractors 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
distri- 
bution 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
of all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 

(all 
farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
reporting 


Total.. 


4,806 


100.0 


2,784 


57.9 


4,345 


0.9 


1 6 






Commercial farms. . . 
Class I 

Class II.. 


3,352 
136 
443 
726 
821 
769 
458 

1,453 


69.8 

2.8 

9.2 

15.1 

17.1 

16.0 

9.5 

30.2 


2,377 
122 
410 
648 
620 
430 
146 
407 


70.9 
90.4 
92.5 
89.3 
75.5 
55.9 
31.8 
28.0 


3,895 
418 
896 

1,059 
839 
513 
169 
450 


1.2 

3.1 

2.0 

1.5 

1.0 

.7 

.4 

.3 


1.6 
3.4 
2 2 


Class III. 


1 6 


Class IV 


1.4 


Class V... 


1.2 


Class VI. 


1.2 




1.1 







Table 6.— PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF ALL FARMS, AND NUMBER OF FIELD TRACTORS, BY ECONOMIC CLASS 

OF FARM, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 







[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms 


. See text] 












United States 


Area 


Economic class of farm 


All farms 


Field 
tractors 


Eastern 


Southern 


Central 


Great Plains 


Western 




All farms 


Field 
tractors 


All farms 


Field 
tractors 


All farms 


Field 
tractors 


All farms 


Field 
tractors 


A 11 farms 


Field 
tractors 


Total 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 








69.8 

2.8 

9.2 

15.1 

17.1 

16.0 

9.5 

30.2 


89.6 
9.6 
20.6 
24.4 
19.3 
11.8 
3.9 
10.4 


61.2 

2.2 

8.0 

12.2 

14.1 

15.0 

9.7 

38.8 


83.9 
7.9 
19.9 
21.7 
18.0 
12.2 
4.2 
16.1 


62.2 

1.1 

2.7 

6.7 

15.4 

21.2 

15.0 

37.8 


82.8 
9.7 
10.2 
14.7 
21.1 
19.0 
8.2 
17.2 


79.8 
2.7 
14.1 
23.1 
20.0 
13.7 
6.1 
20.2 


92.0 
6.1 
24.2 
28.9 
19.7 
10.3 
2.8 
8.0 


75.4 
3.5 
11.3 

19.6 
19.4 
13.8 
7.9 
24.6 


93.5 
8.9 
20.7 
27.3 
21.6 
11.4 
3.6 
6.5 


69.2 
9.1 
14.7 
15.7 
14.8 
10.9 
4.0 
30.8 


89.7 


Class I 


25.5 


Class II 


22.5 


Class III 


18.5 


Class IV 


12.8 


Class V . 


8.0 


Class VI 


2.4 




10.3 







Table 7— PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF ALL FARMS, AND NUMBER OF FIELD TRACTORS, BY TENURE OF OPER- 
ATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





United States 


Area 


Tenure of operator 


All 
farms 


Field 
tractors 


Eastern 


Southern 


Central 


Great Plains 


Western 




All 
farms 


Field 
tractors 


All 
farms 


Field 
tractors 


All 
farms 


Field 
tractors 


All 
farms 


Field 
tractors 


All 
farms 


Field 
tractors 


Total 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 








57.4 
18.1 
0.5 

23.9 
3.3 
3.4 

14.9 
2.3 


46.5 

29.2 

1.4 

22.8 
2.6 
6.2 

12.6 
1.5 


72.6 
14.7 
0.5 

12.3 
2.3 

0.4 
7.6 
2.0 


62.3 

25.5 

1.7 

10.5 
2.2 
0.6 
6.2 
1.5 


52.7 
13.2 

0.4 

33.7 
3.7 
0.5 

26.6 
2.9 


48.3 

26.8 

2.9 

22.1 
2.7 
1.0 

16.3 
2.0 


58.8 
19.0 
0.3 

21.9 
3.1 
6.5 

10.3 
1.9 


48.1 

24.8 

0.7 

26.4 
2.8 
9.0 

13.2 
1.4 


43.4 

28.5 
0.5 

27.6 
4.1 
8.0 

12.9 
2.5 


31.7 

39.3 

0.9 

28.2 
2.2 
10.3 
14.4 
1.4 


67.1 

20.2 

1.0 

11.7 
3.2 
1.1 
5.8 
1.6 


48.3 




33.5 




2.9 




15.2 




3.0 




1.9 




9.2 




1.2 







FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



75 



AUTOMOBILES ON FARMS 



The first automobiles used on farms bore little resemblance 
to those of today. Relatively little horsepower was developed 
by the engines which were started manually with a crank. Tires 
consisted of a fabric body covered with a thin layer of rubber. 
They required frequent repair and had a short life. In many 
areas, especially in the Northern States, use of early automobiles 
was confined largely to the summer months because of bad roads 
and hard starting. Under most conditions, however, travel time 
was reduced greatly over travel by use of horses or mules. 

By 1920, there were 2,146,000 automobiles on farms, or an 
average of 1 car for each 3 farms. Few farmers had trucks at 
that time and the automobile was used for hauling farm produce 
and supplies as well as for pleasure. Rural travel by automobile 
was largely over unsurfaced roads because in 1920 only 13 per- 
cent of the rural roads were hard-surfaced. 

By 1930, many improvements had been made in automobiles 
and automobile tires. The mileage of improved roads had in- 
creased, and the number of automobiles on farms was nearly 
double the number reported in 1920. 

From 1930 to 1954 the number of automobiles on farms in- 
creased only 12S,000 making a total of 4,263,000 in November 
1954. At that time, there was an average of one automobile for 
each 1.1 farms, but many farms had more than 1. 

Although the increase in automobile numbers between 1930 
and 1954 was small, it did occur while the number of farms was 
decreasing from 6.3 million to 4.8 million. 

Rural highway improvement continued steadily and by 1954, 
63 percent of the mileage was hard-surfaced. Truck numbers on 
farms have increased, but automobiles still are used to some 
extent to pull trailers and for hauling small amounts of produce 
and supplies. 

The 4,263,000 automobiles on farms in 1954 were distributed 
over the country in varying degrees of concentration. Heavy 
concentrations were evident in States where a high percentage 
of the land was used for crop production and where farm homes 
were concentrated. Comparatively few automobiles were re- 
ported in much of the western Plains and Mountain regions where 
ranches and farms are large, and in localized eastern and south- 
ern areas where farm population is sparse. 



AUTOMOBILES ON FARMS 

NUMBER. 1954 




The four Corn Belt States, Indiana, Iowa, Illinois, and Ohio, 
have a remarkably even distribution and a heavy concentration 
of automobiles. In Nevada, Arizona, and New Mexico relatively 
few farm automobiles were reported in 1954. 

FARMS REPORTING AUTOMOBILES 

The number of farms in the United States reporting automobiles 
has increased and declined during several Census periods, due to 
several factors. The period 1920 to 1930 was the only period in 
which a really large increase occurred. Farm incomes were good 
in the latter half of the decade and the number of farms with 
automobiles increased rapidly. The low-income years in the first 
half of the decade between 1930 and 1940, along with some re- 
duction in the number of farms caused a decline during that 
period in the number of farms with automobiles. With farm 
incomes rising after 1940, and despite some further reduction in 
the number of farms, number of farms with automobiles in- 
creased until in 1945 the number was about the same as in 1930. 
From 1945 to 1950, the decline in number of farms with auto- 
mobiles was noteworthy. Contributing to this decline was a 
further marked reduction in the number of farms. The number 
of farms with automobiles reported in 1954 is substantially the 
same as the number reported in 1950. 

Regional changes during the different periods followed the pat- 
tern of change for the United States, with the exception of the 
Corn Belt, where the number of farms reporting automobiles in- 
creased between 1930 and 1940. More than a fifth of all the 
farms reporting automobiles in the United States in 1954 were 
in this area. 

The greatest reduction between 1945 and 1954 in the number 
of farms reporting automobiles occurred in the Northeast States 
where the decrease in the number of all farms was greater than 
in the remaining States. Farmers in the Appalachian, Southeast, 
and Delta States did not acquire automobiles as rapidly as those 
in other areas, but the trend in numbers has been upward since 
1940. In the Northern and Southern Plains States, where con- 
solidation of farms into larger units has been most pronounced, 
the trend by 10-year intervals in number of farms reporting 
iiutomobiles has been downward since 1940. 

Almost a third of the farms in the United States reported no 
automobiles in 1954. Farms with no automobiles are usually 
small, low-income places, and sometimes are located in rough 
places not readily accessible to improved roads. Some of them 
are operated by elderly folks who no longer drive an automobile. 
Some are farmers who use a pick-up truck for farm and family 
transportation. Such farms without automobiles were reported 
in all five areas shown on the map for 1954. They were espe- 
cially numerous in the southern area, and considerable numbers 
were in the eastern area. 

Of the farms reporting automobiles, more than 80 percent had 
1, and the other farms had 2 or more. Farms reporting two or 
more automobiles are most numerous in the central area, and 
least numerous in the southern area. 



76 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING AUTOMOBILES FOR THE 
UNITED STATES AND AREAS, 1920-1954 



Thousonda 




1920 1930 1940 1945 1950 195 



A-54 -369 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING 0.1,2. AND 3 OR MORE AUTOMOBILES 
FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 




FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



77 



NUMBER OF AUTOMOBILES, BY SIZE OF FARM 

About 70 percent of all farms in the United States reported 
one or more automobiles in 1954. Although the larger farms 
had more automobiles per farm than did the small farms, the 
distribution of automobiles by size of farm is governed to some 
extent by the number of farms in each size group. For ex- 
ample, because of the preponderance of the smaller farms, or 
those of less than 100 acres, this group had a larger proportion 
of all automobiles in 1954 than any other size group. Although 
many small farms of less than 50 acres do not have an auto- 
mobile, there are so many of them that, as a group, they reported 
27 percent of all automobiles on farms in 1954. 

The eastern and southern areas of the country with many 
small farms reported more than a third of all of the automo- 
biles on farms, and the rich agricultural Central States re- 
ported another third. 



NsT 


-^^ NUMBER OF AUTOMOBILES ON FARMS BY SIZE OF FARM. 






^~~~Tr——I9f^ 


THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS 


, 1954 




J 1 f>£j- j/ £^ 




^X" 


|grEat| \^ 1 






I ^^1 central! 




/#V~ 


IPLAI N s\- 0$m \ 1 I J 


jsM^W 




/5sy 


d C~i i ^'" ^' L**~^\*$ 


ERN^T 


Sv 




[740.620 \ If S0UTH,ERJ1^ 


? 








~~]gr-> 


'^t 


«t«» 


Mwm 




_e^«__ j^ 


', 


g = 


-— ■- 




^UNITED STATES 


-,».—..-, 


MM 


^~J wa.at.ni 


«»« m cm 



In the western area, farms of less than 30 acres, and those of 
more than 1,000 acres reported half of all automobiles on farms 
in that area. This region contains large numbers of fruit and 
truck farms, many of which are small in acreage, but are inten- 
sively operated and consistently are well equipped with automo- 
biles aud some types of farm machinery. 

NUMBER OF AUTOMOBILES, BY TENURE OF 
FARM OPERATOR 

Well over half of the automobiles on farms in the United 
States in 1954 were on farms operated by full owners, and 80 
percent were reported by full owners, part owners, and managers. 
Tenants of all classes reported 20 percent of the total number. 
Share tenants and croppers accounted for about half of the 
automobiles on tenant-operated farms. 



N3r^ 


NUMBER OF AUTOMOBILES ON FARMS BY TENURE OF OPERATOR. 






7T -^__F0RTHE UNITED STATES AND AREAS. 1954 






/~~~~^~y 


M r r ' 1 G RE4T \ 7 








"7 T 1 ^JCENTMU 




ff , 7 ^ ~ J -r L a ' N A— J|\ 


7^~^Jt» 










r / J j*^\ ) 1 l«s. T 3^f / -r- 






^\\ 


> / rn^iTi — y^^S^- 








f ii /-~ 


659^9 


\0k 






ms iwj cnornns \ w^ L 


- UNITED STATES 

\ 1 4,262,785 




V 







NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING I, 2, AND 3 OR MORE AUTOMOBILES BY 
TENURE FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 







1 AUTOMOBILE 

2 AUTOMOBILES 

3 OB MORE 



78 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Full-owner and part-owner operated farms are the dominant 
tenure types in all five regions. Share-tenant and cropper oper- 
ated farms reporting automobiles are especially numerous in the 
Southern and Great Plains regions. 

Only about one-ninth of the automobiles on farms in the 
western area were on farms operated by tenants. 

A large share of the farms reporting 1, 2, and 3 or more auto- 
mobiles were operated by full owners and part owners, the two 
most important tenure classes in the United States, in 4 of the 
5 regions. In the Southern area share-tenant and cropper farms 
having one automobile each exceed the number of part-owner 
farms having automobiles. 

NUMBER OF AUTOMOBILES, BY ECONOMIC 
CLASS OF FARM 

Of the 4.3 million automobiles on farms in 1954, three-quarters 
of them were on commercial farms and one-quarter was on non- 
commercial farms. Economic Classes I to IV contain farms 
reporting sales of products of $2,500 or more per farm in 1954. 
This group contains 44 percent of all farms and reported 57 
percent of all automobiles on farms. Many of the farms in the 
lower economic classes reported no automobiles, and relatively 
few of those reporting automobiles had more than one. 

Farms in Economic Class I, or those with $25,000 or more in 
value of products sold in 1954, had the largest proportion of 
farms reporting 2 and 3 or more automobiles per farm in the 
United States. As the value of farm products sold declined the 
proportion of farms having more than one automobile declined. 
Generally, the farms in the higher economic classes were larger, 
employed more labor, and had greater need for more than one 
automobile than did the farms in the lower economic classes. 



Relatively few of the part-time and residential farms reported 
more than one automobile. 

The number of farms with automobiles and the number with 
2 and 3 or more per farm are heavily concentrated in the Central 
States. In all regions a considerable proportion of the farms 
in the higher economic classes and in the part-time class reported 
more than one automobile. In all areas very few farms in 
Economic Class VI, the lowest commercial farm class, reported 
more than one automobile. 

Table 8. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Automobiles, by Size of Farm, for the United 
States: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 








All farms 


Automobiles 




Num- 
ber 
(OOfl) 


Percent 
distri- 
bution 


Farms reporting 


Number of automobiles 


Size of farm 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
of all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 

(all 
farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
report- 
ing 


Total 


4,806 


100.0 


3,396 


70.7 


4,272 


0.9 


1.3 






tinder 10 acres 

10 to 29 acres 

30 to 49 acres 


4S9 
719 
497 
348 
519 
492 

463 

259 
210 
488 
191 
131 


10.2 
15.0 
10.4 
7.2 
10.8 
10.2 

9.6 
5.4 

4.4 
10.2 
4.0 
2.7 


300 
404 
300 
219 
359 
359 

372 

208 
174 
417 
168 
116 


61.3 
66.1 
60.3 
63.0 
69.2 
72.9 

80.3 
80.4 
83.2 
85.5 
87.8 
88.6 


343 
463 
344 
254 
418 
430 

454 

259 
222 
677 
265 
243 


.7 
.6 
.7 
.7 
.8 
.9 

1.0 

1.0 

1.1 

1.2 
1.4 
1.9 


1.1 
1.1 
1.1 


50 to 69 acres 


1.2 


70 to 99 acres 


1.2 


100 to 139 acres 

140 to 179 acres 

180 to 219 acres 

220 to 259 acres 

260 to 499 acres 

600 to 999 acres 

l,000acres and over. __ 


1.2 

1.2 
1.2 
1.3 
1.4 
1.6 
2.1 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING I, 2, AND 3 OR MORE AUTOMOBILES BY 
^ ECONOMIC CLASS FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 




Thou 


.on* 


/ 






l 


/ 


•V 


l 


|\ 


<L. 


1 


\ r 


' 




1 X 










\ 


4UU 


i 




330 




- 




JOG 








230 
200 


- 






1 








IOO 


| 






SO 






_ 






L£GEND 

1 AUTOMOBILE 

2 AUTOMOBILES 
IS 3 OR MORE 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



79 



Table 9. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Automobiles, by Tenure of Operator, for the 
United States: 1954 



[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 




All farms 


Automobiles 


Tenure of operator 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
distri- 
bution 


Farms report- 
ing 


Number of automobiles ' 




Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
of all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
(all farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
reporting 


Total 


4,806 


100.0 


3,396 


70.7 


4,263 


0.9 










2,761 

872 

22 

1,151 
160 

165 

717 

110 


57.4 

18.1 

.5 

23.9 
3.3 

3.4 

14.9 

2.3 


1,937 

690 

17 

751 
105 

148 

431 

67 


70.2 
79.2 
78.3 

65.2 
65.9 

89.6 

60.1 

61.4 


2,386 

938 

52 

886 
125 

180 

499 

83 


.9 
1.1 
2.4 

.8 
.8 

1.1 

.7 

.8 
















Cash tenants 
Share-cash ten- 


1.2 


Share tenants 
and croppers. .. 

Other and un- 
specified ten- 


1.2 







1 Estimates are based on a sample of approximately 20 percent of the farms. 



Table 10. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Automobiles, by Economic Class of Farm, for 
the United States and Areas: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms 


Automobiles 


Economic class 


Num- 
ber 

(000) 


Per- 
cent 
distri- 
bution 


Farms 
reporting 


Number of automobiles > 


of farm 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Per- 
cent of 

all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 

(all 
farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
report- 
ing 


Total.. 


4,806 


100.0 


3,396 


70.7 


4,263 


0.9 


1.3 




Commercial farms 

Class 1 


3,353 
136 
443 
726 
821 
769 
458 

1,453 


69.8 

2.8 

9.2 

15.1 

17.1 

16.0 

9.5 

30.2 


2,491 
127 
413 
631 
626 
486 
209 
905 


74.3 
93.9 
93.2 
86.9 
76.2 
63.2 
45.6 
62.3 


3,200 
305 
603 
774 
730 
558 
230 

1,062 


1.0 
2.3 
1.4 
1.1 
.9 
.7 
.5 
.7 


1.3 
2.4 
1.5 
1.2 
1.2 
1.1 
1.1 
1.2 


Class 11 


Class III 


Class IV 


Class V._ 


Class VI... 







' Estimates are based on a sample of approximately 20 percent of the farms. 



Table 11.— PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF ALL FARMS AND NUMBER OF AUTOMOBILES, BY ECONOMIC CLASS 

OF FARM, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





United States 


Area 


Economic class of farm 


All farms 


Automo- 
biles 


Eastern 


Southern 


Central 


Great Plains 


Western 




All farms 


Automo- 
biles 


All farms 


Automo- 
biles 


All farms 


Automo- 
biles 


All farms 


Automo- • 
biles 


All farms 


Automo- 
biles 


Total.... 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 




69.8 

2.8 

9.2 

15.1 

17.1 

16.0 

9.5 

30.2 


75.1 
7.2 
14.2 
18.2 
17.1 
13.1 
5.4 
24.9 


61.2 

2.2 

8.0 

12.2 

14.1 

15.0 

9.7 

38.8 


67.8 
6.4 
13.1 
15.2 
15.1 
12.7 
5.3 
32.2 


62.2 
1.1 
2,7 
6.7 

15.4 
21.2 
15.0 
37.8 


62.0 
4.6 
5.1 
8.9 

16.1 

18.0 
9.4 

38.0 


79.8 
2.7 
14.1 
23.1 
20.0 
13.7 
6.1 
20.2 


82.8 
4.8 
18.3 
24.0 
19.2 
12.2 
4.3 
17.2 


75.4 
3.5 
11.3 
19.6 
19.4 
13.8 
7.9 
24.6 


82.1 
6.7 
15.8 
22.5 
19.9 
12.3 
5.0 
17.9 


69.2 
9.1 
14.7 
15.7 
14.8 
10.9 
4.0 
30.8 


74.6 
19.9 


Class I 


Class II. 


Class III 




Class IV 




■Class V 




Class VI 













Table 12.— PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF ALL FARMS AND NUMBER OF AUTOMOBILES, BY TENURE OF 

OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





United States 


Area 


Tenure of operator 


All 
farms 


Automo- 
biles 


Eastern 


Southern 


Central 


Great Plains 


Western 




All 
farms 


Automo- 
biles 


All 
farms 


Automo- 
biles 


All 
farms 


Automo- 
biles 


All 
farms 


Automo- 
biles 


All 
farms 


Automo- 
biles 


Total 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 










57.4 

18.1 

.5 

23.9 
3.3 

3.4 
14.9 
2.3 


56.0 

22.0 

1.2 

20.8 
2.9 
4.2 

11.7 
1.9 


72.6 

14.7 

.6 

12.3 

2.3 

.4 

7.6 

2.0 


69.7 
18.2 
1.5 

10.6 
2.0 
.4 
6.3 
1.9 


62.7 

13.2 

.4 

33.7 

3.7 

.5 

26.6 
2.9 


55.0 
16.3 
1.5 

27.2 

3.2 

.6 

20.7 
2.7 


58.8 

19.0 

.3 

21.9 
3.1 
6.6 

10.3 
1.9 


56.3 

21.0 

.6 

22.0 
2.9 
6.8 

10.7 
1.6 


43.4 

28.5 

.5 

27.6 
4.1 
8.0 

12.9 
2.5 


40.0 

32.5 

.7 

26.7 
3.3 
8.9 

12.5 
2.1 


67.1 

20.2 

1.0 

11.7 
3.2 
1.1 
6.8 
1.6 





































80 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



MOTORTRUCKS ON FARMS 



Delivery of crops and livestock to market and of supplies to 
the farm always has been a sizable job. Before the motortruck 
became available, fat cattle, sheep, and even hogs were often 
driven on foot to local points of delivery. Horsedrawn wagons 
and sleds were used to haul crops to market and supplies back 
home. In the sparsely settled Plains region, it sometimes re- 
quired more than 1 day to deliver a load of produce. In that 
region and in other northern agricultural areas, bobsleds were 
used extensively to haul grain and other produce to market when 
snow covered the ground. In areas where rainfall was heavy, 
early dirt roads often became impassable for a team with a load 
of any size in spring and winter. 

The motortruck appealed to farmers. Although the mileage of 
improved roads in 1920 was small, and motortrucks were far 
from foolproof, there were 139,000 motortrucks on farms. The 
number continued to increase rapidly, even through the post World 
War I years of adjustment. Only during the severe depression 
years of the 1930's did number of motortrucks on farms decrease. 

In November 1954, farmers reported about 2.7 million trucks on 
their farms. These were widely distributed throughout the 
country. They were most numerous in areas where farms are 
numerous and in areas where a relatively large percentage of the 
total land area is in harvested crops. In most sections of the 
Corn Belt and in the southern portion of the Lake States, crop- 
land accounts for more than half of the total land. 

In these areas motortrucks are relatively numerous in relation 
to total land area. This is true also in some areas of the Ap- 
palachian and Northeast States, and in some of the irrigated 
and humid areas of the Pacific Coast States where farms tend 
to be small and where intensive crops are widely gTown. 

In the more arid areas, where farms are of large size and only 
a small percentage of the total land is in farms, there are rela- 
tively few motortrucks. Nevada, Wyoming, Utah, Arizona, and 
New Mexico, together had less than 3 percent of farm motor- 
trucks reported in November 1954. 



MOTORTRUCKS ON FARMS 

NUMBER. 1954 




From April 1950 to November 1954 total motortrucks on farms 
increased from 2.2 million to 2.7 million, or by 23 percent. In- 
creases were reported in all States except New York, Massa- 
chusetts, Maine, New Hampshire, and Rhode Island, where mod- 
erate decreases were reported. 

Counties reporting increases in numbers of motortrucks since 
the 1950 Census were numerous and widely distributed through- 
out the country. The pattern of increase by counties followed 
rather closely the pattern of total distribution of motortrucks. 
In the Northeast States, total numbers of motortrucks on farms 
changed but little from April 1950 to November 1954 and relatively 
few counties in this area reported increases in numbers of motor- 
trucks. In the more arid areas of the country, and in the north- 



ern portions of the Lake States truck numbers increased in many 
counties. 

Counties reporting declines in the number of motortrucks tend 
to be concentrated in the Northeast States. Scattering counties 
in other areas also reported declines in the number of motortrucks. 
In general the counties in which motortruck numbers declined 
from April 1950 to November 1954, had relatively large expansion 
in nonfarm population and farm consolidation. 



MOTORTRUCKS -INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IH NUMBER. 1950-1954 




FARMS REPORTING MOTORTRUCKS 

In 1920, only 132,000 of the 6,448,000 farms in the United 
States reported motortrucks. Since 1920, each Census has shown 
increases in the number of farms reporting motortrucks. From 
1920 to 1930 the increase in number of farms reporting motor- 
trucks occurred in all areas, and ranged from a low of about 400 
percent in the Northeast and Corn Belt States to more than 900 
percent in the Mississippi Delta, Southern Plains, and Lake 
States. 

During the years of relatively low prices and adjustment from 
1930 to 1940, numbers of farms with motortrucks increased mod- 
erately in all areas, except in the Lake States, Corn Belt, and 
Northeast. From 1940 to November 1954, farms reporting motor- 
trucks increased by 1,269,000, or by 134 percent. Of this increase, 
■13 percent occurred between 1945 and 1950. 

The pattern of increase in farms reporting motortrucks since 
1940 has varied widely in the different areas. Percentage in- 
creases in the Southeastern, Appalachian, and Mississippi Delta 
States, areas in which mechanization lagged for some time, have 
consistently been substantially above the average since 1940. In 
the Southern and Corn Belt areas, relative increases in numbers 
have been above average, and in the Pacific, Mountain, and Lake 
States increases since 1940 have been less than the average for 
all areas. In the Northeast States the number of farms reporting 
motortrucks has declined slightly since 1945. primarily because 
of large reductions in numbers of farms. 

MOTORTRUCKS PER FARM 

In November 1954, about 85 percent of the farms reporting 
motortrucks had only 1, and about 4 percent reported 3 or more. 
Number of motortrucks per farm is closely associated with size 
and type of farm business and distance to markets. In the areas 
east of the Mississippi River, few farms reported more than one 
motortruck. But in the Great Plains and Western areas where 
hauling distances are greater and where considerable quantities 
of grain, sugar beets, fruits, vegetables, and other cash crops are 
grown for sale, farms reporting two or more trucks were most 
numerous. In the western area, a fifth of the farms reporting 
motortrucks had 2 trucks, and 10 percent had 3 or more. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



81 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING MOTORTRUCKS FOR UNITED STATES 

AND AREAS: 1920-1954 




NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING 1.2.3 OR MORE MOTORTRUCKS 
FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS. 1954 




82 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



NUMBER OF MOTORTRUCKS, BY SIZE OF FARM 

About 46 percent of all farms reported one or more motor- 
trucks in 1954. Roughly, a third of the motortrucks reported 
were on farms of less than 100 acres in size, another third were 
on farms of 100 to 259 acres, and the remaining third were on 
farms of 260 acres or more in size. Almost a fifth of all motor- 
trucks were reported by farmers who were operating less than 
50 acres of land. The large number of farms of the smaller 
sizes is responsible for this group having such a high proportion 
of all motortrucks.. Frequency of motortrucks is dh-eetly re- 
lated to the size of farm. For example, in 1954, there were 
about 35 motortrucks on each 100 farms of less than 100 
acres, 60 motortrucks per hundred farms of 100 to 259 acres, 
and 120 per 100 farms of 260 or more acres. On a regional 
basis, motortrucks per 100 farms ranged from 40 in the southern 
area to 106 in the western area. The numbers reported include 
trucks of all ages and sizes that are on farms. Probably few of 
them have a rated capacity of more than 3 tons. Many of them 
are of 1%-ton rated capacity and some of them, especially those 
of the pickup type, have a rated capacity of one-half ton. 
Generally, the trucks of higher capacity are on the larger farms. 



NUMBER OF MOTORTRUCKS ON FARMS BY SIZE OF FARM. 




NUMBER OF MOTORTRUCKS, BY TENURE OF 
FARM OPERATOR 

In November 1954, farmers who own all the land they operate 
had half of the farm motortrucks, and full owners and part 
owners combined had about 80 percent of all motortrucks on 
farms. Tenants of all classes had 20 percent of the total number 
of motortrucks on farms. Share tenants and croppers had 
more than half of all motortrucks reported by tenants of all 
classes. Full owners and part owners are the dominant tenure 
classes in each of the five major areas, and, consequently, own 
a large proportion of farm motortrucks in each area. Motor- 
trucks owned by share tenants and croppers are especially 
numerous in the Southern area, although share tenants and 
croppers represent a significant part of motortruck owners in the 
other four areas, especially in the Central, Great Plains, and 
Western areas. 

Each of the tenure classes shown in the maps contained many 
small farms, many of which reported no motortrucks in 1954. 
Of the farms that reported motortrucks the number having only 
1 truck ranged from 78 percent for part owners to 89 percent 
for full owners. About 16 percent of the part owners had 2 
trucks each and percent had 3 or more trucks per farm. In 
the other 3 tenure groups combined, approximately 10 percent 
reported 2 trucks and 3 percent reported 3 or more. In each of 
the 5 regions, most of the farms having more than 1 truck were 
in the owner, part-owner, and share-tenant and cropper tenure 
groups. 



NUMBER OF MOTORTRUCKS ON FARMS BY TENURE OF OPERATOR. 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS. 1954 




NUMBER OF MOTORTRUCKS, BY ECONOMIC 
CLASS OF FARM 

Farms with a large volume of sales have substantially more 
motortrucks per 100 farms than do farms with a lesser volume 
of sales. For example, 90 percent of the farms in Economic 
Class I, those with farm sales of $25,000 or more, reported 1 or 
more motortrucks in 1954, whereas only 30 percent of the com- 
mercial farms in the lowest economic class reported motortrucks. 
In between these two extremes, the percentage of farms report- 
ing motortrucks by economic class declined as volume of sales 
decreased. This general pattern of relationship between volume 
of sale and number of farms reporting motortrucks exists for 
each of the five areas as well as for the United States. Because 
of the large numbers of small farms in the Southern and East- 
ern areas, relatively large numbers of commercial farms having 
sales of less than $1,200, part-time, and residential farms re- 
ported motortrucks. Many of the farms having motortrucks in 
these 3 economic classes reported only 1 truck. Most farms 
that reported 2 or 3 motortrucks were in the higher income 
economic class groups. Farms having more than one truck 
were relatively numerous in the Great Plains and Western re- 
gions, where large quantities of crops per farm and hauled to 
market. 



Table 13. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Motortrucks by Size of Farm, for the United 
States: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms 


Motortrucks 




Num- 


Percent 


Farms reporting 


Number of motortrucks 


Size of farm 














ber 


distri- 








Average 


Average 




(000) 


bution 


Num- 


Percent 


Total 


number 


number 








ber 


of all 


(000) 


per farm 


per farm 








(000) 


farms 




(all 
farms) 


report- 
ing 


Total 


4,806 


100.0 


2,217 


46.1 


2,720 


0.6 


1.2 








4S9 


10.2 


119 


24.2 


130 


.3 


1.1 


10 to 29 acres . 


719 
497 
348 


15.0 
10.4 
7.2 


184 
161 
126 


25.7 
32.4 
36.3 


202 
177 
139 


.3 

.4 
.4 


1.1 


30 to 49 acres .. 


1.1 


50 to 69 acres.. 


1.1 


70 to 99 acres.. 


519 


10.8 


219 


42.2 


240 


.5 


1.1 


100 to 139 acres 


492 


10.2 


238 


48.3 


266 


.5 


1.1 


140 to 179 acres. 


463 


9.6 


247 


53.4 


278 


.6 


1.1 


180 to 219 ac r es _. 


259 


5.4 


151 


58.3 


169 


.6 




1.1 


220 to 259 ac re s 


210 


4.4 


132 


63.1 


155 


.7 




1.2 


260 to 499 ac re s 


488 


10.2 


353 


72.3 


439 


.9 




1.2 


500 to 999 ac res 


191 


4.0 


166 


86.6 


247 


1.3 




1.5 


1,000 acres and over. - 


131 


2.7 


120 


91.8 


278 


2.1 




2.3 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



83 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING I, 2. AND 3 OR MORE MOTORTRUCKS BY 
TENURE FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 EASTERN 

CENTRAL 




A B C E F G SHARE-CASH TENANTS 

SHARE TENANTS AND 



LEGEHD 
MOTOR TRUCK 

2 MOTOR TRUCKS 

3 MOTOR TRUCKS 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING I, 2, AND 3 OR MORE MOTORTRUCKS BY 
ECONOMIC CLASS FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 




LEGEND 

1 MOTORTRUCK 

2 MOTORTRUCKS 

3 OR MORE 



84 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Table 14. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Motortrucks, by Tenure of Operator, for 
the United States: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms 


Motortrucks 




Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
distri- 
bution 


Farms reporting 


Number of motortrucks ' 


Tenure of operator 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
of all 

farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
pel farm 

(all 
farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
report- 
ing 


Total 


4,806 


100.0 


2,217 


46.1 


2,703 


0.6 


1.2 








2,761 

872 

22 

1,151 
160 

165 

717 

110 


67.4 

18.1 

.5 

23.9 
3.3 

3.4 

14.9 

2.3 


1,178 

571 

16 

452 
67 

92 

255 

38 


42.7 
65.5 
71.0 

39.3 
41.9 

55.7 

35.6 

34.6 


1,364 
772 
47 

519 

81 

107 
286 

46 


.5 

.9 

2.1 

.5 
.5 

.6 

.4 

.4 


1.2 




1.4 




3.0 




1.1 


Cash tenants 

Share-cash ten- 


1.2 
1.2 


Share tenants 
and croppors... 

Other and un- 
specified ten- 


1.1 
1.2 







i Estimates are based on a sample of approximately 20 percent of the farms. 



Table 15. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Motortrucks, by Economic Class of Farm, for 
the United States: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See textl 





All farms 


Motortrucks 


Economic class 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Per- 
cent 
distri- 
bution 


Farms report- 
ing 


Number of motortrucks ' 


of farm 


Num- 
ber 

(000) 


Per- 
cent of 

all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 

(all 
farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
report- 
ing 


Total 


4,806 


100.0 


2,217 


46.1 


2,703 


0.6 


1.2 






Commercial farms. - - 
Class 1 


3,353 
136 
443 
726 
821 
769 
458 

1,453 


69.8 

2.8 

9.2 

15.1 

17.1 

16.0 

9.5 

30.2 


1,778 
121 
347 
458 
410 
305 
137 
438 


53.0 
89.2 
78.4 
63.1 
50.0 
39.6 
29.9 
30.2 


2,223 
284 
477 
530 
454 
334 
144 
479 


.7 
2.1 
1.1 
.7 
.6 
.4 
.3 
.3 


1.3 
2.3 


Class II.. 


1.4 


Class III 


1.2 


Class IV 


1.1 


Class V 


1.1 


Class VI 


1.0 




1.1 







' Estimates are based on a sample of approximately 20 percent of the farms. 



Table 16.— PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF ALL FARMS, AND NUMBER OF MOTORTRUCKS, BY ECONOMIC CLASS 

OF FARM, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 



Economic class of farm 



Total.. 

Commercial farms 

Class I. 

Class II 

Class III 

Class IV 

Class V 

Class VI 

Other farms 



United States 



All 

farms 



100.0 



69.8 

2.8 

9.2 

15.1 

17.1 

16.0 

9.5 

30.2 



Motor- 
trucks 



100.0 



82.3 
10.5 
17.7 
19.6 
16.8 
12.4 
5.3 
17.7 



Area 



Eastern 



All 

farms 



100.0 



61.2 
2.2 
8.0 
12.2 
14.1 
15.0 
9.7 
38.8 



Motor- 
trucks 



100.0 



77.2 
9.5 
17.2 
17.6 
15.4 
12.3 
5.3 
22.8 



Southern 



All 
farms 



100.0 



62.2 

1.1 

2.7 

6.7 

15.4 

21.2 

15.0 

37.8 



Motor- 
trucks 



100.0 



71.9 
6.1 
7.2 
11.2 
17.4 
19.2 
10.8 
28.1 



Central 



All 
farms 



100.0 



79.8 
2.7 
14.1 
23.1 
20.0 
13.7 
6.1 
20.2 



Motor- 
trucks 



100.0 



88.2 
6.8 
23.0 
26.2 
18.4 
10.5 
3.3 
11.8 



Great Plains 



All 
farms 



100.0 



75.4 
3.5 
11.3 
19.6 
19.4 
13.8 
7.9 
24.6 



Motor- 
trucks 



100.0 



87.8 
9.1 
19.9 
24.2 
19.2 
11.0 
4.3 
12.2 



Western 



All 
farms 



100.0 



69.2 
9.1 
14.7 
15.7 
14.8 
10.9 
4.0 
30.8 



Motor- 
trucks 



loo.o 



84.2 
24.9 
20.7 
16.3 
11.8 
7.9 
2.5 
15.8 



Table" 17.— PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF ALL FARMS, AND NUMBER OF MOTORTRUCKS, BY 

OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 


TENURE OF 






United States 


Area 


Tenure of operator 


All farms 


Motor- 
trucks 


Eastern 


Southern 


Central 


Great Plains 


Western 




All farms 


Motor- 
trucks 


All farms 


Motor- 
trucks 


All farms 


Motor- 
trucks 


All farms 


Motor- 
trucks 


All farms 


Motor- 
trucks 


Total 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 


100.0 








Full owners 


57.4 

18.1 

.5 

23.9 
3.3 
3.4 

14.9 
2.3 


60.5 

28.6 

1.7 

19.2 
3.0 
4.0 

10.6 
1.7 


72.6 
14.7 

.5 

12.3 
2.3 

.4 
7.6 
2.0 


65.6 

23.8 

1.8 

8.8 
2.1 
.4 
4.7 
1.5 


52.7 

13.2 

.4 

33.7 
3.7 

.5 

26.6 

2.9 


54.7 

22.4 

1.8 

21.1 
3.4 

.8 
14.6 
2.4 


58.8 

19.0 

.3 

21.9 
3.1 
6.5 

10.3 
1.9 


51.2 

25.5 

.8 

22.5 
2.8 
7.0 

11.3 

1.5 


43.4 

28.5 

.5 

27.6 
4.1 
8.0 

12.9 
2.5 


35.0 

39.0 

1.0 

25.1 
3.1 
7.9 

12.4 
1.7 


67.1 

20.2 

1.0 

11.7 
3.2 
1.1 
5.8 
1.6 


49.8 


Part owners 


32.3 




4.1 


AU tenants 


13.8 


Cash tenants... _ _ 


3.4 




1.6 




7.6 


Other and unspecified tenants 


1.3 







FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



85 



ELECTRIC POWER ON FARMS 



Extension of electric distribution lines to almost every farm 
in the United States is one of the outstanding achievements in- 
cident to rural progress and farm mechanization. According 
to estimates made by Edison Electric Institute, only about 100,000 
farmers had central-station electric service in 1920, and these 
made little use of the power outside of their homes. During the 
next 15 years electric service was extended to about 644,000 
more farms which meant that about 11 percent of the farms 
had such service. In 1936, the Rural Electrification Administra- 
tion was formed and distribution systems were extended in 
rural areas much more rapidly. 

By 1945 almost half of our farms were electrified and during 
the next 5 years, electric power suppliers were busy constructing 
additional facilities to serve the people in rural areas. Almost 
1.5 million more farms were connected during these 5 years 
making a total of 77 percent of the farms with electric service. 

From 1950 to the present time effort to extend electric service 
to all farms has continued. Distribution systems have been 
extended across the Great Plains where the density of con- 
sumers is low. The service has been expanded in low-income 
areas so that electric power would be available to all people 
for electric lights and refrigeration, and other kinds of modern 
equipment. According to estimates made by Rural Electrifica- 
tion Administration more than 4.5 million farms, or 94.2 percent 
of the total had central-station electric service on June 30, 1956. 
In addition to these there were some farms with home generat- 
ing plants. 

Electricity on the farm is used almost exclusively at the farm- 
stead but it is used for three very important purposes, namely, 
lights, heat, and motive power. It has revolutionized the farm 
home and made it possible for the farm family to have as modern 
a home as urban families. For farmwork it is applied to a wide 
variety of jobs, especially on dairy and poultry farms. Push- 
button farming still is a long way off, but electric power has done 
much to reduce costs and increase labor efficiency in farming and 
in the home. 

Electricity is now generally used by farms of all types, sizes, 
economic classes, and tenures of operator. Almost 90 percent 



of the share tenants and croppers and about 83 percent of the 
farms of Economic Class VI reported electric service in 1954. 
Most of the farms that remain unserved are in parts of the 
Southern States and in some of the sparsely settled sections of 
the Mountain area. 

By 1950 about 90 percent of all the farms in the Northeast, Lake 
States, Corn Belt, and Pacific States were receiving electric serv- 
ice. In the Great Plains and Southern States farms receiving 
electric service continued to increase substantially after 1950. 
On a county basis, decreases after 1950 in number of farms re- 
ceiving electric service occurred in widely distributed counties, 
which were largely concentrated in the Northeast and Central 
States. These reductions were caused by reductions in the num- 
ber of farms between the two Census dates, and not by the dis- 
continuance of service by farmers. In some localities the num- 
ber of rural consumers has actually increased while the number 
of farm consumers has decreased. This has come about because 
many urban workers and others have moved to small rural places 
in the country which, by definition, are not classified as farms. 



FARMS REPORTING ELECTRICITY-INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




UNTIED STATES NET INCREASE 
235.012 OR 5 6 PERCENT 



i of«Ti«»t c* mwttcc 



PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING ELECTRICITY, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 
PERCENT 

i 1 UNDER 60 SS3 90 TO 94 

^^60 TO 79 HI 90 AND OVER 

E£ffij 60 TO 69 
• NO FARMS 

US DEPARTMENT Of COMMERCE 



MAP MO tMOU 



BUREAU Of THE CENSUS 



86 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



HORSES AND MULES 



Horses were first brought to this country by early explorers 
of the 17th century. Their number in the United States increased 
rapidly and continuously with the growth of the new Nation 
until 1918 when the number of horses and mules on farms and 
in cities, mines, and elsewhere reached a peak of about 30 million 
head. In a way, the most important result of modern mechaniza- 
tion has been the displacement of about 85 percent of this vast 
number of horses and mules by mechanical power. The change 
from animal to mechanical power on farms and elsewhere, in- 
volving a decrease of more than 25 million head of horses and 
mules has diverted about 80 million acres of cropland and much 
pasture from production of horse and mule feed to the production 
of food and fiber for human use. Crop acreages thus released 
between 1918 and 1956 now produce a large share of the food 
and fiber used to feed and clothe our larger population. Eighty 
million acres is about a fourth of the total acres of crops har- 
vested in recent years. Annual colt crops, which from 1910 to 
1920 usually exceeded 2 million head, have declined to less than 
100,000 head. This number is not sufficient to maintain present 
numbers of horses and mules on farms. However, there are only 



about 4 million head now on farms, and we can no longer look 
to disappearance of horses and mules to supply many additional 
acres for food production. 

When farming was done with animal power, horses were used 
primarily in the northern and western farming areas, and mules 
were used principally in the Southern States. The horse num- 
bers were most dense in the Central and Lake States where large 
acreages were in corn and other row crops that required several 
cultivations during the growing season. The general pattern of 
horse and mule numbers changed markedly between 1920 and 
1954. Density is much thinner throughout the country now than 
it was in 1920, although numbers of horses and mules still are 
relatively dense in the Southeastern States. In 1954, about 37 
percent of all horses and mules in the United States were in the 
Appalachian and Southern areas, compared with only 14 percent 
in 1920. From April 1950 to November 1954, horse and mule 
numbers decreased throughout the country, although increases 
were reported in a few counties in Colorado, New Mexico, and 
Arizona. 




FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



87 



MULES 

(EXCLUDING COLTS AND YEARLINGS. INCLUDING MULES IN CITIES AND VILLAGES) 



MULES ON FARMS JAN. 1, 1920 

(TWO YEARS OLD AND OVCR| 



fa 

li... 

AL, 
0U. 



tutu* 



774.517 
399,801 

288.971 
287.939 
285.838 
26S.133 
295.455 



N. C 
K> 
5 C 
U 

l.o. 



NUMMR 



746.212 
245.717 
715.712 
172.347 
IS7.402 
113.271 
88.042 
72.162 



NL'MHEA 



N,6f 
C.W 
lo». 
f. 

tl. 
Md 
Obi. 
Colo . 



69.643 
S2.46I 
51.205 
49.386 
40.997 
30.033 
25.495 
23.123 



NUMBER JAN. 1. 1920 




EACH DOT REPRESENTS 
2.000 HEAD 




". . • •".'•:S'.'-\.>.>.. - v • ••'/.'•: •;•, . 



MULES ON FARMS— Conllnucd 



W V. 
0rt| 



NUMBER 



19.549 
16.104 
13.286 
11.171 



S.1S3| 111 



ITiti OK WIS U« 


1920 


iCnntiniud) 


STAIE 


NUN9U 


IHIIU 
• 1114 


Moil 


1.046 


SIM 


II . 


6.615 


168 


N Dili. 


6.374 


108 


U.bo. 


S.927 


III 


N.J... 


5.392 


1(0 


M.ib .. 


S.165 


117 


w„ . . 


3.(13 


lit 


w„ . . . 


2.578 


114 


1 'lib . . . 


1.740 


82 


....... 


1.602 


83 


Conn 


129 


160 


Vl . . . . 


544 


IS7 


Mt 


387 


1(8 


Mui 


310 


131 


N H .. 


227 


143 


11 ... 


70 


122 


U. S . . . . 


4.651.694 


154 1 



HORSES AND MULES 

NUMBER. 1954 




HORSES AND MULES BY TYPE AND ECONOMIC 
CLASS OF FARM 

Of the 1.8 million farms reporting horses and mules in Novem- 
ber 1954, 80 percent reported having only 1 or 2 head. These 
were reported in all five areas, but were especially numerous in 
the southern area. Certainly the horses and mules on these 
farms play a very minor role in our present day agricultural 
production. Farms with three or more horses or mules were rel- 
atively numerous in the Southern, Great Plains, and Western 
areas. Large proportions of the farms having two or more head 
were cotton farms in the southern region, and livestock other 
than dairy or poultry farms in the Great Plains and Western 



HORSES AND MULES -INCREASE AND DECREASE 
IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




regions where forage crops and range lands are prevalent. Many 
dairy farms in the Central and Eastern States still have one or 
more horses or mules. 

Some farms in each economic class, including those with sales 
of $25,000 or over reported horses and/or mules. Many of these 
animals are saddle horses, or old animals which will not be re- 
placed as they die off. This is true in all five areas shown. How- 
ever, very few farmers in any class group, in any region, reported 
more than 1 or 2 animals. It is apparent from the wide distribu- 
tion of the 4 million head of horses and mules among all farm 
types, economic classes, and size-of-farm groups that few com- 
mercial farmers depend to any great extent on animal power for 
farmwork. 



88 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING DIFFERENT NUMBER OF HORSES AND MULES 
BY TYPE OF FARM. FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 




NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING DIFFERENT NUMBERS OF HORSES AND 
MULES BY ECONOMIC CLASS; UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 




^^^^" 


./-' 




^i ^ 


'25 


C— 


j— «- 


IOC 


VI 

i 


1* 




- B 


\ 




1 




2& 


.il 





LEGEND 
11 1-2 HORSES G MULES 
|^|| 3-5 MORSES G MULES 
] 6<« MORE 



S *> t> b *i 9 & $ & 






FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



89 



DISPLACEMENT OF WORK STOCK BY MOTOR 
VEHICLES 

After the coming of the gas tractor, year after year more and 
more farmers gradually disposed of all work stock. Yet, as late 
as 1940, only 4 percent of all farmers reported tractors and no 
horses or mules. By November 1954, the number of farms re- 
porting tractors only, had increased to 38 percent of all farms. 
Another large group of farmers having tractors still retained 
some horses or mules. This group constituted about one-fifth 
of all farms in both 1940 and 1954. Together, these 2 groups of 
what may be called tractor farms comprised 58 percent of all 
farms in 1954 compared with 23 percent in 1940. The remaining 
42 percent were farms with horses or mules only, or farms with- 
out tractors, or horses or mules, as shown by the following data : 

1940 1954 
Percentage of all farms reporting tractors and 

(no horses and/or mules 4 38 
Percentage of all farms reporting both tractors 
and horses and/or mules 19 20 
Percentage of all farms reporting horses and/or 

mules but no tractors 53 17 

Percentage of all farms reporting no tractors 
and no horses and/or mules 24 25 

Farms with tractors and no work stock were most heavily con- 
centrated in the better agricultural areas where much of the 
land is suited for crop production and where land values per 
farm are high. Such areas in the Western States predominate in 
the intensive dairy-, fruit-, and vegetable-producing areas. In 
the East, tractor farms with no horses or mules are most nu- 
merous in the Corn Belt and Lake States areas, and in western 
New York, southeastern Pennsylvania, and the New Jersey, Mary- 
land, and Virginia vegetable-growing areas. Parts of the Mis- 
sissippi Delta and eastern Great Plains areas reported large 
numbers of tractor farms with no horses or mules. Farms with 



FARMS WITH TRACTOR AND NO HORSES OR MULES 

NUM3ER. 1954 




tractors and work stock in 1954 were well scattered throughout 
the agricultural areas, but the heaviest concentrations were in 
portions of the southeastern States, particularly in the tobacco 
and general farming areas. It is in such areas that animal 
power still is used to some extent for farmwork. Retention of 
horses or mules on many of the larger farms in this group is 
probably a matter of personal likes of the operators, and does 
not reflect a low degree of mechanization. More than three- 
quarters of a million farms reported horses or mules and no 
tractors in 1954. About 62 percent of these were in the 10 
Appalachian and Southeastern States, where many of the farms 
are small commercial, residential, and part-time places. One of 
the unusual features of agricultural production is that about 
1.2 million farms reported no tractors, horses, or mules in 1954. 



FARMS WITH TRACTOR AND HORSES AND /OR MULES 

MAeCR. 1934 




"u&-_ FARMS WITH HORSES AND /OR MULES AND NO TRACTOR 

NUWER.1954 




These farms are located very largely in the eastern half of the 
United States, and are most numerous in the Southeastern States. 
Farms without tractors or work animals were heavily concen- 
trated in the Mississippi Kiver Delta. Many of these are 
operated by sharecroppers who own none of the equipment with 
which the places are operated. Such farmers had use of tractor 
or animal power, or both, reported by the "home farm." Many 
other farmers in this class, because of size or type of farm, 
operated their places without owning either tractors or work 
animals. Those who needed such power undoubtedly hired their 
work performed. Operators of greenhouses and some com- 
mercial poultry enterprises who cultivate little or no land may 
not need to own tractors or work stock. Fruit farmers in some 
areas, and other farmers too, hire all of their field work done. 



FARMS WITH NO TRACTOR. HORSES OR MULES 

WABER.I954 




90 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Table 18.— NUMBER OF FARMS, AND FARMS REPORTING BY NUMBER OF HORSES AND MULES 

REPORTED, BY ECONOMIC CLASS OF FARM, AND BY TYPE OF FARM, 

FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms. 

number 

(000) 


Farms reporting horses and/or 
mules by number reported 


Area and item 


All farms, 

number 

(000) 


Farms reporting horses and/or 
mules by number reported 




None 
(000) 


lor 2 

(000) 


3 to 5 
(000) 


6 or more 
(000) 


None 
(000) 


1 or 2 

(000) 


3 to 5 
(000) 


6 or more 
(000) 




4,806 

4,806 
3,352 
136 
443 
726 
821 
769 
458 
1,453 

4,806 
547 
528 
373 
33 

86 
554 
157 

694 

342 

78 

65 

199 

1,491 


3,013 

3,013 
2,034 
84 
307 
482 
503 
439 
218 
979 

3,013 

419 

287 

154 

23 

74 
348 
125 

374 

203 

44 

42 

118 

1,004 


1,426 

1,426 

1,007 

26 

90 

177 

243 

269 

202 

419 

1,426 

98 

187 

193 

9 

9 
167 
29 

202 

106 
27 
18 
61 

427 


291 

291 
245 
13 
31 
53 
62 
53 
33 
46 

291 
25 
49 
23 

1 

2 
34 
3 

79 

26 
6 
4 
16 
49 


C) 
C) 


76 

76 
67 
13 
15 
14 
13 
8 
4 
9 

76 
5 
5 
3 

6 
1 

39 

7 
2 
1 
4 
11 




1,366 

1,366 
1,090 
37 
193 
316 
273 
188 
84 
276 

1,366 

269 

12 

8 

8 

7 
288 
38 

316 

139 

10 
43 
87 
282 


1,037 

1,037 
814 

27 
156 
242 
199 
133 

57 
223 

1,037 

228 

11 

5 

6 

6 
195 
33 

223 

102 

8 

29 

65 

228 


267 

267 
223 
8 
28 
60 
60 
46 
22 
44 

267 

34 

1 

3 

1 

1 

77 
5 

70 

31 
2 

11 
18 
44 


51 

51 
45 
2 
6 
12 
13 
8 
4 
4 

51 
5 
(■) 
C) 
(') 

C) 
14 

C) 

19 

5 
C) 
2 
3 
6 


11 


ECONOMIC CLASS 
Total. - .- 


ECONOMIC CLASS 

Total 

Commercial farms 

Class I 


11 

8 




1 




Class II 


2 


Class III 


Class III 


2 


Class IV 


Class IV 

Class V _. 

Class VI.... 


2 




2 


Class VI 


1 






3 


TYPE OF FARM 


TYPE OF FARM 
Total _. 


11 






1 








Other field-crop farms ... 














C) 

2 










(■) 

4 


Livestock farms other than dairy and 


Livestock farms other than dairy and 






1 






(•) 

1 










1 


M iscellaneous and unclassified farms . 


Miscellaneous and unclassified farms.... 


3 




779 

779 

477 

17 

62 

95 

110 

117 

76 

302 

779 

26 

1 

125 

7 

11 

146 

49 

58 

42 
9 
7 

26 
313 


481 

481 
274 
14 
43 
61 
61 
62 
33 
207 

481 
18 
(■) 
53 

5 

9 
90 
41 

26 

22 
6 
4 
12 
216 


252 

252 
165 
1 
14 
25 
38 
48 
38 
87 

252 

6 

C) 

61 

2 

2 

45 

7 

24 

15 

3 

2 

10 

89 


37 

37 
32 

1 

4 
7 
10 
6 
4 
6 

37 
1 

9 

(•) 

(•) 
9 

1 

6 

4 

(') 
1 
3 
6 


C) 

(■) 
C) 

C) 

(') 

C) 

(•) 
(■) 
(■) 


8 

8 
6 
1 
1 
2 
1 
1 

1 
8 
1 

2 

2 
1 

2 


761 

761 
574 
26 
86 
149 
148 
105 
60 
187 

761 

182 

91 

6 

3 

1 
31 

13 

177 

68 
12 
10 
45 
188 


475 

475 
349 
13 
50 
94 
96 
66 
32 
126 

475 
129 
64 

4 
2 

1 

18 
10 

79 

42 
9 
7 

26 
127 


206 

206 
155 
6 
25 
37 
35 
31 
20 
51 

206 
40 
20 

2 
1 

(■) 
10 
3 

60 

18 

3 

2 

13 

51 


62 

62 
63 
3 
8 
15 
13 
7 
6 
9 

62 
11 
6 

C) 

C) 

C) 

3 
C) 

26 

7 

1 

5 
9 


18 


ECONOMIC CLASS 
Total 


ECONOMIC CLASS 
Total 


18 






17 


Class I ... - - --- --- - 


Class I 


3 


Class II - - 


Class II.. 


3 


Class III 


Class III 


3 


Class IV 


Class IV 


3 


ClassV 


ClassV 


2 


Class VI 


Class VI 


2 




1 


TYPE OF FARM 
Total --- 


TYPE OF FARM 
Total 


18 






1 






1 






(") 






(■) 












C) 






Livestock farms other than dairy and 


Livestock farms other than dairy and 
poultry. _ 


12 




2 




C) 






(*) 






1 


Miscellaneous and unclassified farms 


Miscellaneous and unclassified farms 


1 




1,477 

1,477 
918 
17 
39 
99 
228 
313 
222 
658 

1,477 

26 

413 

222 

8 

16 
47 
35 

77 

61 

29 
3 
29 

571 


733 

733 

411 

8 

18 

43 

109 

148 

85 

322 

733 
14 

204 

85 

4 

13 
16 
22 

29 

19 

10 

1 

9 

328 


624 

624 
409 
4 
13 
43 
96 
135 
118 
215 

624 

8 

163 

124 

3 

2 
26 
12 

32 

33 

15 

2 

16 

220 


104 

104 
85 
3 
6 
12 
19 
27 
18 
19 

104 

3 

42 

13 

C) 

1 
5 
1 

12 

7 

3 

C) 

3 

21 


(■) 
C) 
C) 

(•) 


15 

15 
13 
3 
3 
2 
3 
2 
1 
2 

15 
1 
3 
1 

1 

5 

2 
1 

1 
3 


423 

423 
293 

38 
62 
67 
63 
46 
17 
130 

423 

45 
11 
11 

7 

50 
43 
22 

66 

32 

17 

2 

12 

137 


286 

286 
186 
23 
40 
42 
39 
31 
11 
100 

286 
30 
8 

7 
6 

45 

29 
20 

17 

18 

11 

1 

6 

106 


77 

77 
55 

6 
11 
12 
14 
10 

3 
21 

77 
9 
2 
3 
1 

4 
9 
2 

16 

8 
4 
1 
4 
22 


36 

36 
30 
4 
6 
8 
7 
4 
2 
6 

36 

4 
C) 

1 
C) 

1 

4 
(•) 

16 

3 

1 
C) 
2 

7 


24 


ECONOMIC CLASS 
Total. 


ECONOMIC CLASS 
Total 


24 




22 


Class I 


Class I . 


5 


Class II 


Class II... 


5 


Class III 


Class III... 


4 


Class IV. 


Class IV 


4 


ClassV 


Class V. .. 


2 


Class VI 


Class VI 


1 


Other farms. 




2 


TYPE OF FARM 
Total 


TYPE OF FARM 
Total 


24 


Cash-grain farms 

Cotton farms.. . 


Cash-grain farms 


2 
(•) 


Other field-crop farms _. 




(•) 


Vegetable farms 




(") 


Fruit-and-nut farms _. 




(■) 


Dairy farms 




1 


Poultry farms 




("> 


Livestock farms other than dairy and 


Livestock farms other than dairy and 


• 16 


General farms 




2 


Primarily crop 




(•) 




Primarily livestock 


C) 

1 


Crop and livestock 


Miscellaneous and unclassified farms 


Miscellaneous and unclassified farms 


2 



■ Less than 500. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



91 



HARVEST MACHINES 



Adaptable and versatile tractor power has supplied the real 
force back of the development and improvement of field ma- 
chinery suitable for our many types and sizes of farms. The 
harvest machines discussed in this report are those for which 
the Bureau of the Census has reported information on numbers 
and farms reporting. Including are grain combines, corn 
pickers, pick-up balers, and field forage harvesters. These are 
timesaving machines which enable the farmers to do better 
harvest jobs, especially under emergency conditions when time- 
liness of operation is most essential. Generally, they enable 1 
man or a small crew, to do the work done by 2 or more men under 
harvest conditions prevailing about the time of World War I. 
They have enabled farmers to reduce the hours of labor used to 
harvest an acre or ton of product, and to do the work faster and 
easier. The labor savings of these machines over older harvest 
methods are indicated by the following data : 



Item and area 



WHEAT in the Great 
Plains. 



CORN in the Corn Belt. 



HAY in the Central 
States. 



HAY in the Central 
States. 



Man-hours used by- 



Old harvest method 



6 hours per acre. Cut with 
binder, shocked, and 
threshed from shock. 

8.2 hours per acre. Har- 
vested by hand from 
standing stalk. 

2.8 hours per ton. Handled 
from windrow to storage 
with hay loader and pow- 
er fork. 

2.8 hours per ton. Same 
method as above. 



New harvest method 



1.5 hours per acre. Com- 
bined from standing grain. 



2.8 hours per acre. Harvest- 
ed with mechanical picker 
from standing stalk, 

2 hours per ton. Handled 
from windrow to storage 
with automatic-tie pick-up 
baler and tractor trailer. 

1.1 hours per ton. Handled 
from windrow to storage 
with pick-up chopper and 
motortruck. 



GRAIN COMBINES 

The first grain combine was built in Michigan before the 
middle of the 19th century. After a decade of limited use, it 
was not considered a success under eastern conditions and it 
was shipped to California. Its use under California conditions 
was encouraging and in 1880 factory -production of combines 
was initiated there. 

The first combines were of large size, with a cutting width 
up to 35 feet. They were pulled principally with large teams 
(as many as 40 horses) and were traction powered. Prior to 
World War I, combines were used almost exclusively in the 
Pacific Coast States and Idaho. Smaller combines, adapted for 
use with gas tractors, and equipped with mounted engines came 
into use during World War I. With the new combines, the 
combine method of harvesting small grains soon became pop- 
ular in the Plains and Mountain States. Gradually, the use of 
combines spread into the more humid areas of the United States. 
Small combines, some with a cutting width of about 40 inches, 
were first developed around 1930. The small combines are usu- 
ally operated with tractor power take-off. During World War 
II the self-propelled combine came into use and has proved quite 
popular. 

In November 1954, the number of farms reporting grain com- 
bines and number of combines reported was greater than for 
nny previous year. The 989,000 combines of that date were 
located on 934,000 farms. Modern combines are used primarily 



to harvest small grains, flax, soybeans, sorghums, and grass and 
legume seeds, and are concentrated in areas where these crops 
are grown commercially. About half of the farms with combines 
in 1954 were located in the Central area and about one-fourth 
were located in the Great Plains area. Together, the Western, 
Southern and Eastern States had only about a fourth of the 
farms reporting combines. In the humid areas of the country, 
combines tend to be smaller in size than they are in the Great 
Plains and the Western regions where grain fields and grain 
acreage per farm are large. 



GRAIN COMBINES 

NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING. 1954 




Between April 1950 and November 1954, the number of com- 
bines increased from 714,000 to 9S9.000. Although increases 
occurred throughout the grain areas, almost 80 percent of the 
total increase was in the Corn Belt, Northern Plains, and Lake 
States. Increases were greatest in the northern and western 
areas of the Corn Belt and in the southern portions of the Lake 
States. It is principally in these areas that the binder-thresher 
method of harvesting small grain has decreased less rapidly 
than elsewhere. In many of the areas where combines have 
shown substantial increases since 1950 a considerable portion 
of the small grain acreage is combined from the windrow. 

On a county basis, some localities showed reductions in num- 
bers of combines between 1950 and 1954. Most of the counties 
reporting reductions in numbers are in the Southern and Central 
Plains, where recent small grain production declined because 
of reduced plantings and severe drought. 



GRAIN COMBINES-INCREASE 

IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




92 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



NUMBER OF GRAIN COMBINES ON FARMS 
UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1945-1954 



LAKE STATES 




£S» 




HRLM W Till IUW4> 



Although factory production of combines started around 1880, 
the number on farms as late as 1920 probably did not exceed 
4,000 and most of these were in the Pacific Coast States. In 
1930, the Pacific Coast, Mountain, Northern Plains, and Southern 
Plains States together had 96 percent of the 61,000 combines 
then on farms. By 1945 the number in the United States had 
increased to 375,000 and by November 1954 to 980,000. During 
this period of approximately 10 years, the number of combines in- 
creased by about 160 percent. A part of the increase reflected 
a further rapid spread of the combining method of harvesting 
small grains and soybeans in the central, eastern and southern 
areas, where increases in numbers of combines was about 200 
percent. Since 1950, increases in numbers has continued rela- 
tively heavy in the Northern Plains, the Lake States, the Corn 
Belt, the Northeast and the Mississippi Delta States. In the 
other regions, the rate of increase has been less in recent years. 

GRAIN COMBINES BY SIZE OF FARM 

Although crops suitable for combining are widely produced 
throughout the United States, the major commercial areas are 
the important wheat growing areas of the Great Plains and 
Western States, and the small feed grains, bread grains, and 
soybean producing areas of the Central States. Smaller com- 
mercial producing areas of barley, dry beans, dry peas, sorghums, 
grass and legume seeds, and other crops suitable for combining 
are located with the limits of 1 or more of these 3 areas. As a 
group, the farmers in this area had 85 percent of all the combines 
on farms in November 1954. About three-fourths of the total 



number were located in the Plains and Central States. In 
general, grain combines tend to be concentrated on farms in 
the larger size groups. This is especially true in the Great 
Plains and Western areas where grain farms are numerous and 
usually relatively large. The number of combines indicate only 
a part of the total picture of combine use, for these harvest 
machines vary greatly in size and harvesting capacity. Many 
of the combines in the Great Plains and Western regions where 
acreages per farm are large are more than 10 feet in size. In 
the irrigated areas, and in the humid areas east of the Great 
Plains, most combines are 5 and 6 feet in size. 



H^^- 


NUMBER OF 
Tr— -FOR 


GRAIN COMBINES ON 
THE UNITED STATES 


FARMS BY SIZE OF FARM, 
AND AREAS. 1954 










J BREAT 1 








irTL 


N 




f | cenNral/ ( if 












\ PUlNsA 




1 "j^c T 










r_ff>\ 


«74 760 L-* 


'*f J ^!L-~~L 


**v i 








1 277,000 


~~y south 


ERN J* 














TT.4W \ 


'■■ ■■■."•.: -. / 


G3 U.OMKX. HI 


~-~. 










V 1 UNITED STATES 


■>•'•—*- - — « 










— - — ■*» 





FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



93 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING 0, I, 2. AND 3 OR MORE COMBINES BY ACREAGE 
OF SMALL GRAIN HARVESTED, UNITED STATES AND AREAS. 1954 




LEGEHD 

COMBINES 

1 COMBINE 
'•' t 2 COMBINES 
lmS\M 3 OB MORE 






About one-fifth of all farms in the United States reported having 
one or more combines in 1954. Because of the wide range in size 
of combines most farmers can buy a size suitable for the work to 
be done. Few farmers own more than 1 combine. Many of those 
reporting more than 1 combine were farms having at least 100 
acres of small grain, and were located in the Great Plains area. 

Estimates made by the United States Department of Agri- 
culture show that grain combines were used to harvest almost 63 
percent of the total small grain acreage of 1945, 84 percent of the 
acreage of 1950, and more than 90 percent of the small grain 
acreage harvested in 1954. Farmers have bought substantially 
more combines since World War II. Much of the increase was 
east of the Great Plains area where many of the combines are 
of the small sizes, and acreage per combine is less than in the 
specialized wheat areas. These changes resulted in an average 
decrease in acres of all small grain per combine from 297 acres 
in 1945 to 112 acres in 1954. 

CORN PICKERS 

Early settlers arriving in the New World soon discovered that 
for a long time corn had been an important food of the Indians. 
Since then, corn production has spread into most countries of 
the world, but so well adapted to its production are our soils and 
climate that our farmers alone produce about 60 percent of the 
world crop. Our corn acreage has grown with the growth of the 



Nation — from 34 million acres in 1866 to a peak of 117 million 
acres in 1917. Now, about 1 in 4 acres of land planted to crops 
is in corn. 

Although the first patents for a field-type corn picker were 
issued around 1850, it was not until 1910 that pickers on farms 
reached the 1,000 mark, according to estimates by the United 
States Department of Agriculture. Ten years later the number 
had increased to 10,000. All of the early corn pickers were one- 
row traction-operated machines. Use of pickers made little head- 
way until about 1928, when the tractor power take-off was first 
adapted for use with them. Two-row pickers came into use about 
the same time. With these improvements, farmer's use of the 
corn picker began to increase. By November 1954, corn pickers 
were reported by 684,000 farmers. 

Corn harvest was a long, tiresome job before the mechanical 
picker came into general use. Estimates of the United States 
Department of Agriculture show that in 1913, 40 percent of the 
corn acreage for grain was cut, shocked, and husked, much of it 
by hand, and nearly all of the remaining 60 percent was harvested 
by hand from the standing stalk. In recent years, little of the 
corn acreage is cut, shocked, and husked, and probably as much 
as three-fourths of the acreage is harvested with mechanical 
pickers. The mechanical harvester has reduced the time re- 
quired to harvest and crib an acre of corn in the Corn Belt from 
about 8 hours when harvested from standing stalk by hand to 
less than 3 hours when harvested with mechanical picker. 



407763—57- 



94 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Much of the total corn acreage is in the Corn Belt, Lake States, 
and in eastern South Dakota and Nebraska, although some corn 
Is grown in all areas where the climate is suitable. 

As the number of corn pickers on farms increased by about 50 
percent between 1950 and 1054, many of those reported in 1954 



CORN FOR ALL PURPOSES 
ACREAGE. 1954 



sb> 





CORN PICKERS 

NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING. 1954 




h^~^-~^- 


CORN PICKERS- INCREASE 






IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 






^ic 


I .. U-y, /^N 




1~- 'm 1$[J 


$&% 






'•i'SSL ■cr"***-' 




w 




l v« 


r ^-r- 


■ *'i 




"**\ \ j 










■JS 






UNITED STATES NET INCREASE 


/ ~-- <L.-*~~ -*S. 'x!>^^^''^\ 






231.947 OR 50 9 PERCENT 


\ JT 1 DOT ■ 50 INCREASE 

V^^l 1 COUNTY UNIT BASS) 






U c«*.»i-t»T » to-«.ra 


J MM IMI 




» M tt»U!l 



were of recent manufacture. Most (70 percent) of the corn 
pickers are concentrated in the important corn-producing area 
of the Corn Belt and Lake States. The use of pickers is spread- 
ing into other areas as the commercial corn acreage increases. 
In the Southeast area the number of pickers increased by 400 
percent between 1950 and 1954, hut the total number in that 
region in 1954 was less than 10,000. 

NUMBER OF CORN PICKERS BY SIZE OF FARM 

The Central States, with 70 percent of the corn pickers in 
1954, completely dominate the general pattern of picker distribu- 
tion. In this important corn-producing region, pickers were re- 
ported on many small and medium sizes of farms, but the out- 
standing size group contained farms ranging in size from 100 
to 179 acres. In the eastern and southern areas, about half the 
corn pickers were on farms containing more than 100 acres of 
land. In the Great Plains and Western regions relatively large 
proportions of the corn pickers were reported on the larger farms, 
or those having more than 260 acres. 



NUMBER OF MECHANICAL CORN PICKERS ON FARMS BY SIZE OF FARM. 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS, 1954 




In 1954 more than two-thirds of all farms reporting corn pickers 
had from 25 to 99 acres of corn. Nearly all of these farms had 
only one corn picker. In fact, only 2 percent of all farms re- 
porting corn pickers in 1954 had more than 1 picker. Corn harvest 
seasons vary in length, primarily because of variations in weather 
conditions. When corn was picked by hand the harvest season 
in central Illinois usually extended from about the middle of 
October to the middle of December. When the first killing frost 
was late, or fall rains were unusually heavy the season might 
be so delayed that the corn harvest was extended into January. 
As mechanical pickers came into use farmers in the Corn Belt 
were able to shorten the picking season and to complete the job 
before severe winter weather. Many of the pickers now on farms 
normally are used a short period on the home farm and then are 
used to harvest corn for other farmers, some of whom have more 
corn acreage than can be harvested by their picker during good 
weather. Under good harvest conditions a 1-row picker can 
harvest up to 200 acres, and a 2-row picker can harvest up to 400 
or 450 acres per season. Many pickers actually are used to 
harvest only a fourth or a third of these acreages. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



95 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING I, 2, AND 3 OR MORE MECHANICAL CORN 
PICKERS BY ACRES OF CORN HARVESTED FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS 

1954 



/ 



UNITED STATES 

Thouiandi / 




< 

B3C 






225 
f 





\ 


200 
175 


\~| 


_\ 


ISO 


C\ 


— 


125 


— 


N 


100 


— 




75 






50 




■ - - 


25 


— 


- - 




.1 





LEGEND 

1 MECHANICAL CORN PICKER 

2 MECHANICAL CORN PICKERS 
^3 OR MORE 






_ » « a, oi e, C 

& *■ .op o ^ * " ,r 



PICK-UP BALERS 

Hay crops are widely grown and represent one-fifth of all har- 
vested crop acreage in the United States. This extensive acreage, 
which normally yields in excess of 100 million tons of hay, pro- 
vides a big harvesting job. 

Hay acreage is concentrated mainly in or adjacent to the dairy, 
beef cattle, and sheep-producing areas of the country. In some 
areas where the hay acreage is small in relation to land area, 
it makes up a large part of the total cropland harvested. In 
these areas, soil and climatic conditions are not suitable for ex- 
tensive production of crops other than hay and grass. For ex- 
ample, in eastern Minnesota and northern Wisconsin, SO to 90 
percent of the cropland harvested in 1954 was in hay. In the 
southern parts of these States where corn and small grains are 
grown extensively, less than 40 percent of the cropland harvested 
was represented by land from which hay was cut. High pro- 
portions of the harvested cropland are in hay also in the colder 
portions of the Northeastern States, and in some of the irrigated 
areas of the Mountain and Western States. 

The practice of baling hay began about the middle of the 19th 
century when a simple press operated by animal power was used. 
Steam power was first used to operate stationary hay presses, 
or balers, around 18S5. These early balers were used primarily 
for baling both hay and straw from stacks and mows for ship- 
ment to cities and other off-farm places for use as feed for horses 
and mules, and some cattle. 

The first baler for picking up and baling hay or straw from the 
windrow in the field was introduced around 1930. This early 
pick-up baler required manual tying and required a crew of 3 or 



4 men for operation. Its use in the hay field eliminated the 
handling of loose hay at both harvest and feeding time. The 
baled hay requires less storage space than loose hay, and the 
bales facilitate the hauling and stacking in sheds, and in fields 
where rainfall is not a problem. About 10 years later the auto- 
matic-tie pick-up baler became a reality. This type of baler used 
twine for tying and was operated by one man. Savings in man- 
power was a big factor in the subsequent rapid increase in farms 
reporting pick-up balers. From 1950 to 1954 the number of farms 
reporting pick-up balers increased from 192,000 to 443,000. Since 
some farmers had more than one baler in both years, the increase 
in number of balers was somewhat greater than the number of 
farms reporting. 



LAND FROM WHICH HAY WAS CUT • 
ACREAGE. raS4 







96 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



HAY ACREAGE** AS A PERCENT OF CROPLAND HARVESTED, 1954 




I 1 UNDFR 10 

I ' I 10 TO 19 
W%A 20 TO 39 
IS&H 40 TO 59 
* NO FARMS 
*-* EXCLUDING SOYBEAN, COWPEA 
PEANUT AND SORGHUM MAY 

U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54-066 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



The nationwide distribution pattern of pick-up balers resembles 
the distribution pattern of the hay acreage. The greater part 
of the increase in number of balers between 1950 and 1954 oc- 
curred in areas of heavy hay concentration. In the area com- 
prising Wisconsin, Minnesota, and Michigan the increase was 
nearly 200 percent. 



PICK-UP HAY BALERS 

NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING. 1954 




The pick-up baler is well adapted for customwork since it can 
handle a fairly large hay acreage during the haying season. 
Many owners of balers who have only average tonnages of hay 
on their farms do some baling for their neighbors. In this way 
the owner increases the use of and lowers the annual cost of his 
baling, and enables other small farmers to harvest and feed 
their hay in baled form. In November 1954, about 11 percent 
of the pick-up balers were reported by farmers having farms of 
less than 100 acres. More than half of all farms are in this size 



PICK-UP HAY BALERS- INCREASE 

IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 







NUMBER OF PICK-UP BALERS ON FARMS BY SIZE OF FARM 




FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



97 



group. Another 46 percent of the pick-up balers were on farms 
ranging in size from 100 to 260 acres. These farms are most 
numerous in the Central and Eastern States and many of the 
livestock farms are in this size group. More than half of the 
pick-up balers reported in the Southern region were on farms of 
260 or more acres in size. In the Great Plains and Western 
areas, large numbers of balers were reported on ranches and 
farms with 500 or more acres of land. 

Harvested hay acreage is a better indicator of need for a baler 
than is total acres of land in the farm. When the farms are 
segregated by acres of hay, and numbers of pick-up balers re- 
ported, the data show that many farmers with 10 to 25 acres 
of hay have pick-up balers. For example, about S percent of all 
pick-up balers were reported by farmers who harvested less than 
10 acres of hay on their own farms, and more than a third of 
the balers were owned by farmers who reported less than 25 
acres of hay. Undoubtedly many such farmers did custom bal- 
ing and some of them may have owned their balers jointly with 
other farmers. About 90 percent of all pick-up balers were re- 
ported by farmers who had less than 100 acres of hay. This 
group, of course, includes the majority of farms in the United 
States. In the Great Plains and Western areas about half of the 
balers were reported on farms having more than 50 acres of hay. 



IJi^JJJMBER OF PICK-UP 


BALERS ON FARMS BY ACREAGE OF HAY HARVESTED. 






FOR THE 


UNITED STATES AND AREAS 


. 1954 


Y 




W^f3 


« 




| G RE AT | \ j 






1 ■ s^i CE NT RAlJ 


\ \ M 

\ \ L w 








1^ 1 C _1^*L ' 






© ) (S) i 


K\ > 






60,100 ^ i \r* 


0U lii?^-X f 






\ /^ 










W720 y mfflk 


A 


BE ir maim 












CJ "■«■ '0 ^S1tn 






/ \ JK~~~ a \*& | \ UNITED STATES 

\ JP^ \ \ 449,440 


UMBO* MM 






;? — - u. * -"' „,, 


T« ««* 



FIELD FORAGE HARVESTERS 

Harvesting of corn and other green crops for silage is a slow, 
tiresome job when the crops are cut by hand or with a binder, 
loaded by hand or elevator, and unloaded into the silage cutter 
by hand. For many years farmers looked to the time when this 
heavy job could be made easier. Finally, the field forage har- 
vester, a machine that cuts and chops green forage crops into 
desirable lengths as it is driven over the field, brought the long- 
sought solution of the problem. The first field forage harvesters 
were used around 1920, almost exclusively for harvesting row 
crops, mainly corn for silage. In time the field forage harvester 
was improved and equipped with attachments for doing several 
jobs. Many of the harvesters on farms in 1954 were equipped 
to harvest row crops, cut and chop standing grass and legume 
crops, and to pick up and chop from the windrow such crops 
as hay and straw. 

Field chopping as of today is a relatively quick, easy, labor- 
saving way of harvesting forage crops. The increase in the 
use of this machine has been rapid since World War II. 
According to estimates of the United States Department of 
Agriculture there were about 81,000 field forage harvest- 
ers on farms in 1950. By November 1954 over 200,000 were 
reported on farms. Although the field forage harvester is dis- 



tributed throughout all farming areas, the heavy concentrations 
are in the principal dairy areas where chopping corn and grass 
for silage is common. In some areas the machine is used to 
some extent for chopping grass for green feed and for chopping 
hay. 



'%-— - 


FIELD 


FORAGE HARVESTERS 






NUMBER. 1954 


r\ 


pn 


life^^ 


^ J> 


/ ^ / 






(• ■ /. / ^—r 




-''m^.f^jr 


r - \ ' / 


f 1 


• ~\\y<^i 


UMTED STATES TOTAL 
201.605 




>^K^ 








^ ID0T-25 HARVESTERS V ^ 


ut CCPU.NCM «f «*«.« 





Harvest machines, like the field forage harvester, require 
relatively large investments. Economic use of such machines 
depends largely on the volume of crops to be harvested year after 
year. On many of the larger farms there are adequate quanti- 
ties of crops for their use. But many farmers with limited 
acreages on their own farm find it desirable to do contract work 
for others or to own such machines jointly with one or more 
other farmers. In November 1954, half of all forage harvesters 
reported by farmers were on farms of less than 260 acres in 
size. These farms of less than 260 acres represent about 73 per- 
cent of all farms in the United States. Farms between 260 
and 500 acres in size had 28 percent of all forage harvesters in 
1954. 

Geographically, farmers in the central area reported almost 
half of the forage harvesters in 1954. Concentration was par- 
ticularly heavy in the eastern dairy area of Wisconsin. More 
than 80 percent of the forage harvesters reported in the central 
area were on farms between 100 and 500 acres in size. In the 
Eastern States many of the smaller dairy farms have a large 
proportion of their crop acreage in corn and grass for silage. 
Almost 40 percent of the forage harvesters in this area were 
reported by farmers having less than 180 acres of land, while 
in the Great Plains area less than 7 percent of the forage har- 
vesters were on farms of this size. In both the Great Plains 
and Western areas almost a fourth of the forage harvesters were 
on farms of 1.000 or more acres. 



NUMBER OF FIELD FORAGE HARVESTERS ON FARMS BY SIZE OF FARM. 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS. 1954 




98 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Estimates by the United States Department of Agriculture 
show the extent to which mechanical harvesting of hay has 
replaced old hay harvesting methods. In 1944, for example, 
about 27 percent of the entire hay tonnage was baled, 2 percent 
was chopped, and 71 percent was handled as long loose hay. 
Pick-up baling and field chopping increased markedly during the 
next 10 years. In 1954, about 73 percent of the hay was baled, 
7 percent was chopped, and only 20 percent was handled in long 
loose form. Much of the present long loose hay is in the low 
rainfall areas of the Great Plains and some Western States where 
large quantities of wild hay and alfalfa are stacked for cattle 
and sheep feeding. Only in a few areas is much of the hay 
chopped. The field forage harvester is used primarily for har- 
vesting forage crops for silage. 

Percentage of Hay Harvested by Different Methods, 
United States For Specified Years ' 



Year 



Crop of 1944, 
Crop of 1948. 
Crop of 1951. 
Crop of 1954, 



Percentage of specified hay crop that 
was— 



Baled 



26.8 
47.5 
61.7 
72.5 



Chopped 



1.7 
5.6 
7.5 
7.2 



Stored as 

loose long 

hay 



71.5 
46.9 
30.8 
20.3 



1 "Harvesting Hay and Straw and Use of Balers" F. M. 107, United States Depart- 
ment of Agriculture, June 1953, and "Harvesting Hay and Straw" ARS 43-27, United 
States Department of Agriculture, May 1956. 



COMBINATIONS OF HARVEST MACHINES 

The larger, specialized harvest machines, like pick-up balers, 
forage harvesters, etc., require a considerable investment, es- 



pecially on farms where more than one kind of a machine is 
necessary. High investment and the operating costs for such 
machines undoubtedly influence many farmers to contract for 
their use or to arrange with neighbors for exchange of machine 
work. In 1954, for example, only 157,000 farmers reported hav- 
ing one or more of each kind of the 3 harvest machines, grain 
combine, corn picker, and pick-up baler, although many hundreds 
of thousands of farmers harvested crops which could be harvested 
by these machines. Nearly all of the farmers (96 percent) who 
had all 3 kinds of these machines were in 4 type-of-farming 
groups, namely cash-grain, livestock other than dairy or poultry, 
dairy, and general farming. These are the types of farms grow- 
ing relatively large acreages of small grains, corn, and hay. 
For the most part, the farms of these types are in the higher 
economic class groups. Seventy percent of all farmers reporting 
all 3 harvest machines, and 60 percent of those reporting 2 of the 
3 machines were located in the important grain and livestock 
areas of the Corn Belt and Lake States. Most of these farms 
were in Economic Classes I, II, III, and IV. 

In all economic classes of farms, in all 5 areas, some farmers 
did not have any of the 3 machines, grain combines, corn pickers, 
or pick-up balers. For the United States as a whole, nearly 63 
percent of the farmers had none of the machines. These farmers 
were especially numerous in the Southern area where 90 percent 
of all farms did not have a grain combine, a corn picker, or a 
pick-up baler in 1954. Of course, some farms do not have these 
machines because they are not needed for the type of farming 
followed. In many other cases, however, the farmer has so 
little work for them that he cannot afford them. This does not 
mean necessarily that combines, corn pickers, and pick-up balers 
tire not used on the smaller farms. Operators of small farms 
frequently engage a neighboring farmer to combine his small 
grain, machine pick his corn, or bale his hay. 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING 0, I, 2. AND 3 KINDS OF FIELD MACHINES" 
BY ECONOMIC CLASS FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 




FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



99 



Table 19. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Grain Combines, by Size of Farm, for the 
United States: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms 


Orain combines 


Size of farm 




Farms reporting 


Number of grain combines 




Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
distri- 
bution 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
of all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
(all farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
reporting 


Total 


4.806 


100.0 


934 


19.4 


989 


0.2 


1. 1 


Under 10 acres. . ... 

10 to 29 acres 

30 to 49 acres 

50 to 69 acres. 

70 to 99 acres _._ 

100 to 139 acres 

140 to 179 acres 

180 to 219 acres 

220 to 259 acres. _ 

260 to 499 acres 

500 to 999 acres 

1,000 acres and over. . 


489 
719 
497 
348 
519 
492 

463 

259 
210 
488 
191 
131 


10.2 
15.0 
10.4 
7.2 
10.8 
10.2 

9.6 
5.4 
4.4 
10.2 
4.0 
2.7 


3 

8 
13 
15 
56 
86 

147 
96 
90 
243 
111 
67 


.7 

1.1 

2.5 

4.3 

10.8 

17.5 

31.7 
36.9 
43.1 
49.8 
57.9 
51.5 


3 

8 
13 
15 
56 

88 

148 
97 
92 
254 
125 
90 


C) 

C) 

C) 

(') 
.1 
.2 

.3 
.4 

.4 
.5 

.7 


1. 1 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 

1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.1 
1.3 



■ Less than 0.05 percent. 



Table 20. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Grain Combines, by Tenure of Operator, for 
Commercial Farms, for the United States: 1954 

Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample, approximately 20 percent 
of the farms. See text] 





All farms 


Grain combines 






Farms reporting 


Number of grain combines 


Tenure of operator 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
distri- 
bution 


Num- 
ber 

(000) 


Percent 
of all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 

(all 
farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
report- 
ing 


Total... 


3,328 


100.0 


896 


26.9 


950 


0.29 


1.06 




1,594 
756 

18 
960 

95 

160 
642 
63 


47.9 
22.7 

0.5 
28.8 

2.8 

4.8 
19.3 
1.9 


326 

309 

5 

255 

20 

92 

132 

11 


20.5 
40.9 
30.8 
26.6 
20.6 

57.6 

20.6 

17.6 


339 

338 

7 

267 

20 

95 

140 

12 


.21 
.45 
.41 

.28 

.21 

.60 
.22 
.18 


1.04 


Part owners 


1.09 
1.32 




1.05 


Cash tenants 

Share-cash ten- 


1.04 
1.03 


Share tenants 
and croppers... 

Other and unspec- 
ified tenants 


1.06 
1.05 



Table 21. — Farms Reporting and Acreage of Small Grains 
Harvested, and Number of Grain Combines, by the 
Acreage of Small Grains Harvested, for the United 
States and Areas: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See textl 



Area and acres of small grains 
harvested 



United States, total. 



Farms by acres of small grain 
harvested: 

Under 10 acres 

10 to 49 acres 

50 to 99 acres 

100 to 199 acres.... 

200 to 499 acres 

500 acres and over 



Eastern area 



Farms by acres of small grain 
harvested: 

Under 10 acres 

10 to 49 acres 

50 to 99 acres 

100 to 199 acres... 

200 to 499 acres 

500 acres and over 



Southern area- 



Farms by acres of small grain 
harvested: 

Under 10 acres 

10 to 49 acres 

50 to 99 acres 

100 to 199 acres 

200 to 499 acres 

500 acres and over 



Central area 



Farms by acres of small grain 
harvested: 

Under 10 acres 

10 to 49 acres 

50 to 99 acres 

100 to 199 acres 

200 to 499 acres 

500 acres and over 



Great Plains area 

Farms by acres of small grain 
harvested: 

Under 10 acres 

10 to 49 acres 

50 to 99 acres 

100 to 199 acres 

200 to 499 acres 

500 acres and over 



Western area. 



Farms by acres of small grain 
harvested: 

Under 10 acres 

10 to 49 acres 

50 to 99 acres 

100 to 199 acres 

200 to 499 acres 

500 acres and over _. 



Small grains 
harvested 



Farms 
report- 
ing 
(000) 



2,010 



447 
1.054 
264 
132 
91 
22 



116 

133 

12 

2 

(■) 



130 
74 
10 
6 
4 
1 

1,024 



170 
683 
137 
29 
6 
1 

363 



11 

106 
88 
81 
65 
12 

135 



Acres 
(000) 



109,158 



2,259 
25, 184 
17,767 
18, 081 
27. 367 
18. 499 



4.323 



549 
2,749 
742 
252 
31 



560 
1,433 

672 

781 
1,151 

416 

32. 175 



979 
16,644 
8,885 
3,676 
1,452 

539 

49,710 



60 
3,098 
6,248 
11,358 
19,534 
9, 412 

17, 938 



112 
1,260 
1,220 
2,015 
5,198 
8,132 



Grain combines 



Farms reporting 



Num- 
ber 
(000) 



905 



70 
464 
180 
96 
76 
20 



66 



(") 



13 
27 
7 
4 
3 
M 



102 

24 

5 

1 



Percent 

of farms 

reporting 

small 

grains 



45.0 



15.6 
44.0 
68.0 
72.4 
83.8 
90.0 



8.2 
34.8 
67.6 
83.5 
80.0 



10.0 
37.2 
66.9 
63.4 
79.2 
57.1 
P 
48.8 



24.7 
47.7 
74.2 
84.8 
92.4 
91.4 

61.6 



26.3 
42.3 
61.8 
69.6 
83.5 
89.0 

45.8 



11.4 
33.2 
52.6 
66.2 
82.9 
93.6 



Number 



Total 
(000) 



71 

474 
186 
103 
90 
32 



68 



(■) 



43 
332 

104 
26 



Per 
farm 
report- 
ing 



1.0 
1.0 
1.0 

1.1 

1.2 
1.6 



1.0 



1.0 

1.0 

1.1 

1.3 
2.0 



1.0 
1.0 
1.2 
1.1 
1.5 
2.0 



1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.1 
1.2 
2.0 



1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.1 
1.2 
1.5 



1.0 
1.0 
1.1 
1. 1 
1.2 
1.7 



■ Less than 500. 



Table 22.— NUMBER OF FARMS, FARMS REPORTING SMALL GRAINS HARVESTED, AND FARMS REPORTING 

GRAIN COMBINES, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 



[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text) 










United States 


Area 




Eastern 


Southern 


Central 


Great Plains 


Western 


All farms number (000).. 


4.806 

2,010 

905 

956 

55.0 

42.8 

2.0 

.2 


779 

263 

66 

68 

75.1 
24.0 
0.8 
■) 


1,477 

225 

54 

59 

75.7 

22.4 

1.6 

.2 


1.366 

1 , 024 

499 

512 

51.2 
47.6 
1.1 
C) 


761 
363 
223 
244 

38.4 

56.8 

4.2 

.6 


423 


Farms reporting small grains harvested farms (000).. 

Farms reporting both small grains harvested and a grain combine. . . farms (000) . . 

Percentage of farms reporting small grains harvested and reporting — 


135 
62 
73 

54.2 

39.3 

5.4 

1.2 



" Less than 0.05 percent. 



100 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Table 23.— NUMBER OF FARMS, AND FARMS REPORTING AND NUMBER OF CORN PICKERS, BY SIZE OF 

FARM, FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1954 



[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms 


See text] 












All farms 


Corn pickers 




Number 

(000) 


Percent 
distribution 


Farms reporting 


Number of corn pickers 




Number 
(000) 


Percent of 
all farms 


Total (000) 


Average 

number per 

farm (all 

farms) 


Average 
number per 
farm re- 
porting 


Total 


4.806 


100.0 


684 


14.2 


694 


0.1 


1.0 


Under 10 acres __- - ... 

10to29acres . . ... -- 

30to49acres ... ... .-- 


489 
719 
497 
348 
519 
492 

463 

259 
210 
488 
191 

131 


10.2 
15.0 
10.4 
7.2 
10.8 
10.2 

9.6 
5.4 
4.4 
10.2 
4.0 
2.7 


2 
5 
10 
11 

46 
74 

133 
86 
79 

176 
46 
17 


.4 

.8 

1.9 

3.1 

8.9 

15.0 

28.7 
33.0 
37.8 
36.0 
23.9 
12.9 


2 

5 
10 
11 
47 

74 

134 
86 
80 

180 
48 
18 


(■) 

[>) 

(■) 

C) 
.1 
.2 

.3 
.3 

.4 
.4 
.2 
.1 


1.0 
1.0 
1.0 




1.0 
1.0 


100 to 139 acres . .. .. 


1.0 




1.0 




1.0 




1.0 


260 to 499 acres .. .. .. . .. 


1.0 


500 to 999 acres . . . . . 


1.0 




1.1 











1 Less than 0.05 percent. 



Table 24.— FARMS REPORTING AND ACRES OF CORN HARVESTED FOR ALL PURPOSES, AND NUMBER OF 
FARMS REPORTING CORN PICKERS, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text) 





Corn harvested 


Corn pickers 


Area 


Com harvested 


Corn pickers 




Farms reporting 


Number 


Farms reporting 


Number 




Farms 
report- 
ing 
(000) 


Acres 
(000) 


Num- 
ber 

(000) 


Percent 

of farms 

reporting 

corn 


Total 
(000) 


Per 
farm 
report- 
ing 


Farms 
report- 
ing 
(000) 


Acres 
(COO) 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 

of farms 

reporting 

com 


Total 
(000) 


Per 
farm 
report- 
ing 


United States, total.. _ 


2,818 

1,038 

1,282 

359 

136 

3 

1 


78, 623 

4,926 
28, 678 
24, 363 
18, 663 

1,029 
964 


652 

12 

266 

255 

115 

2 

1 


231 

1.2 
20.8 
71.2 
84.5 
74. 1 
62.1 


662 

12 

268 

258 

120 

3 

1 


1.02 

1.00 
1.01 
1.01 
1.04 
1.36 
1.76 




1,029 

181 

535 
235 

76 
1 
1 

335 

65 
143 

80 

46 

1 

C) 

35 

14 
18 

1 

(•) 
(■) 


41,513 

986 

13, 712 

15, 895 
10. 272 

250 
397 

16, 542 

317 

3.581 

5,512 

6, 456 

453 

224 

925 

59 
392 
175 
170 
40 
98 


458 

194 

188 

69 

1 

1 

121 

1 
27 
53 
38 

1 
(■) 

3 

C) 
2 
1 
1 

C) 

(■) 


44.6 

3.7 
36.3 
79.9 
90.1 
88.2 
89.3 

36.1 

1.8 
18.7 
66.7 
83.9 
81.0 
61.5 

8.6 


466 

195 

190 

72 

1 

1 

123 

1 
27 
54 
39 

1 

(■) 

3 

(■) 

2 

1 
1 

(■) 

(■) 


1.02 


Farms by acres of corn har- 
vested: 


Farms by acres of corn har- 
vested: 


1.00 




1.01 


50 to 99 acres . 


50 to 99 acres.... 


1.01 


100 to 299 acres 


100 to 299 acres... 


1.05 


300 to 499 acres . 


300 to 499 acres... 


1.70 






1.88 




Great Plains area 

Farms by acres of corn har- 
vested : 

Under 10 acres 

10 to 49 years 






457 

263 

176 
14 
4 

8 

962 

515 

409. 

29 

9 

1 

(■) 


6,142 

1,137 

3, 397 

873 

499 

55 

181 

13,500 

2,427 
7, 594 
1,907 
1,267 
240 
64 


46 

3 

32 

8 

3 

C) 

C) 

23 

1 
11 
6 
4 

C) 

C) 


10.1 

1.0 
18.3 
56.1 
85.3 
76.0 
35.3 

2.4 

0.3 
2.8 
21.0 
43.3 
52.9 
33.3 


47 

3 
32 

8 
4 
(■) 
C) 
24 

2 
12 
6 
4 

(■) 

C) 


1.02 

1.00 
1.01 
1.01 
1.13 
1.33 
1.33 

1.02 

1.00 
1.03 
1.00 
1.05 
1. 11 
1.00 


1.02 


Farms by acres of corn har- 
vested: 


1.00 
1.00 








1.01 






100 to 299 acres 


1.02 






300 to 499 acres .... 


1.25 


300 to 499 acres.... 




1.88 










1.00 


Farms by acres of corn har- 
vested: 


Farms by acres of corn har- 
vested: 








9.6 
46.3 
50.0 
25.0 
20.0 


1.00 




50 to 99 acres . .... 


1.00 


100 to 299 acres 


100 to 299 acres 


1.00 


300 to 499 acres 


300 to 499 acres 


1.00 




1.00 









■ Less than 500. 



Table 25.— FARMS REPORTING AND ACRES OF CORN HARVESTED FOR ALL PURPOSES, AND NUMBER OF 
FARMS REPORTING CORN PICKERS, BY ACRES OF CORN HARVESTED, FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1954 





[Data are estimates based 


upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 












Corn harvested 


Farms reporting corn pickers 


Item 


Farms reporting 


Acres 
(1.000) 


Total 


1 corn picker 
(1,000 farms) 


2 corn pickers 
(1.000 farms) 






Number 
(1,000 farms) 


Percent 
distribution 


Number 
(1.000 farms) 


Percent of 
farms report- 
ing corn 
harvested 


3 or more 
corn pickers 
(1,000 farms) 


Farms reporting com harvested by acres harvested: 
Total 


2,818 
1.038 
802 
480 
359 
136 
4 


100.0 
36.8 
28.5 
17.0 
12.7 
4.8 
1 


78,623 
4,926 
12, 134 
16. 543 
24,363 
18, 663 
1,993 


652 

12 
78 
189 
255 
115 
3 


23.1 

1.2 
9.7 
39.3 
71.2 
84.5 
70.3 


641 

12 

78 

188 

252 

110 

2 


10 


(•) 








(■) 

1 
3 
5 
1 






(■) 


50 to 99 acres _ 


C) 


100 to 299 acres... 


(') 




(•) 











■ Less than 500. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



101 



Table 26. — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Pick-up Balers, by Size of Farm, for the United 
States: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms 


Pick-up balers 




Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
distri- 
bution 


Farms reporting 


Number of pick-up balers 


Size Of farm 


Num- 
ber 

(000) 


Percent 
of all 
farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
(all farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
reporting 


Total. 


4.806 


100.0 


459 


9.6 


463 


0.1 


1.0 


Under 10 acres 

10 to 29 acres... 


489 
719 
497 
348 
519 
492 

463 
259 
210 
488 
191 
131 


10.2 
15.0 
10.4 
7.2 
10.8 
10.2 

9.6 
5.4 
4.4 
10.2 
4.0 
2.7 


2 
5 
8 
8 
29 
50 

70 
47 
42 
117 
47 
34 


.4 

.6 

1.6 

2.3 

5.6 

10.3 

15.0 
18.2 
20.2 
24.0 
24.4 
26.0 


2 
5 
8 
8 
29 
51 

70 
47 
43 
118 
47 
36 


(«) 

(•) 

C) 

(•) 
. 1 
.1 

.2 
.2 
.2 
.2 
2 
!3 


1.0 
1.0 




1.0 




1.0 




1.0 


100 to 139 acres 

140 to 179 acres 

180 to 219 acres 

220 to 259 acres. 

260 to 499 acres 

500 to 999 acres 

1 .000 acres and over. _ 


1.0 

1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 

1. 1 



1 Less than 0.05. 



Table 27- — Number of Farms, and Farms Reporting and 
Number of Forage Harvesters, by Size of Farm, for the 
United States: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





All farms 


Forage harvesters 


Size of farm 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Per- 
cent 
distri- 
bution 


Farms report- 
ing 


Number of forage har- 
vesters 




Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Per- 
cent of 
all 

farms 


Total 
(000) 


Average 
number 
per farm 

(all 
farms) 


Average 
number 
per farm 
report- 
ing 


Total 


4.806 


100. 


203 


4.2 


205 


(') 


1.0 






Lender 10 acres 


489 
719 
497 
348 
519 
492 

463 
259 
210 
488 
191 
131 


10.2 
15.0 
10.4 
7.2 
10.8 
10.2 

9.6 
5.4 
4.4 
10.2 
4 
2.7 


1 
2 
2 
2 
11 
20 

27 
20 
20 
57 
24 
18 


.1 
.2 
.5 
.6 
2.0 
4.0 

6.0 
7.5 
9.4 
11.6 
12.7 
13.8 


1 
2 
2 
2 
11 
20 

27 
20 
20 
58 
25 
19 


(■) 

(") 


1.0 

1.0 


30 to 49 acres 

50 to 69 acres 

70 to 99 acres 

100 to 139 acres 

140 to 179 acres 

180 to 219 acres 

220 to 259 acres.. 

260 to 499 acres 

500 to 999 acres 

1,000 acres and over. . 


C) 
(■) 
(■) 
(■) 






1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 

1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
1.0 



" Less than 0.05. 



Table 28.— NUMBER OF FARMS, FARMS REPORTING AND ACRES OF ALL HAY HARVESTED, AND FARMS 
REPORTING PICK-UP BALERS, BY ACRES OF HAY HARVESTED AND BY SIZE OF FARM, FOR THE UNITED 
STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 



Item 



All farms number (000). 

Farms reporting hay harvested farms (000). 

Acres of hay harvested acres (000). 

Farms reporting both hay harvested and pick-up balers farms (000). 

Percent of farms reporting hay harvested 

Number of pick-up balers (000). 

Average acres of hay harvested per pick-up baler 

Percent of farms with specified acres of hay harvested, reporting pick-up balers 

. Under 10 acres of hay.. _ percent. 

10 to 24 acres of hay do... 

25 to 49 acres of hay.. do... 

50 to 99 acres of hay.. _ do... 

100 to 299 acres of hay do... 

300 acres of hay and over do... 

Percent of farms in each size of farm group, reporting pick-up balers: 

Under 10 acres percent. 

10 to 29 acres __ do... 

30 to 49 acres do... 

50 to 69 acres do... 

70 to 99 acres .do.-. 

100 to 139 acres do... 

140 to 179 acres do... 

180 to 219 acres do... 

220 to 259 acres do... 

260 to 499 acres do... 

500 to 999 acres do... 

1.000 acres and over do... 



United States 



4.806 

2,573 

70,017 

445 

17.3 

449 

155.8 



4.3 
15.2 
28.5 
39.4 
42.1 

in i; 



1.6 
2.3 
5.6 
10.3 

15.0 

18.2 
20.2 
24.0 
24.4 
30.0 



era 


Southern 


779 


1,477 


547 


460 


11,583 


5.438 


105 


33 


19.2 


7.3 


106 


34 


109.6 


161.3 


4.6 


1.9 


16.2 


9.8 


34.8 


27.2 


52.5 


46.6 


76.4 


57.2 


72.7 


68.8 


.6 


.2 


.5 


.4 


1.9 


.7 


3.1 


.8 


9.0 


1.4 


15.3 


3.1 


25.5 


4.0 


26.1 


6.6 


35.3 


9.1 


41.5 


13.9 


49.0 


27.5 


55.2 


34.3 



tral 


Great Plains 


Western 


1,366 


761 


423 


1,001 


356 


210 


23,069 


19, 878 


10, 049 


204 


59 


43 


20.4 


16.7 


20.4 


206 


60 


44 


112.1 


330.7 


228.2 


7.6 


4.8 


3.1 


17.2 


10.1 


16.1 


29.1 


20.8 


25.4 


41.9 


25.7 


38.0 


55.0 


28.1 


38.8 


53.8 


32.4 


47.1 


.1 


.2 




.1 


1.4 


1.3 


2.7 


1.3 


4.6 


4.4 


.7 


6.4 


7.0 


2.7 


14.8 


12.6 


4.3 


20.8 


19.2 


4.5 


16.0 


23.1 


6.7 


20.9 


24.4 


10.0 


22.8 


33.6 


13.7 


15.5 


41.1 


18.2 


16.2 


51.5 


22.1 


24.1 



407763—57- 



102 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Table 29.— NUMBER OF FARMS, AND NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING 1, 2, OR 3 KINDS ' OF FIELD MACHINES 
BY ECONOMIC CLASS OF FARM, AND BY TYPE OF FARM, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 





Number of 

;ili farms 

(000) 




Farms reporting, by numbe 


of 3 kinds r, 


f field machines 




Item 


None 




I 


2 


3 




Number 

(000) 


Percent of 
all farms 


Number 
(000) 


Percent of 
all farms 


Number 
(000) 


Percent, of 
all farms 


Number 
(000) 


Percent of 
all farms 


United States, total .. 


4. 806 

3, 352 
136 

443 
726 
821 
769 
458 
1. 453 

547 
528 
373 
33 

86 
554 
157 
694 

342 
78 
65 

199 

1,491 


3. 504 

2,096 
51 
125 
299 
544 
650 
428 

1,408 

157 

481 

339 

31 

82 
329 
136 
341 

166 
48 
30 

87 

1.443 


72.9 

62.5 
37.8 
28.1 
41. 1 
66.2 
84. 5 
93.5 
96.9 

28.6 
91.2 
90.9 
92.5 

95.3 
59.3 
86.7 
49.1 

48.5 
62.0 
46.9 
43.7 

96.7 


685 

648 
39 
119 
207 
176 
84 
23 
37 

194 

37 

24 

2 

3 

129 

14 

160 

85 
19 
16 
49 

39 


14.3 

10.3 
28.5 
26.9 
28.5 
21.4 
10.9 
5.1 
2.5 

35.4 
6.9 
6.4 

5.8 

3.6 
23.2 

8.7 
23.0 

24.9 

25.0 
25.4 
24.6 

2.0 


458 

451 
28 
136 
169 
83 
30 
5 
7 

156 

8 
8 
C) 

1 

65 

5 

140 

66 
8 
12 
46 

8 


9.5 

13. 5 

20.8 

30.7 

23.3 

10.1 

3.9 

1.1 

.5 

28.6 
1.6 
2.3 
1.1 

.8 

11.8 

3.4 

20.1 

19.4 
10.5 
18.8 
23.0 

.5 


158 

157 
17 
63 
51 
19 
5 
1 
2 

40 
2 

9 

(■) 
(■) 

32 
2 

54 

25 
2 
6 

17 

1 




Economic claps of farm: 


4.7 


ClassI 


Class II 




Class III... 




Class IV. . 




Class V.... 




Class VI .._ 


3 






Type of farm: 


7.4 
























Livestock farms other than dairv anrl poultry .. 


7.8 


Primarily crop _ 


2.6 


Primarily livestock _ 


8 9 


Crop and livestock 


8 6 


Miscellaneous and unclassified farms _ 


1.2 






Eastern area, total _ _ 


779 

477 
17 
62 
95 

liri 

117 
76 

302 

26 

125 

i 

11 
146 
49 
58 

42 
9 
7 

26 

313 


638 

345 

9 
26 
52 
83 

103 
72 

294 

13 

1 
113 

7 

10 
78 
43 
41 

27 
7 
4 

16 

304 


82.0 

72.3 
51.3 

41.8 
54.2 
75.8 
88.3 
94.9 
97.4 

52.5 
100.0 
90.3 
94.1 

91.5 
53.6 
87.6 
70.7 

64.5 
71.7 
59.5 
63.1 

97.1 


84 

78 
4 

18 
25 
18 
10 
3 
6 

6 


10.8 

16.3 
21.9 

28.5 
26.5 
16.7 
8. 1 
4.4 
2.0 

25.3 


39 

38 
2 
11 
13 

4 
C) 

2 

3 


5.1 

7.9 
13.3 
18.4 
14.0 
6.0 
3.1 
.4 
.6 

12.9 


17 

17 
2 
7 
5 
2 
1 

C) 

C) 

2 


2 2 


Economic class of farm : 
Commercial farms 


3.5 


ClassI 




Class II 


11 3 


Class III 


5 3 


Class IV. 


1.5 


Class V 


.4 


Class VI 


3 


Other farms 


C) 

9.3 


Type of farm: 
Cash-grain farms. . 






Other field-crop farms 


(") 

1 

40 
4 
11 

8 
2 
2 
4 

7 


6.7 
4.0 

4.8 
27.4 

9.0 
18.7 

18.2 
17.6 
22.3 
17.3 

2.1 


4 
(0 

C) 

19 
1 
4 

1 
1 
3 

2 


3.2 
.3 

3.7 
13.0 
2.6 
7.2 

12.5 

7.9 

15.2 

13.5 

. 7 


1 

C) 


.8 


Vegetable farms. 


1.6 


Fniit-and-nut farms 




Dairy farms. 


9 

C) 

2 

2 
C) 
C) 

2 

C) 


6.0 




.7 


Livestock farms other than dairy and poultry. 


3.4 


Genera] farms 


4.8 


Primarily crop 


2.8 


Primarily livestock 


3.0 


Crop and livestock 


6. 1 


Miscellaneous and unclassified farms 


. 1 






Southern area, total .. 


1,476 

918 

17 

39 

99 

228 

313 

222 

558 

26 

413 

222 

8 

16 
47 
35 

77 

61 
29 
3 

29 

571 


1,377 

826 

8 

22 

78 

207 

297 

215 

551 

14 

392 

210 

8 

16 
36 
32 
60 

47 

23 

2 

22 

562 


93.2 

90.0 
45. 1 
56.0 
78.0 
90.8 
94.9 
96.9 
98.6 

52.6 

95.0 
94.5 
97.7 

97.4 
76.8 
92.0 
77.7 

77.0 
77.5 
72.3 

77.0 

98.4 


68 

61 
5 
9 
14 
16 
12 
5 
7 

8 
14 
10 

(«) 

(•) 

6 
2 
11 

9 
4 
1 

4 

8 


4.6 

6.6 
29.3 
22.8 
13.6 
7.1 
3.7 
2.4 
1.2 

31. 
3.3 
4.3 

1.5 

1.7 
13.1 

6.0 
14.0 

14.9 
14.9 
16.9 
14.6 

1.4 


26 

25 
3 
7 
7 
4 
4 
1 
C) 

4 

6 
3 
(') 


1.7 

2.8 

16.7 

16.7 

7.1 

1.9 

1.1 

.5 

(■) 

14.3 

1.3 
1.1 
.3 


7 

6 

2 
2 
1 
1 

1 
C) 
(') 

1 
1 

C) 

C) 

C) 

1 
(■) 

1 

1 
1 

(■ 

1 

(■) 


.4 


Economic class of farm: 
Commercial farms 


.7 


ClassI 


8.9 


Class II 


4.6 


Class III 


1.3 


Class IV 


.3 


Class V 


.2 


Class VI 




Other farms . 


. 1 


Type of farm : 
Cash-grain farms 


2. 1 


Cotton farms 


.3 


Other field-crop farms 


.1 




. 5 


Fruit-and-nut farms .. . . 


.9 


Dairv farms. 


4 
1 
5 

4 
2 

(') 

2 

1 


7.9 
1.7 
6.6 

6.0 
5. 1 
6.8 
6.7 

.1 


2 1 


Poultry farms 


.3 


Livestock farms other than dairy and poultry 


1.8 


General farms . 


2.2 


Primarily crop 


2.5 


Primarilv livestock 


4. 1 


Crop and livestock... 




Miscellaneous and unclassified farms 


. 1 







See footnotes at end of table. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



103 



Table 29.— NUMBER OF FARMS, AND NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING 1, 2, OR 3 KINDS ' OF FIELD MACHINES, 
BY ECONOMIC CLASS OF FARM, AND BY TYPE OF FARM, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954— Con. 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 



1 1 em 



Central area, total 

Economic class of farm: 

Commercial farms 

Class I 

Class II --.. 

Class III 

Class IV.... 

Class V.... 

Class VI.... 

Other farms 

Type of farm : 

Cash-grain farms 

Cotton farms 

Other field-crop farms 

Vegetable farms .- 

Fruit-and-nut farms 

Dairy farms 

Poultry farms 

Livestock farms other than dairy and poultry 

General farms 

Primarily crop 

Primarily livestock 

Crop and livestock 

Miscellaneous and unclassified farms 

Great Plains area, total 

Economic class of farm: 

Commercial farms. __ 

Class I 

Class II 

Class III 

Class IV 

Class V 

Class VI 

Other farms 

Type of farm: 

Cash-grain farms 

Cotton farms 

Other field-crop farms 

Vegetable farms 

Fruit-and-nut farms 

Dairy farms 

Poultry farms _ 

Livestock farms other than dairy and poultry 

General farms 

Primarily crop 

Primarily livestock 

Crop and livestock 

Miscellaneous and unclassified farms - 

Western area, total 

Economic class of farm: 

Commercial farms _ 

Class I 

Class II 

Class III 

Class IV. 

Class V 

Class VI 

Other farms 

Type of farm: 

Cash-grain farms 

Cotton farms 

Other field-crop farms 

Vegetable farms 

Fruit-and-nut farms 

Dairy farms 

Poultry farms 

Livestock farms other than dairy and poultry. 

General farms 

Primarily crop 

Primarily livestock 

Crop and livestock 

Miscellaneous and unclassified farms- 



Number of 

all farms 

(000) 



1.366 



1.00(1 

37 
193 
31fi 
273 
188 

84 
276 



269 
12 
8 



7 

288 

38 

316 

139 
10 
43 

87 

282 



574 

26 
86 
149 
148 
105 
60 
187 



182 

91 

6 

3 

1 
31 
13 

177 

68 
12 

in 
45 

188 



293 
38 
62 
67 
63 
46 
17 

130 



45 
II 
11 

7 

50 
43 
22 
66 

32 

17 
2 
12 

137 



Farms reporting, by number of 3 kinds of field machines 



None 



Number 
(000) 



458 

5 

19 

82 

140 

138 
74 

258 



165 
29 
108 

50 
4 

19 
27 



Percent of 
all farms 



264 



271 
9 
23 
45 
68 
74 
53 

179 



26 
6 
4 

16 

181 



132 



52.4 



42.0 
14.0 
9.9 
26.0 
51.2 
73.5 
88.5 
93.6 



26.9 
73.8 
70.7 
89.1 

86.3 
57.4 
76.9 
34.3 

35.9 
44.7 
44.4 



93.6 



59.2 



47.3 
34.8 
27.0 
30.1 
45.9 
70.2 
87.6 
95.8 



25.1 
78.7 
60.5 
96.5 

100.0 
59.7 
87.3 
50.1 

38.1 
50.7 
40.2 
34.2 

95.8 



196 


66.8 


21 


53.8 


34 


55.0 


42 


63.8 


46 


73.1 


38 


81.6 


15 


88. 1 


126 


96.7 


12 


25.7 


8 


70.9 


7 


59.6 


6 


86.8 


48 


96.7 


30 


71.3 


20 


93.0 


43 


65.2 


16 


50. 3 


8 


48.3 


1 


53.7 


6 


52.2 



96.3 



Numher 
(0001 



248 
6 
38 
93 
74 
31 
7 
14 



185 
11 
34 
57 
53 
24 
6 
7 



(■) 



80 



Percent of 

all farms 



22.8 
14.9 
19.5 
29.4 
27.2 
16.7 
8.0 
5.0 



24.1 
19.9 
18.6 
6.6 

9.7 
22.4 
12.3 
23.5 

25.0 
32.6 
24.0 
24.6 

5.0 



25.2 



32.2 
40.9 
39.3 
38.3 
35.9 
22.9 
10.2 
3.5 



48.0 
19.4 
34 3 
3.5 



24.7 

9.0 

26.3 

32.7 
31.9 
33.8 
32. 7 

3.5 



26.2 
35.8 
33.8 
28.2 
22. 5 
15.6 
II. 1 
2.7 



60.6 
25.4 
30.4 
12.9 

3.2 
24.4 

5.6 
25.7 

35.5 
36.8 
32.5 
34.4 

3.1 



Number 

(000) 



Percent of 
all farms 



273 
15 
89 
106 
46 
15 
2 
3 



(') 
(') 



103 
1 
1 



(■) 



(■) 

(■) 
(■) 
« 
(■) 

(■) 



20.2 



25. 1 

41.0 

46.4 

33.4 

16.8 

8.0 

2.6 

I. 1 



38.1 
5.3 

7.7 
4.0 

2.7 
13.0 

6.8 
29.1 

26.8 
18.2 
20.2 
31.0 

1.0 



12.6 



16.6 

15.8 

25.4 

25.6 

15.8 

6.3 

1.8 

.5 



22.5 
1.8 
5.2 



11.8 
3.8 
18.3 

23.0 
14.2 
20.0 
26. 1 



Numher 
(000) 



110 
11 
47 
35 
13 
3 
1 
1 



C) 
(■) 
(■) 

C) 



(■) 



(') 
(■) 



(■) 



4.8 



6.7 
9.7 
10.8 
7.6 
4.0 
2.8 
.8 
.6 



13.2 

3.5 

9.5 

.3 

.1 
4.1 

1.4 
8.5 

13.7 
13.9 
13.8 
13.4 



C) 



C) 



(■) 
C) 
(■) 
C) 



C) 



C) 
<■) 



(■) 

(■)" 

(■) 
C) 



C) 



Percent of 
all farms 



1 Quantity less than half of the smallest unit: less than 500 or less than 0.05 percent. ' The 3 machines included are grain ombines, corn pickers, and pick-up hay balers. 



104 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 
CHORE EQUIPMENT 



Human labor is the oldest form of power in agriculture. Even 
after a hundred years of the development of labor-saving 
machines and practices, much farniwork remains to be done by 
hand or with small hand tools. A large part of this handwork 
is used for feeding and caring for livestock, although even in this 
field of work several important labor-saving machines and prac- 
tices have been put into effect on many farms. The extension 
of central station electric service to almost 95 percent of the 
farms has made possible the use of many kinds of electrical 
equipment in service buildings and service areas. Many of these 
pieces of equipment, such as tool grinders, portable drills, and 
circular saws, require little electric power for operation. Other 
items, such as crop driers, may require motors of 7.5 and even 
10 horsepower. The livestock chore equipment discussed here 
is limited to only three items, namely, milking machines, power 
feed grinders, and electric pig brooders. These are the items of 
chore equipment reported for the 1954 Census of Agriculture. 

MILKING MACHINES 

Dairy farmers generally have accepted the milking machine as 
a necessary item in the barn or milking parlor. The number of 
farms with milking machines almost doubled between 1945 and 
1954, increasing from 365,000 to 712,000. Most of this increase 
came between 1945 and 1950, a period when electric distribution 
lines were being extended rapidly in rural areas and when many 
farming areas were experiencing labor shortages. 

The number of farms reporting milking machines in the south- 
ern area, where dairying is expanding, increased from 6,000 in 
1945 to almost 35,000 in 1954. Although the number of milking 
machines in the Southern States still is small, the rapid increase 
does indicate considerable progress in dairying in this part of 
the country. 



MILKING MACHINES 

NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING. 1954 




.Milking machines are concentrated in the areas that produce 
whole milk for sale. Farms of the central and eastern areas 
produced three-fourths of the milk sold by farmers in 1954 and 
had three-fourths of the milking machines reported. 

Wisconsin, the leading dairy State, with 2.2 million milk cows 
and more than 14 billion pounds of milk sold in 1954, had 100,761 
farms with milking machines. Minnesota with 74,000 farms with 
milking machines and New York with 51,000 followed in order 
of number of farms reporting. Dairy farms in California fre- 
quently have large herds of 100 or more cows. Farmers in Cali- 
fornia sold about 8 percent of the whole milk sold in 1954 and had 
only 2 percent of the farms with milking machines. 

Several types of farms other than dairy farms have milk 
cows varying in number from only a few head to sizable herds. 
Consequently, milking machines are used by many farmers who 



are not classified as dairy farmers. Of the 712,000 farms re- 
porting milking machines in 1954, more than 300,000 or 44 percent 
were classified as other than dairy farms. Livestock farms other 
than dairy and poultry farms accounted for 13 percent of all farms 
with milking machines, and general farms, many of which have 
milk cows, accounted for another 13 percent. Dairy farms, and 
other types with milking machines are especially numerous in the 
central area. In the Great Plains area dairy farms having milk- 
ing machines are only half as numerous as other types of farms 
which reported milking machines. 



WHOLE MILK SOLD 

NUMBER OF POUNDS. 1954 




NUMBER OF FARMS WITH MILAIN0 MACHINES, 8V TYPE OF FARM FOR UNITED STATES AND AREA& 1994 



1 









Milking machines are now generally used throughout the coun- 
try on farms with 10 or more milk cows. Seventy percent of the 
commercial farms with 10 to 19 milk cows in 1954 reported a 
milking machine while 90 percent of the farms with 20 or more 
milk cows reported a milking machine. In recent years many 
farms with small herds of milk cows have turned to machine 
milking. Estimates made by the United States Department of 
Agriculture show that only 7 percent of the milking machines on 
January 1, 1943, were on farms where less than 9 cows were 
milked. In November 1954 according to the Census, almost one- 
fourth of all commercial farms reporting milking machines had 1 
to 9 milk cows. About a fourth of these were farms having less 
than live milk cows. Most of the older milking machines on farms 
are of the two-unit type. The operator carries the milk to the 
milk room and pours it into a milk can. Recently, however, 
dairy installations of pipeline milkers and bulk coolers have been 
increasing rapidly. By this method the milk is handled entirely 
by mechanical means. It is another step in the mechanization 
of farm chore operations and has reduced the time used to milk 
a cow and has made the work much easier. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



105 



Table 30.— FARMS REPORTING MILK COWS, AND FARMS REPORTING MILKING MACHINES, BY NUMBER OF 
MILK COWS, FOR ALL COMMERCIAL FARMS AND DAIRY FARMS, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 
1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 



Item 



Number of farms reporting milk cows by number of cows: 

All commercial farms - farms (000). 

1 to 4 cows do 

5 to 9 cows do 

10 to 19 cows do 

20 to 29 cows do 

30 to 49 cows do 

50 or more cows do 

Dairy farms do 

1 to 4 cows do 

5 to 9 cows do 

10 to 19 cows_ do 

20 to 29 cows do 

30 to 49 cows do 

50 or more cows.. do 

Percent of farms reporting milking machines for farms classified by number of 

milk cows: 

All commercial farms percent.. 

1 to 4 cows do 

5 to 9 cows ^do 

10 to 19 cows do 

20 to 29 cows do 

30 to 49 cows _ _.do 

50 or more cows do 

Dairy farms do 

1 to 4 cows __do 

5 to 9 cows do 

10 to 19 cows _ do 

20 to 29 cows _.do 

30 to 49 cows do 

50 or more cows do 



United States 



2,141 
1,066 
432 
404 
151 
62 
26 

537 
25 
96 
219 
118 
57 
22 



31.3 
3.8 
26.1 
69.8 
90.2 
95.4 
88.0 

73.2 

17.1 
35.3 
77.7 
92.0 
96.2 
94.1 



Eastern 



336 
143 
56 
67 
38 
23 



138 
5 
18 
51 
35 
22 



39.8 
2.9 
22.0 
73.7 
92.1 
97.3 
95.5 

80.6 
12.8 
44.6 
81.3 
92.8 
97.7 
95.4 



Southern 



497 

384 

62 

30 

10 

6 

5 

47 
4 



6.4 
.4 

4.5 
30.0 
74.0 
92.1 
77.6 

52.0 

7.1 
8.7 
48.4 
78.7 
92.6 
93.1 



Central 



il 


Great Plains 


Western 


785 


371 


151 


247 


210 


81 


197 


91 


25 


233 


50 


23 


81 


12 


9 


22 


4 


7 


4 


2 


6 


280 


30 


41 


11 


2 


3 


55 


6 


7 


131 


9 


13 


60 


7 


7 


19 


3 


6 


3 


2 


5 


48.1 


18.2 


39.2 


7.6 


3.9 


9.2 


34.7 


19.1 


45.3 


77.1 


47.6 


77.5 


93.1 


75.2 


94.9 


95.0 


88.9 


97.1 


95.9 


81.1 


83.7 


73.4 


60.4 


80.7 


19.3 


9.5 


36.8 


35. 3 


17.4 


62.6 


80.6 


64.1 


78.2 


94.1 


88.4 


91.4 


95.3 


91.3 


100.0 


95.6 


85.2 


94.5 



Table 31.— NUMBER OF FARMS, AND PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING MILKING MACHINES, BY TYPE 

OF FARM, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 







[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 














United 
States 


Area 


Item and type of farm 


United 
States 


Area 


Item and type of farm 


East- 
ern 


South- 
ern 


Cen- 
tral 


Great 
Plains 


West- 
ern 


East- 
ern 


South- 
ern 


Cen- 
tral 


Great 
Plains 


West- 
ern 








Numb( 


r (000) 






Percent of all farms reporting by 
type of farm: 


Percent 




4,806 


779 


1,477 


1,366 


761 


423 


13.8 

.8 

2.3 

3 2 

2.8 

72.4 

5.9 

13.1 

26.9 

7.3 

43.4 

29.2 

1.8 


8.0 

3.0 
4.2 

6 
79.9 
6.2 

5.7 

19.9 

9.5 

35.6 

19. 6 

2 2 


1.1 
.5 
.5 
.5 

.7 

49.7 

2.8 

2. 1 

3.4 

.8 

15.8 

4.7 

.5 


17.8 

.6 

12.7 

4.6 

7.4 
71.1 
9.0 

20.9 

43.6 

15.2 
51.5 
42.9 

3.4 


11.7 

1.2 
2.2 

.8 

1.0 

63.9 

3.9 

7.9 

18.1 

4.2 

22.4 

21.0 

1.1 








Type of farm: 


547 

528 

373 

33 

86 
554 
157 

694 

342 
78 
65 

199 

1,491 


26 

1 

125 

7 

11 
146 
49 

58 

42 
9 

7 
26 

313 


26 
413 
222 

8 

16 
47 
35 

77 

61 

29 

3 

29 

571 


269 

12 
8 
8 

7 
288 
38 

316 

139 
10 
43 

87 

282 


182 
91 
6 
3 

31 
13 

177 

68 
12 
10 
45 

188 


45 
11 
11 
7 

50 
43 
22 

66 

32 

17 
2 
12 

137 








8.3 
22.0 
4.8 


















Fruit-and-nut farms 




5.9 






Poultry farms.. 

Livestock farms other than 


Livestock farms other than 












General farms . 




14.7 
45.5 
40.3 




Primarily livestock-. 






Miscellaneous and unclassified 


Miscellaneous and unclassified 















106 



A GRAPHIC SUMxMARY 



V IV NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING MILKING MACHINES BY NUMBER OF COWS MILKED. 
ji ~"^-t-B2L C0MM£RCIAL FARMS FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS. 1954 




POWER FEED GRINDERS 

For many years, some farmers have made a practice of grinding 
home-grown grains and grains bought from local farmers, for 
their livestock ; others have followed the practice of hauling their 
grain to commercial grinding mills. Recent technological de- 
velopments in power grinders and in power units have encouraged 
more grinding on the farm. Most of the grinders used today are 
powered by a farm tractor or an electric motor. Many of the 
electric powered grinders are relatively small and have auto- 
matic controls. 

Power feed grinders on farms are concentrated in the grain- 
livestock farming areas. Almost half of the farms reporting 
feed grinders in 19"«4 were in the S States which comprise the 
Corn Belt and Lake States. About one-ninth of them were in 



Iowa alone. Another one-fourth were in the 6 Great Plains 
States, and the remaining one-fourth were scattered over the 
remaining 34 States. 



I v ^~tt — -— — 


POWER FEED GRINDERS 

NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING. 1954 






/■', 4 \ 




t ... r^*~^-~ ^~*K-< 






('^7~---tL^' ' 




1\ £ 


v/~5&*~^&s 










*"~ i gJS 












Wm 




*y? 


i> 


Ht > • / 




*i 
























UNITED STATES TOTAL 












707. 088 


\ 


. f IDOT-IOO FARMS 

1 "1 ICOUNTY UHn BiSJSI 






„, ,,.„.,. , .,„-., 






UMU -'■*««. 


» r* «-** 



More than one-third of the livestock farms, other than dairy 
or poultry farms, reported power feed grinders in 1954. These 
farms were most numerous in the Central and Great Plains areas 
where livestock raising and feeding is important. Dairy, cash- 
grain, and general crop and livestock farms were the other farm 
types most frequently reporting power feed grinders. A large 
proportion of these are located in the Central grain and livestock 
area. Few poultry farmers used this kind of equipment, pri- 
marily because nutritional requirements for poultry production 
are so exacting that few farmers decide to grind and mix their 
poultry feed. Dairy farmers also face the same problem as 
poultry farmers but to a lesser degree. 



LUMBER OF FARMS WITH POWER FEED GRINDERS BY TYPE OF FARM 
FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 



WESTERN 

Th0U»0f>d» / 

an . . ' 





EASTERN , 

\ Trioutondt k 




UNITED STATES 



-GREAT PLAINS 

ThOUlOndl I 



I Cosh groin 
[ ';: : vj Cotton 

jjj Other field crops 
■|i| Vegetoble 
§S3 Fruit ond nut 
HI Demy 



Bgsj Poultry 

□ Livestock other 
than Dairy and Poultry 

.^Primarily crop 
^jprimanly livestock 
jjjjjjjjj crop and livestock 

■ Miscellaneous and 
unclassified 



.j lILJi 



SOUTHERN 
\ 




FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



107 



Tower feed grinders were reported on dairy farms regardless 
of size of herd in 1954, even on many farms with less than 10 
cows. Power feed grinders on small dairy farms that grow their 
own feed is a means of preparing grain for feeding without the 
time and expense of making numerous trips to the grinding mill. 
In all areas, except the Southern, a large proportion of the dairy 
farms with power feed grinders had from 10 to 19 cows, and 
another large proportion in all regions had from 20 to 29 cows. 
Dairy farms with herds in these two size groups represented two- 
thirds of all dairy farms reporting feed grinders in 1954. The 
cost of feed often represents a substantial part of the cash cost 
of operating a dairy farm. In the Northeastern region, for ex- 
ample, expenditures for feed on a typical family sized dairy farm 
probably represents a third of the total cash cost of operating the 
farm. In the central corn and livestock areas, expenditures for 
dairy feed usually represent a smaller proportion of total cash 
costs. In 1954, the average expenditure for feed by dairy farmers 
with 20 to 29 milk cows ranged from about $2,500 in the eastern 
area to $1,400 in the central region. Much of the feed fed to 
cows in the Eastern area was produced in the Central area. Many 
of the large dairy farms in California buy all of their concen- 
trated feed. Dairy farms in the Western region with 50 cows or 
more spent an average of $16,000 for feed in 1954. It should be 
pointed out that all of the feed bought by dairy farmers in 1954 
was not necessarily for milk cows. Some of it may have been 
fed to hogs, poultry, or other livestock. 



M5 



NUMBER OF DAIRY FARMS WITH POWER-FEED GRINDERS BY SIZE OF HERD 
FOR THE UNITE0 STATES AND AREAS. 1954 




ELECTRIC PIG BROODERS 

Traditionally, heavy farrowing in April and May have re- 
sulted in heavy marketings and seasonally low hog prices in 
late fall and early winter months. In order to have their hogs 
ready for an earlier market, many farmers have pushed the 
farrowing dates ahead to the cold, damp months of late winter 
and early spring. Providing heat for the new-born pigs then 
became a problem. 

Years ago most artificial heat for this purpose was provided 
by coal, wood, or oil burning stoves, bricks heated on the kitchen 
range and other methods, none of which were entirely satisfac- 
tory. During bad weather it was not uncommon for the kitchen 
to be converted into a pig nursery. As electric service became 
available, many farmers adopted the electric pig brooder. This 
equipment requires little attention and is relatively free from 
lire hazard. 

During the winter months the electric pig brooder is in oper- 
ation for an individual litter of pigs for a week or 10 days. 



Sometimes it is the only source of artificial heat provided but 
often it is used in conjunction with other sources of heat, es- 
pecially in central farrowing houses. It is seldom used during 
the summer months. 

In November 1954, approximately 117,000 farmers reported elec- 
tric pig brooders. These farmers were scattered throughout 
the hog-producing areas of the country, even in some areas of 
the South. Two-thirds of them were in the important hog pro- 
ducing Corn Belt and Lake States. Iowa and Illinois alone 
had a fifth of all the farms reporting electric pig brooders in 
1954. Farms with electric pig brooders were also numerous 
along the eastern border of the Northern Plains where corn and 
hog production are important farming enterprises. 



ELECTRIC PIG BROODERS 
NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING. 1954 




Somewhat more than 1 million farms reported sows farrowing 
between December 1, 1953, and June 1, 1954. More than three- 
fourths of these had fewer than 10 sows farrowing. About one- 
third reported between 5 and 14 sows farrowing in the 6-month 
period. Less than 7 percent of all farms reporting sows far- 
rowing during this period had 20 or more sows. A close rela- 
tionship exists between numbers of farms reporting different 
numbers of sows farrowing and number of farms reporting 
number of electric pig brooders. More than half of the farms 
reporting electric pig brooders had 1 to 9 sows farrowing, and 
many of these had only 1 or 2 sows farrowing. The electric 
pig brooder is a fairly inexpensive device for saving pigs at far- 
rowing time. It is an important device for the small hog pro- 
ducer as well as for the large commercial producer, neither of 
whom can afford high pig losses. 



NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING PIG BROODERS BY SIZE OF ENTERPRISE. 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AN0 AREAS. 1954 




108 A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 

Table 32.— NUMBER OF FARMS, AND PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING POWER FEED GRINDERS, BY TYPE 

OF FARM, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 



Item and type of farm 



Number of farms, total _. 

Type of farm: 

Cash-grain farms 

Cotton farms 

Other field-crop farms.-. . 

Vegetable farms -~ 

Fruit-and-nut farms. 

Dairy farms 

Poultry farms 

Livestock farms other than 
dairy and poultry 

General farms 

Primarily crop 

Primarily livestock 

Crop and livestock 

Miscellaneous and unclassified 
farms 



United 
States 



Area 



East- 
ern 



South- 
ern 



Cen- 
tral 



Great 
Plains 



West- 
ern 



Number (000) 



4,806 


779 


1.477 


1,366 


761 


547 


26 


26 


269 


182 


528 


1 


413 


12 


91 


373 


125 


222 


8 


6 


33 


7 


8 


8 


3 


86 


11 


16 


7 


1 


554 


146 


47 


288 


31 


157 


49 


35 


38 


13 


094 


58 


77 


316 


177 


342 


42 


61 


139 


68 


78 


9 


29 


1(1 


12 


65 


7 


3 


43 


10 


199 


26 


29 


87 


45 


1,491 


313 


571 


282 


188 



Item and type of farm 



Percent of all farms reporting by 
type of farm: 

Cash-grain farms 

Cotton farms 

Other field-crop farms 

Vegetable farms 

Fruit-and-nut farms 

Dairy farms 

Poultry farms 

Livestock farms other than 
dairy and poultry 

General farms 

Primarily crop 

Primarily livestock 

Crop and livestock 

Miscellaneous and unclassified 
farms 



United 
States 



East- 
ern 



South- 
ern 



Cen- 
tral 



Great West- 
Plains ern 



Percent 



22.8 


12.5 


10. 1 


21.6 


29. 1 


3.8 




1.7 


2.6 


12.5 


4.3 


6.2 


2.2 


8.7 


14.8 


2.9 


2.9 


3.8 


1.6 


5.8 


2.7 


5.8 


1.4 


4.0 




22.9 


18.4 


24.0 


23.8 


38.8 


6.1 


4.9 


4. 1 


10.8 


8.0 


34.3 


23.0 


16.0 


40.6 


38.4 


28.3 


24.4 


9.9 


35 4 


36.7 


10 9 


5.9 


4.5 


10 3 


23.8 


36.8 


34.5 


20.3 


39.6 


35. 


32.3 


28.5 


14.2 


36.1 


40.6 


2.3 


2.2 


1.4 


3.1 


4.0 



17.8 
9.7 

15.6 
1.7 

2.3 
19.4 
2.3 

24.7 

19.4 
15.5 
22.8 
24. 1 



2.0 



Table 33. 



NUMBER OF FARMS, EXPENDITURES FOR FEED, AND FARMS REPORTING FEED GRINDERS, 
DAIRY FARMS, CLASSIFIED BY SIZE OF HERD, FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 



FOR 



Size of herd 


Dairy 


farms 


Expenditures for 

feed for livestock 

and poultry 


Farms reporting 
feed grinders 




Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 
distribu- 
tion 


Dollars 

(000) 


Per farm 
reporting 
(dollars) 


Num- 
ber 
(000) 


Percent 

of dairy 

farms 


Total _ 


537 


100.0 


873, 409 


1,684 


129 


24.0 






lto4milkcows --. ... 

5 to 9 milk cows _ _ 

10 to 19 milk cows 

20 to 29 milk cows . .. __ ... ._ _. . 


25 
96 
219 
118 
57 
22 


4.7 
17.9 
40.8 
21.9 
10.5 

4.1 


8,476 
49,050 
215, 301 
218, 929 
176, 474 
205, 178 


376 
561 
1,039 
1,923 
3,155 
9,455 


3 

14 
51 
35 
19 

7 


10.7 
15.0 
23.5 
29.4 


30 to 49 milk cows _ _ .. 


33.2 
29.5 







Table 34.— FARMS REPORTING SOWS FARROWING BETWEEN DECEMBER 1, 1953, AND JUNE 1, 1954, AND 
FARMS REPORTING ELECTRIC PIG BROODERS, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 



Item 



All farms number (000) . 

Farms reporting sows farrowing between: 

Dec. 1, 1953, and June 1, 1954 farms (000)- 

percent ol all (arms. 

Percent distribution of farms reporting sows farrowing between Dec. 1, 1953, 
and June 1, 1954, by number of sows farrowing: 

1 sow _ .percent- 

2 sows .. -. percent. 

3 sows _ ___ percent. 

4 sows percent. 

5 to 9 sows percent. 

10 to 14 sows ..percent. 

15 to 19 sows _ percent. 

20 to 29 sows__ percent . 

30 sows and over percent. 

Percent of farms reporting electric pig brooders, by number of sows farrowing 
between Dec. 1, 1953, and June 1, 1954: 

1 sow.. percent. 

2 sows __ _ _ percent. 

3 sows -_ .percent . 

4 sows... percent. 

5 to 9 sows percent. 

10 to 14 sows... __ percent- 

15 to 19 sows ..percent. 

20 to 29 sows ...percent. 

30 sows and over percent- 



United States 



4,806 



1,004 
20.9 



22.4 
16.1 
10.1 
7.8 
21.1 
11.1 
4.7 
4.4 
2.3 



1.8 
3.8 
6.2 
6.9 
10.8 
15.5 
14.8 
19.1 
23.4 



Eastern 



779 



92 
11.8 



37.6 

23.0 

11.0 

7.3 

14.8 

3.3 

1.2 

.9 

.8 



2.4 
5.2 
4.1 
6.2 
8.3 
16.3 
19.6 
12.5 



Southern 



1,477 



221 
15.0 



47.5 

23.0 

11.4 

5.6 

9.4 

1.9 

.8 

.3 

.2 



1.7 
2.4 
3.6 
7.2 
6.4 
2.8 
4.3 



Central 



1.366 



515 
37.7 



10.1 
11.6 
9.1 
8.7 
26.1 
16.3 
7.4 
7.1 
3.8 



4.4 
5.5 
7.3 
9.0 
12.2 
16.6 
15.1 
20. 9 
24.4 



Great Plains 



150 
19.8 



16.6 
16.8 
10.3 
8.6 
25.7 
12.7 
3.9 
4.2 
1.2 



1.8 
3.7 
8.0 
4.3 
10.0 
11.0 
13.7 
11.8 
24.5 



Western 



34.7 
20.6 
13.1 

8.0 
15.6 

3.7 

1.0 
.9 

2.4 



4.6 
8.9 
24.5 
6.0 
18.5 
39.1 
41.7 
18.2 
36.7 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 
SERVICE EQUIPMENT 



109 



Farms in some rural areas have had telephone service for a 
iong time. Now electricity on the farm is supplying the heat 
and energy long lacking for really modernizing the farm home. 
Electric toasters, irons, radios, refrigerators, space heaters, and 
washing machines are commonplace pieces of electrical equip- 
ment in many farm homes. Television sets, home freezers, and 
running water in the home are becoming more commonplace, 
although many farm homes still lack one or more of these items. 
The discussion in this section deals with four of these service 
items for which the Census obtains data. These items are tele- 
phones, television sets, home freezers, and piped running water. 

TELEPHONES 

Of all our early technological developments, the telephone was 
one of the most rapidly accepted and widely distributed on farms. 
The telephone was invented in 1876 and by 1920 almost 40 per 
cent of all farms had a telephone. Many of the early telephone 
lines were inexpensively constructed with the wires strung on 
fence posts, trees, and small poles. Frequently a dozen or more 
farms were on one "party line." Exchange service often was un- 
satisfactory. By 1930, farms with telephones had decreased from 
the number in 1920 (2,498,000) by more than a third of a million, 
and by 1940 another decrease of more than a half million had 
taken place. The depression of the 1930's contributed to the 
latter decrease. Another important factor, however, was the 
prevalence of automobiles and hard-surfaced roads which gave 
the farmer more mobility and greatly reduced his isolation. The 
radio also helped keep him in contact with the central markets, 
the weather reports, and other developments. 



With the increase in commercial farming and in farm incomes 
after 1940. the percentage of farms with telephone service in- 
creased. By 1945, 32 percent of the farms had telephone service, 
and by 1950 about 38 percent had the service. In 1949 the Rural 
Electrification Administration was authorized by Congress to 
make loans to expand and improve telephone service in rural 
areas. By 1954 almost half of the farms had telephones. 

The Northeastern area, with 77 percent of the farms reporting 
telephones in November 1954, topped all other farming regions in 
the proportion of farms with individual phone service. The 
Pacific area was close behind with 75 percent, and the Corn Belt 
was next with 71 percent of the farmers reporting telephones. 
In the Delta States. 17 percent of the farmers had telephones and 
in the Southeast, 20 percent. Iowa, with 168.000 farms reporting 
telephones, had more farms with telephones than any other State. 

The number of farmers with telephone service increased from 
1950 to 1954 by almost 13 percent. All 10 areas of the country 
shared in this increase. The Appalachian area with an increase 
of 54.000 farms reporting telephones, and the southeastern area 
with an increase of 49,000 farms reporting telephones lead other 
areas in the increase. For the Southeastern area, however, the 
increase amounted to 84 percent compared to an increase of 32 
percent in the Appalachian area. Although more farms in all 
regions had telephones in 1954 than in 1950, some counties, es- 
pecially in the New England States, had fewer farms with tele- 
phones at the end of the 5-year period. A large part of this de- 
crease resulted from decrease in total number of farms rather 
than from the discontinuation of telephone service. 



PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING TELEPHONES, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LE6END 

PERCENT 
I I UNDER 10 El&Si 40 TO 59 

t&iii 10 TO 19 SS88 60 TO 79 

V///A 20 TO 39 Hi e 

+ NO FARMS 
US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



P NO AS4-05 3 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



110 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



TELEPHONES-INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING. 1950-1954 




Frequency of reporting of telephones is closely related to size 
of farm business, or to economic class of farm. In 1954, for ex- 
ample, 22 percent of the farms in Economic Class VI had tele- 
phones, while 80 percent or more of the farms in Economic Classes 
I and II reported telephones. Among the tenure groups, almost 
70 percent of share-cash tenants had telephones, as compared 
with 6S percent of managers, 57 percent of part owners, and 51 
percent of full owners. Many of the owner-operated farms are 
small in size and have relatively low farm incomes. Farms of 
share tenants and croppers as a group had fewer telephones 
than farms in other economic classes. 



TELEVISION SETS 

The most recent development in mass communication is tele- 
vision. Farmers are rapidly installing television sets as re- 
ception becomes available to them. In November 1954, about 1.7 
million farms, or more than 35 percent of all farms, had tele- 
vision sets. This number exceeds the number of farms reporting 
home freezers in 1954, by 10 percent. 

The range for satisfactory reception of television broadcasts is 
definitely limited. For this reason, many farmers cannot use re- 
ception sets until broadcast facilities become available to their 
area. The percentage of farms reporting television sets in 1954 
varied in the different areas from 60 percent in the northeastern 
area to less than 20 percent in the Delta area. 



TELEVISION SETS 

. NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING. OCTOBER NOVEMBER. 1954 




PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING HOME FREEZERS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




*- NO FARMS 



US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A34-248 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



111 



HOME FREEZERS 

Farm homemaking has been revolutionized by modern refrig- 
eration. In a great many eases the mechanical refrigerator was 
one of the first major pieces of electrical equipment bought after 
electric service was received at the farm. Many dairy farmers 
immediately after receiving electric service replaced the old 
water bath or ice type of refrigeration with an electric cooler. 
In fact, the old icehouse has about disappeared from farms. 
More recently the home freezer is providing a much-needed cold 
storage space on many farms. It will freeze and preserve many 
kinds of foods for protracted periods, usually ranging from a few 
days to a year. Home freezing has reduced the amount of can- 
ning done on many farms. The farm freezer often supplements 
or surplants the cold storage locker in a local plant. 

In 1950, about 651,000 farms reported home freezers. By 1954 
the number had increased to 1,542,000, an increase of 137 per- 
cent. In Ihe Northeast, Corn Belt, Lake States, Mountain, and 
Pacific States more than 40 percent of the farmers reported home 
freezers in 1954. In the Appalachian, Southeast, and Delta areas, 
about 20 percent of the farmers had home freezers. However, 
home freezers have been installed very rapidly on farms in these 
regions: there were almost 3 times as many farms with them in 
1954 as in 1950. 



PIPED RUNNING WATER 

By most definitions a "modern home," whether in the city or 
on a farm must have electric service, central heat, and piped run- 
ning water. A few farms had running water before they had 
electric service, often from a spring or reservoir located above 
the farmstead. On most farms, however, running water was only 
a dream until electric power made it practicable to install auto- 
matic pumps and pressure tanks. In 1954, more than 2.81 million 
farms had piped running water. This is about 59 percent of all 
farms and 478,000 more than the number of farms with telephone 
service. 

The proportion of farms in all areas of the country having this 
facility ranged from 94 percent of all farms in the Pacific States, 
and 85 percent in the Northeast area to 36 percent in the Delta 
area. Piped running water on an individual farm may be used 
for household purposes, for farm purposes, or for both. On 
most farms, running water is first installed in the home and 
later it is extended to the service buildings and service areas. 
On many farms, however, the order of installation is reversed. 
The term "piped running water" on some farms means complete 
plumbing facilities with automatic water heaters, bathroom, and 
sewage disposal system. On other farms it may mean little more 
than water in the kitchen. Running water in service buildings is 
now almost a necessity for the operation of commercial dairy and 
poultry farms. 



PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING PIPED RUNNING WATER, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




I l llNRFR 30 

W//ft 30 TO 49 

[ I 50 TO 69 

* NO FARMS 

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



LEGEND 
PERCENT 

§S§ 70 T 89 

Hi 90 AND OVER 



MAP NO A54-249 



BUREAU OE THE CENSUS 



112 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PIPED RUNNING WATER 
NUMBER OF FARMS REPORTING. 1954 




A direct relationship exists between level of farm incomes and 
the use of piped running water. More than 93 percent of Eco- 



nomic Class I farms but only 33 percent of the Class VI farms 
reported piped running water in 1954. Among the tenure groups, 
64 percent of the full-owner operated farms, 08 percent of the 
part-owner operated farms, and 40 percent of the tenant-operated 
farms had piped running water. 

COMBINATIONS OF SERVICE EQUIPMENT 

Of the 4.S million farms in November 1954, 1.9 million, or 
almost 40 percent had electricity, telephone, and piped running 
water. Prevalence of farms having all three of these items 
ranged from a high of 65 percent in the Western area to 17 percent 
in the Southern area. Electricity apparently was first installed 
by most farmers, as more than 25 percent of the farms had elec- 
tricity, but neither telephone nor piped running water. Less 
than 1 percent of the farmers reported having a telephone only or 
running water only. 



Table 35.— NUMBER AND PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING ELECTRICITY, TELEPHONES, AND PIPED RUNNING 

WATER, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 

[Data are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms. See text] 



Item 



United States 



Area 



Eastern 



Southern 



Central Great Plains 



Western 



All farms ...number (000). 

Farms reporting: 

Electricity, telephone, and piped running water.... farms (000). 

percent of all farms. 
Electricity, telephone, and no piped running water ..farms (000). 

percent of all farms. 
Electricity, no telephone, and piped running water farms (000). 

percent of all farms. 
Electricity, no telephone, and no piped running water farms (000). 

percent of all farms. 

No electricity, telephone, and piped running water.. farms (000). 

percent of all farms. 
No electricity, no telephone, and piped running water ..farms (000). 

percent of all farms. 
No electricity, telephone, and no piped running water farms (000). 

percent of all farms. 
No electricity, no telephone, and no piped running water farms (000). 

percent of all farms. 

■ Less than 0.1 of 1 percent. 



4,806 



1.900 
39.5 
386 
8.0 
898 
18.7 
1.224 
25.5 

4 
.1 
18 
.4 
17 
.4 
359 
7.5 



351 

45.1 

52 

6.7 

121 
15.6 

196 
25.1 

1 
.1 

3 
.4 

3 

.4 

52 

6.7 



C) 



1,477 



247 

16.7 

44 

3.0 

366 
24.8 

658 
44.5 

1 

4 

.3 

1 

.1 

156 

10.6 



1.366 



726 
S3. 1 

198 
14.5 

166 
12.2 

196 
14.4 

1 
.1 

4 
.3 

8 

.6 

67 

4.9 



761 



302 

39.7 

81 

10.6 

158 
20.7 

149 
19.6 

1 
.1 

4 
.5 

i 

.5 

63 

8.2 



423 



275 

65.0 

10 

2.4 

87 

20.5 

26 

6.1 

1 
.2 



1 

.2 

21 

4.9 



Table 36.— NUMBER AND PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING ELECTRICITY, TELEPHONES, AND PIPED RUNNING 
WATER, BY ECONOMIC CLASS OF FARM, FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1954 



IData are estimates based upon reports for only a sample of farms 


. See text) 












All farms 


Commercial farms 


Other 




Class I 


Class II 


Class III 


Class IV 


Class V 


Class VI 


farms 




4,806 

1,900 

39.5 

386 

8.0 

898 

18.7 

1,224 

25.5 

4 

18 
.4 
17 
.4 

359 
7.5 


136 

111 

81.6 

2 

1.8 

16 

11.4 

2 

1.5 

C) 

.1 
(■) 

.3 

C) 

.1 

4 

3.2 


443 

324 

73.3 

27 

6.2 

63 

14.1 

17 

3.8 

C) 

.1 
2 

.3 
C) 

.1 

10 

2.2 


726 

411 

56.6 

76 

10.5 

128 

17.6 

82 

11.3 

1 

3 
.5 

2 

.3 

23 

3.2 


821 

306 

37.2 

87 

10.6 

167 
20.4 

206 
25.1 

1 
.1 

3 
.4 

4 

.5 

48 

5.8 


769 

204 

26.5 

65 

8.5 

146 
19.0 

278 
36.1 

(') 
.1 
3 
.4 
3 
.4 
70 
9.0 


458 

69 

15.1 

30 

6.7 

81 

17.6 

200 

43.8 

(«) 
(') 

2 
.5 
3 
.6 
72 
15.8 


1,453 


Farms reporting: 

Electricity, telephone, and piped running water farms (000). 

percent of all farms. . 
Electricity, telephone, and no piped running water farms (000).- 

percent of all farms. 
Electricity, no telephone, and piped running water farms (000). 

percent of all farms. . 
Electricity, no telephone, and no piped running water... farms (000). - 

percent of all farms. . 

No electricity, telephone, and piped running water farms (000).. 

percent of all farms. . 
No electricity, no telephone, and piped running water farms (000).. 

percent of all farms. . 
No electricity, telephone, and no piped running water. farms (000) . . 

percent of all farms. . 
No electricity, no telephone, and no piped running water farms (000) .. 

percent of all farms.. 


476 

32.7 

98 

6.7 

298 
20.5 

440 
30.3 

2 
. 1 
4 
.3 
5 
.3 
132 
9.1 



• Quantity less than half of the smallest unit: less than 500 or less than 0.05 percent. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



113 



SOME RESULTS OF FARM MECHANIZATION 



Modern mechanization has made the farm a better place to 
live and to work. Modern farm and home facilities have im- 
proved farm sanitation and health conditions of the farm family. 
They have made farm and home work easier by reducing hand 
labor and human drudgery. Farm machines and facilities have 
reduced sizes of crews needed to perform some of the major, labor- 
consuming farm jobs, and made possible greater use of older and 
younger workers. Electric lights, piped running water, television, 
and radio, have provided satisfying influences in keeping good 
hired hands, and they have aided the farm family in conducting 
its business, and its educational and social affairs. 

Tractors, motortrucks, and automobiles are the three power 
machines basic to modern mechanization of field work and trans- 
portation. Stationary and mounted internal-combustion engines 
and electric motors are the power units that have modernized the 
pumping of water for irrigation and for use in the home and 
farm service areas. The several items of harvest machines, chore 
equipment, and service equipment previously discussed are only 
some of the many items used with modern mechanical power 
units. However, their effects on production and marketing 
efficiencies in farming have been significant. 

Modern mechanization has played an important part in chang- 
ing production practices, thereby speeding up farming operations 
and reducing labor requirements. For example, the harvest of 
small grain is accomplished in a single operation with combine- 
harvester-thresher and the three tiresome labor-consuming opera- 
tions involved in the old method of cutting, shocking, and thresh- 
ing the grain have been eliminated. Timeliness of operation has 
helped to increase yields and the quality of product, and to reduce 
waste. 

The farm machines and equipment discussed in this report 
along with many others, have played a very important role in 
reducing total man-hours used directly in farming from about 
1!4 billion in 1920 to 14.6 billion in 1955, according to estimates 
by the United States Department of Agriculture. This decrease 
of almost 40 percent has been accompanied by an increase of 
60 percent in farm output for human use. At the same time, 
farm employment has decreased from 13.4 million workers to 8.2 
million workers. So great has been the increase in output per 
worker that each farmworker now produces enough food, fiber 
and tobacco for himself and about 19 other persons, while, in 
1920 each worker produced enough for himself and about 7.5 
other persons. It should be noted here that a part of this ap- 
parent increase in farm labor efficiency has resulted from the 
transfer of some jobs from the farm to off-farm establishments. 

Mechanical power with its complement of adapted machines 
has made possible the handling of larger acreages per worker 
and per family. From 1920 to 1954, a 40-percent decline in the 
number of farmworkers resulted in a 67-percent increase in 
acreage handled per worker, or from 30 acres to 50 acres per 
worker. During this period the average size of farm in the 
United States increased from about 148 acres to 242 acres. This 
increase was largely the result of farm consolidations. Number 
of farms decreased from 6.4 million in 1920 to 4.8 million in 1954. 
Thus, fewer families now handle more land, and produce much 
more product for sale than they did in 1920. They do this with 
fewer workers and with 40 percent fewer farm man-hours. 

It should be stressed that the increased production per man- 
hour is not entirely the result of new machines, new tyjies of 



power, or because of adoption of labor-saving methods. Agri- 
cultural production per acre increased between 1920 and 1955 
by 22 percent, and livestock production per breeding unit in- 
creased by 68 percent during the same period. Each unit of 
increased production did not require a corresponding increase 
in man-hours. 

In general, crop production has been more highly mechanized 
than livestock production. Thus, even though the increase in 
crop production per acre between 1920 and 1955 was only a third 
of the increase in production per breeding unit, the actual in- 
crease in crop production per man-hour was double the increase 
in livestock production per man-hour. The largest increases in 
production per man-hour during the 35-year period occurred in 
the production of the highly mechanized grain and oil crops. 
The actual percentage increases were, feed grains, 260 percent; 
food grains, 360 percent ; and oil crops, 425 percent. Three 
other groups of crops had large increases in production per man- 
hour. These were, hay and forage crops, 138 percent ; sugar 
crops, 156 percent ; and cotton, 188 percent. Although production 
per acre of vegetables, fruit-and-nut crops, and tobacco has in- 
creased markedly, the large amount of handwork in weeding, 
pruning, picking, etc. has kept increases in production per man- 
hour relatively lower than for other crops. Decreases since 
1920 in production per man-hour have amounted to only 43 
percent for tobacco, 52 percent for fruits and nuts, and 65 per- 
cent for all vegetables. Increases in livestock production per 
man-hour have been largest for milk cows and poultry, amount- 
ing to 80 and 90 percent, respectively. The corresponding in- 
crease for meat animals, primarily hogs and beef cattle, was 
only 29 percent. 

Modern mechanization has given many small farmers, and 
large operators too, an opportunity to add to their farm income 
by working off the farm for pay. But at the same time mechani- 
zation has increased the farmer's costs for machinery and power, 
machine hire, and for petroleum products. Census data bear- 
ing on these 3 phases of "some results of farm mechanization" 
are presented in the following discussion. 

MORE WORK OFF THE FARM 

The number of farm operators working off the farm 100 days 
has increased steadily from Census to Census, from about 700,000 
in 1930 to 1,334,000 in 1954. This is evidence of the influence 
of technology — farm and nonfarm — on the off-farm labor market. 
Mechanization and related developments have paved the way 
for a significant migration out of agriculture and in a space of 
25 years have helped in doubling the number of farm operators 
working off the farm 100 days or more. However, improved 
highways and automobiles, and other improvements in transpor- 
tation and communications have brought farm people closer to 
industry and other jobs and have created increased nonfarm 
jobs for farmers and members of their families. Industry has 
become widely dispersed in many areas that were largely rural 
a few decades ago. In the Northeast and more recently in the 
rural areas of the South, increased off-farm employment has 
l>een brought about largely by new job opportunities in industry. 
Undoubtedly the increase from 1949 to 1954 of almost 70.000 in 
the ol>erators of Classes I 'o VI farms I farms with a value of farm 
products sold of $1,200 or morel working off the farm was 
influenced greatly bv increases in farm mechanization. 



114 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Wk 


^ PERCENT OF ALL FARM OPERATORS WORKING 


100 


OR MORE DAYS 


OFF 


THEIR FARMS, 1954 




V^^ll 


p|3fep-- ; • u_ 


(COUNTY UNIT 


BASIS) 






Fi° 1 i 


.SI Kk~\ '/j 


j^/^Tlj 


Lr* y 




r^W^S^' 1 ^ 


h4m^3S 


~Y sti$w&Mr 








(■■ rK:' ! 




1 


'km 






-^jj^^jgwr " '"' ■ ''^Mr^^'° 




ta 


^ V^Ljaa 




■s^ .:.' 




r ~ r irri 


B ri 


l^&S^^W 


*fii?i 










'SIS H*_flr""-"' r 


■'■■■ ■ i n 1; ; ^i ^ 







&| 




1 


C&^'^^vj 


W J 


1111 ^k,5°^^ 


I ! 1 U J 


B? 




gjif ' $' J 








r: : :2fi./: : ;':V:j ' :: x--:f:l-,5SSiHs 
■t±5£wt ■■■:•:•:•:■ :-$x* ''<"V TBKSgF 1 




§8(r~5©53 


















f§iS i. Jf \ 


c f: - ^*Pi 




B|: « 










LEGEND 


"^aOQCL^J ^.v.'.Jv ;V'ii 


r*y^sa>l^j[! 






EMia 


Sz^M 




PERCENT 




' r~ "> '-v-g : : : Jw^^" : - : M 




BP' - 'ijiK^Spff^'^ 






1 """ 1 UNDER 


10 ESS 30 TO 39 ^8fc § 


v.": tX5^WBSv^-x-t-:-i>^ 




JStewS'B?' •' 






EH! 10 TO 


19 129 40 AND OVER 












&*SJ!20 TO 


29 














* NO FARMS 










UNITED STATES AVERAGE 
26.3 PERCENT 


tb? 


U S DEPARTMENT 


OF COMMERCE 








MAP NO A54022 


BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



PERCENT OF ALL FARM OPERATORS WORKING OFF THEIR FARMS IN 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




i 30 TO 44 
*N0 FARMS 



US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54 060 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



115 



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




US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO AS4. tJlA 



NUMBER OF DAYS 
I TO 49 
50 TO 99 
100 AND OVER 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Although the number of farms in the aggregate has been de- 
clining, the number of farm operators working off their farms 
has been increasing. For example the number of operators work- 
ing 100 days or more off their farms increased from 944,000 in 
1940 to 1,256,000 in 1949 and to 1,334,000 in 1954. More than 
one-fourth of this increase was realized in the Southeast area 
where the number of operators who worked off their farms 100 
days or more, more than doubled between 1940 and 1954. This is 
a reflection in a large part of the rapid industrial development 
in the area. 



FARM OPERATORS WORKING OFF THEIR FARMS 100 DAYS OR MORE 

INCREASE ANO DECREASE. IN NUMBER. 1949-1954 




In some sections, such as eastern Kentucky, portions of West 
Virginia and western Pennsylvania, some counties have had a 
decline in the number of operators working 100 days or more 
oft their farms. Most of this decline apparently is due to the 
decrease in number of farms rather than to a decrease in off- 
farm jobs. 

MACHINERY INVESTMENT COSTS HAVE 
INCREASED 

Modern farm mechanization, reduced labor requirements, and 
greater opportunities for off-farm employment have been realized 
through increased investment and operating costs for farm ma- 
chinery and equipment. In 1956, physical assets of machinery 
and motor vehicles on farms was valued at 16.6 billion dollars. 
compared with a value of 3.1 billion dollars in 1940, according to 
estimates by the United States Department of Agriculture. 
Partially offsetting this tremendous increase in investment in 
farm machinery and equipment was a decrease of a billion dollars 
in value of horses and mules on farms. A part of the increase in 
value of machinery and equipment is due to increased prices. 
Increasing inventory values have been accompanied by increasing 
prices of farm products. In 1951, prices received by farmers 
were 200 percent above the average for 1940, and in September 
1956, they were 136 percent higher than in 1940. There are, of 
course, many other economic and other factors involved in the 
progress of farm mechanization and labor productivity. Farm- 
ers' expenditures for machine hire and petroleum products pro- 
vide two indicators of the progress of farm mechanization. 



116 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PURCHASED MACHINE WORK HAS INCREASED 

During early settlement of our country, most farm tools were 
simple and most farmers owned their own equipment or bor- 
rowed from their neighbors. Rarely did a farmer pay cash for 
a machine to work on his farm. With the coming of the grain 
reaper, the steam-powered thrashing machine, and other kinds 
of costly machines, it became customary for farmers to hire 
machines for certain kinds of work. As mechanization pro- 
gressed and the cost of fully equipping a farm increased, the 
practice of hiring some machine work became general in prac- 
tically all farming sections. In 1954, almost two-thirds of the 
commercial farms and one-third of all other farms reported some 
expense for machine hire. Heavy concentration of machine 
hire in 1954 was reported in the Mississippi River Delta and in 
several important western irrigation farming areas. 

As machines become more specialized, it is probable that the 
hiring of machine work by farmers will become even more gen- 
eral. Frequently a farmer will buy a machine realizing that he 
does not have enough use for it on his own farm to make it pay 
and expecting to use it for hire on other farms in the neighbor- 
hood. Numerous firms that make a business of doing machine 
work for farmers have been established. Airplanes used for 
seeding, dusting, and spraying, and earth-moving equipment are 
examples of machines often provided by nonfarm firms. Hay 
balers, grain combines, and forage harvesters often used for 
custom work are usually owned by farmers. 

Hiring a machine usually involves hiring some labor, too, as 
it is often customary for the owner of the machine to also pro- 
vide all or a part of the crew for its operation. 

Farms reporting machine hire in 1954 ranged from almost 70 
percent of all farms in the Lake States to about 45 percent in 
the Appalachian area. Farms of all economic classes reported 
some machine hire. Between 60 and 68 percent of the farms 
of Economic Classes I, II, III, and IV hired some machine work 
done. These are the farms that, for the most part, are large 
enough to use machines effectively. Less than 60 percent of 
the farms of Class V and less than 50 percent of those of Class 
VI reported any machine hire in 1954. This low rate of ma- 
chine hire applies to a relatively large number of farms with 
very small scale of operation. Almost half of the part-time 
farms hired some machine work. (The small amount of harvest 
work to be done on many of these places may not justify owning 
such expensive equipment as hay balers, forage harvesters, or 
corn pickers.) 



EXPENDITURES FOR MACHINE HIRE 

DOLLARS. 1954 








NUMBER OF FA 


FOR 


REPORTING MACH 

THE UNITED ST* 


NE HIRE. BY ECONOMIC CLASS 
TES AND AREAS. 1954 

{ I \STBTESJ ) ^rv~^ tC>^ 


NORTHERN 
PLAINS 


f 


\ 1 1 




/ • / 






m 






-J CORK BELT \. 






216. 4SC 




















BM.TM j*T 


WPALACH1ANJ 


S95.« T J5 








CD <«»' i 


1 r.: 




SOUTHERN PLAINS 

m 

*"-\ COT, 961 


MISS DELTA 
JjiT.eMW) 


" SOUTHEAST. 
_\ ISO." 


\ UNITED STATES 
\ Z.MS.IZI 


... — 

















....... ...- 



Farmers spent about $638,000,000 for machine hire in 1954, 
an average of about $135 for every farm in the United States. 
Most of this expense was incurred in the farming areas where 
relatively costly and complicated machines are used in field 
operations. The Corn Belt, with almost $119,000,000, led other 
areas in total expense for machine hire. The highest costs per 
farm were in the Pacific and Mountain areas where expenditures 
for all farms averaged $316 and $308, respectively. 

More than 80 percent of the total cost of machine hire was for 
farms of classes I, II, III, and IV. Part-time and residential 
farms representing 30 percent of all farms accounted for only 
5 percent of the total. 

Average expenditure per fann reporting machine hire was 
about $250 in 1954, up almost $30 per farm since 1950. 

For Class I farms the average expenditure for machine hire was 
$1,676, or almost 4 times as much as for farms of Class II. Al- 
most one-half of the total expenditure by Class I farms for ma- 
chine hire was in the Mountain and Pacific areas. Many of 
these farms are very large and highly specialized. For some 
farm operations, operators of these farms prefer to use custom- 
work rather than to own the machines and hire crews to op- 
erate them. 

GREATER DEPENDENCE ON PETROLEUM FUEL 
AND OIL 

Power for farmwork provided by horses and mules and oxen 
was farm produced. Now that most of the power is provided by 
motors, the farmer must buy it. More cash is required to farm 
now than was required when the farmer produced his own power. 
It has been estimated that SO million acres of cropland that once 
produced feed for horses and mules has been released for other 
purposes by the adoption of tractors, motortrucks, and automo- 
biles. On the other hand, farmers spent during 1954 about one 
and a third billion dollars for gasoline and other petroleum fuel 
and oil used in the farm business. This is for farming purposes 
only. A part of these expenditures were for petroleum fuels 
used for such purposes as heating orchards, brooding chicks, and 
heating water, but most all of the total was used in equipment 
powered by internal-combustion engines. 

Thus, farmers have become almost entirely dependent on pe- 
troleum products for most of their farm operations. They are 
no longer able to switch from mechanical to animal power in 
their field and road operations. Although electric motors are 
helping more and more in the stationary power jobs in the serv- 
ice areas, full-scale farm production is possible only when the 
necessary supply of petroleum products is available. 



FARM MACHINERY AND FACILITIES 



117 



The geographic distribution of expenditures for petroleum fuel 
and oil followed, in a general way, the distribution of tractors. 
There were some exceptions, however, as in the High Plains cot- 
ton area of Texas where pumping water for irrigation and inten- 
sive farming may have accounted for part of the concentration of 
expenditures for petroleum products. The Corn Belt had 26 per- 
cent of the tractors reported on farms in 1954 and 22 percent 
of the expenditures for petroleum fuel and oil. The Northern 
Plains, where many of the tractors are relatively large, had 13 
percent of the tractors and 15 percent of the expenditures for 
petroleum fuel and oil. 



EXPENDITURES FOR GASOLINE AND OTHER PETROLEUM FUEL AND OIL 
FOR THE FARM BUSINESS. DOLLARS. 1954 




Farms in the higher income economic classes use more equip- 
ment than do those in the lower income economic classes. Class 

1 farms, for example, had 10 percent of the tractors reported in 
1054 and bought 19 percent of all petroleum products used on 
farms, while Class VI farms had 4 percent of the tractors and 

2 percent of the expense for petroleum products. Part-time and 
residential farms reported 11 percent of all tractors and 4 percent 
of the total expenditure for petroleum products. The overall 
United States pattern of costs of petroleum products by economic 
class of farm is similar to the patterns in the Northern Plains, 
Corn Belt, and Lake States. In other areas the tendency is for 
larger proportions of the total cost to be borne by farmers in the 
higher economic clasjs groups. 

In 1954, farmers spent an average of $418 per farm reporting 
for gasoline and other petroleum products used in farming 
operations. This cost ranged from an average of almost $700 
per farm in the Mountain States to only $220 in the Appalachian 
area. Many of the farms in the Mountain area are large, are 
located considerable distances from trading centers and markets, 
and are well equipped with tractors, trucks, self-propelled com- 
bines, and automobiles. 

On a per-farm basis, Class I farms spent an average of $2,000 
per farm for petroleum products in 1954. This was more than 
double the average expenditure by Class II farms and 15 times 
the average of Class VI farms. Average expenditures of ab- 
normal farms was about $1,550 per farm but because of their 
small number they accounted for less than 1 percent of the total 
farm costs for petroleum products. 



^TOTAL COST OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS ON FARMS BY ECONOMIC CLASS; 

FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 




118 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



COST OF PETROLEUM PRODUCTS PER FARM BY ECONOMIC CLASS; 
FOR UNITED STATES AND AREAS: 1954 






LAKE STATES 



Dollar* 

2,000 



NORTHEAST 

Dollart / 

ISOO 





CHAPTER 3 



FARM TENURE 



SUMMARY OF CONTENTS 



Page 

INTRODUCTION 125 

DEFINITIONS AND EXPLANATIONS 126 

SECTION I, LAND 127 

SECTION II, PRODUCTION 151 

SECTION III, PEOPLE 171 

DIRECTORY OF TENURE DATA, 1954 CENSUS 191 

121 



122 



MAPS AND CHARTS WITH ACCOMPANYING DISCUSSION 



Section I — Land 



Land in farms: 

Percent of total land area in farms, 1954 

Land in farms as a percent of total land area, United 
States and regions, 1880-1954 

Land ownership: 

Ownership of land and land in farms, United States, 1954. 

Tenure of farmland: 

Land in farms, by tenure of operator, United States, 
1954 

Land in farms operated by tenants, by class of tenant, 
United States, 1954 

Percent of farms and farmland operated by tenants, and 
percent of total farmland under lease, United States 
and regions, 1880-1954 

Percent of all land in farms operated under lease, 1954.. 

Counties in which at least half of the land in farms was 

under lease to the operator, 1910-1954 

Tenure of farms: 

Number of farms, by tenure of operator, United States 
and regions, 1880-1954 

Number of farms, by tenure of operator, 1954 

Comparison of changes in number of farms, by tenure of 
operator, United States, 1945-1950 and 1950-1954. _. 



Page 
128 

129 
130 

131 
132 

133 

134 

135 



136 
137 

138 



Tenure of farms — Continued 

Changes in number of farms, by color and tenure of 

operator, South, 1950-1954 

Percentage of all farms operated by tenants, 1954 

Counties in which at least half the farms were operated by 

tenants, 1 880-1 954 

Most frequent method of renting farms, 1954 

Percent of rented farms, by class of tenant, United States 

and regions, 1950 and 1954 

Farms operated by class of tenant, 1954 

Value of land and buildings: 

Value of land and buildings, by tenure of operator, 

United States and regions, 1900-1954 

Average value of land and buildings per acre, 1954 

Average value of land and buildings per acre — increase 

and decrease, 1950-1954 

Average value of land and buildings per farm, by tenure 

of operator, United States and regions, 1950 and 1954. 

Multiple-unit operations: 

Subunits in multiple units as a percent of all farms, 1954.. 
Cotton acreage harvested in multiple units as a percent of 

total cotton acreage harvested, 1954 

Tobacco acreage harvested in multiple units as a percent 

of total tobacco acreage harvested, 1954 



Section II — Production 



Type of farming: 

Type-of-farming areas, based on type accounting for 

50 percent or more of commercial farms, 1954 153 

Percent of farms in each type-of-farm group, by tenure 

of operator, commercial farms, United States, 1954 154 

Crop and livestock output: 

Percent of value of specified crops and livestock sold, 
by tenure of operator for commercial farms, United 
States, 1954 155 

Percent of cropland harvested represented by acres 
harvested of the principal crops, by tenure of operator, 
for commercial farms, United States and regions, 1954, 156 

Percent distribution of acres of the principal crops 
harvested, by tenure of operator, for commercial farms, 

United States and regions, 1954 157 

Land use: 

Percent distribution of all land in farms according to 
major uses, by tenure of operator, United States, 
1945-1954 158 

Percent distribution of cropland, land pastured, and 
woodland, by tenure of operator, for commercial farms, 

United States and regions, 1954 159 

Size of farm: 

Average size of farm, by tenure of operator, United 

States and regions, 1900-1954 160 

Percent distribution of size group of cropland harvested, 
by tenure of operator, for commercial farms, United 

States and regions, 1954 161 

Irrigation: 

Irrigated land as a percent of all land in farms for 20 

States, 1954 162 

Percent distribution of irrigated farms, by tenure of 
operator, 17 Western States, Arkansas, Louisiana, and 
Florida, 1954 and 1950 163 



Irrigation — Continued 

Percent distribution of irrigated land in farms, by 
tenure of operator, 17 Western States, Arkansas, 
Louisiana, and Florida, 1954 and 1950 

Farm labor: 

Number of family workers (including operator) and 
hired workers per farm reporting, commercial farms, 
by tenure of operator, United States and regions, 1954. 

Expenditure for hired labor per commercial farm, by 
tenure of operator, United States and regions, 1954 

Equipment and fertilizer: 

Percent of farms reporting tractors (other than garden) 
by tenure of operator, commercial farms, United 
States and regions: 1954 and 1950 

Number of commercial farms by class of work power and 
tenure of operator, United States and regions, 1954 

Tractors on farms, number, 1954 

Percent of commercial farms reporting tractors, com- 
bines, milking machines, corn pickers, and pick-up 
balers, by tenure of operator, LJnited States and 
regions, 1 954 

Percent of farms using commercial fertilizer, by tenure, 
commercial farms, United States and regions, 1954 

Average expenditure per acre for commercial fertilizer 
and fertilizer material, by tenure of operator, com- 
mercial farms, United States and regions, 1954 

Specified farm expenditures: 

Average expenditure per commercial farm for specified 
cost items, by tenure of operator, United States and 
regions, 1954 



Page 

139 
140 

141 
141 

142 
143 



144 

145 

145 
146 

147 
148 
149 



163 

164 
165 

166 

167 
167 

168 
169 

169 
170 



MAPS AND CHARTS WITH ACCOMPANYING DISCUSSION 



123 



Section III — People 



Farm population: 

Population: Total, nonfarm, and farm, United States, 
1910-1954 

Farm population, United States, 1920-1955 

Residence of labor force, farm and nonfarm, United 
States, 1950 _ 

Migration to and from farms, United States 1920-1953-. 
Percentage change in the farm population selected 

periods, United States and regions, 1920-1954 

Residence of farm labor force by kind of worker, United 

States, 1950 

Tenure of farm workers, United States, 1954 

Farm income and tenure: 

Agricultural net income and nonagricultural net income, 
United States, 1910-1954 

Net income from farming received by nonfarm popula- 
tion, United States, 1910-1954 

Agricultural net income as percent of total National 
income, United States, 1910-1954 

Net income of the farm population from farming and 
nonfarm sources, United States, 1934-1954 

Percent distribution of commercial farms in each eco- 
nomic class, by tenure of operator, United States and 
regions, 1954 

Percent of commercial farms in each tenure group 
reporting a telephone, electricity, and running water, 
United States and regions, 1954 

Off-farm employment and part-time farming: 

Percent of all farm operators working off their farms, 
1954 

Farm operators working off their farms 100 days or 
more — increase and decrease in number, 1949-1954 



Page 

173 
173 

173 
173 

173 

173 
173 



174 
174 
174 
174 

175 

176 

177 
177 



Off-farm employment and part-time farming — Continued Page 
Farm operators with other income of family exceeding 

value of agricultural products sold, 1954 177 

Percent of farm operators working off their farms 100 
days or more, by tenure, United States and regions, 

1954 and 1950 178 

Percent of farm operators with other income of family 
exceeding the value of farm products sold, by tenure, 
United States and regions, 1950 and 1954 179 

Occupancy, mobility, and length of tenure: 

Average number of years on present farms, by tenure 

of operator, United States and regions, 1954 and 1950__ 180 
Percent distribution of farm operators in each tenure, by 

years on present farms, United States and regions, 

1954 181 

Years on farm — number of operators reporting by tenure, 

United States, 1910-1954 182 

Percent of farm operators on present farms 1 year or 

less, by tenure, United States, 1910-1954 182 

Percent of farm operators on present farms 1 year or 

less by month of occupancy, October to November 

1954, United States and regions 183 

Age and residence of farm operators: 

Average age of farm operators, by tenure, United States 

and regions, 1940-1954 184 

Percent of farm operators 55 to 64 years of age, 1954 184 

Percent of farm operators 65 years of age and over, 1954. 184 
Percent distribution of farm operators in each tenure 

group, by age, United States and regions, 1954 185 

Percent distribution of tenant operators in each tenure 

group, by age, United States and regions, 1954 186 

Percent of farm operators reporting residence off their 

farms, 1954 187 



INTRODUCTION 



This report on farm tenure consists of three sections entitled, 
respectively, Land, Production, and People. The first section, 
Land, deals with how individuals gain access to the services of 
agricultural land. The second section, Production, relates the 
tenure system to farm outputs and inputs. Section III, People, 
shows the tenure system as an instrument for dividing farm in- 
come among individuals. This portrayal of America's farm 
tenure structure indicates some of the relationships between 
tenure arrangements and production and division of farm in- 
come in our economy. 

Land tenure can be looked upon as a collection of arrange- 
ments which, to the individual, may appear to be a scale of 
degrees of access to land services. At one end of the scale 
is the fee simple, debt-free ownership which permits maximum 
access to the services of land subject to rights reserved by the 
public. At the other end of the scale may be such tenure forms 
as the temporary leaseholder or sharecropper whose legal rights 
to land may be quite limited. 

The means of obtaining or retaining use of, or control over, 
resources may take many forms. Some of these forms of agri- 
cultural land tenure are : Individual ownership, debt-free or 
encumbered ownership ; coownership, such as joint tenancy, ten- 
ancy in common, or tenancy by entirety ; corporate ownership ; 
estate ; trust ; public ownership ; cash, standing, share, or cropper 
leasing arrangements ; life estates ; easements and covenants ; 
employee ; and public, noncontractual, reservations of property 
rights such as eminent domain, taxation, and police power. 

It would, of course, be impractical for a Census of Agriculture 
to enumerate all the possible relationships in the way persons 
gain access to land even for agricultural purposes. Tenure is 
usually specified in terms of the relationship of the person per- 
forming the farming operation without regard to the degrees 
of equity. The tenure forms contained in this report represent 
discrete categories such as full owner, part owner, manager, or 
tenant. These broad groups of tenure arrangements are neces- 
sary for purposes of enumeration and simplification. In reality, 
of course, tenure is a continuum of relationships which provide 
various degrees of access to resources. Ownership encumbered 
with a heavy mortgage may require far more stringent restric- 
tions on land use than debt-free tenancy. Part ownership may 
consist of many different mixtures of ownership and tenancy. 



Adjustments in the tenure structure have taken place in recent 
years to accommodate changes in agricultural production. The 
number of farm operators has decreased and farms have become 
larger. The proportion of farms operated by tenants has de- 
creased and the proportion of part-owner operators has increased. 
Full owners, although fewer in number, now represent nearly the 
same proportion of all operators as in 1945. Increasing numbers 
of farmers are undertaking off-farm employment. 

The second section of the report, Production, is especially de- 
voted to the relation of tenure to type of farm, land use, crop 
and livestock output, size of farm, irrigation, equipment and 
fertilizer, farm expenditures, and farm labor. 

Agricultural output has continued to rise while the number of 
persons employed in agriculture has declined. Production per 
acre and per animal unit has increased so that, although very 
little new land was cultivated and relatively small increases 
took place in livestock numbers, total output increased more 
than 80 percent from 1910-14 to 1954. Adjustments have been 
made in the composition of agricultural output and the tenure 
pattern has changed accordingly. The tenancy pattern, for 
example, now includes a greater proportion of livestock-share 
leases partly because of shifts toward expanded livestock enter- 
prises. Tenure adjustments have taken place to accommodate 
expansion in farm size. Some farmers wishing to use their 
limited capital for increased quantities of specialized equipment 
or fertilizer may prefer to rent rather than buy additional land. 
The number of part owners has increased. Tenure adjustments 
are necessary when improved techniques, changes in consumer 
tastes, and changes in the relative quantities of labor, capital, 
or land alter the value of the various resources in production. 

The farm tenure system, through its effects on the return to 
factors of production, resource mobility, and uncertainty, affects 
the level and composition of agricultural output. Since every 
farm operation is, in one way or another, related to tenure ar- 
rangements between individuals and to individual property rights 
as governed by our laws, the entire pattern of agricultural pro- 
duction from the individual farm firm to entire agricultural in- 
dustry affects and is affected by the tenure structure. 

125 



407763—57- 



126 



DEFINITIONS AND EXPLANATIONS 



The terminology used in this report is identical with that used 
in the reports for the various Censuses of Agriculture. In the 
several Censuses it has been necessary to make minor adjust- 
ments in the definition of a farm and in the procedures for enu- 
meration, but it is believed that these adjustments are not of suf- 
ficient magnitude to affect tenure trends appreciably. In the 
Census of 1050, a relatively slight change in the definition of a 
farm caused a decrease of 150,000 to 170,000 in the number of 
farms which would have been included if the 1945 definition had 
been retained. The 1951 definition of a farm coincided with that 
used in 1950. Most of the places excluded by the 1950 and 1954 
definition that would have been counted as farms in earlier 
Censuses are owner-operated. 

In all Censuses except 1950, farm operators were classified 
according to the tenure under which they held their land on the 
basis of the land they retained. The 1950 procedure, although 
slightly different, had very Little effect on the tenure distribution. 

Owners are farm operators who own all or part of the land 
they operate. 

Full owners own all of the land they operate. 

Part owners own land they operate and rent, from others, 
additional land which they operate. 

Managers operate farms for others, and are paid a wage or 
salary for their services. 



Tenants rent from others (or work on shares for others) 
all of the land they operate. 

Cash tenants pay cash and no share of crops or livestock as 
rent, such as $10 per acre or $1,000 for the use of the entire 
farm. 

Share-cash tenants pay a part of the rent in cash and a part 
as a share of the crops or of the livestock or livestock products, 
or both. 

Share tenants pay a share of either the crops or of the live- 
stock or livestock products, or a share of both. Share tenants 
were further classified as : 

Crop-share tenants if they paid a share of the crops and no 
share of the livestock or livestock products. 

livestock-share tenants if they paid a share of the livestock 
or livestock products. They may also have paid a share of the 
crops. 

Croppers are tenants to whom all work power is furnished. 

Other tenants include those who pay a fixed quantity of any 
product ; those who pay taxes, keep up the land and buildings, 
or keep the landlord in exchange for the use of the land ; those 
who have use of the land rent free ; and all others whose rental 
arrangements require payment other than cash or a share of 
the products. 

Unspecified tenants include those tenants whose rental agree- 
ment was not reported or could not be determined from the 
information given. 



GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS AND DIVISIONS 

THE 
NORTH 




THE 
WEST 



SOUTH 



Figure 1 . 



The four geographic regions used in this report are: (i) The 
Northeast, including the 9 States in the New England and Middle 
Atlantic divisions ; (2) The North Central, including the 12 States 
in the East North Central and West North Central divisions ; 
(3) The South, including the 16 States in the South Atlantic, 
East South Central, and West South Central divisions, and (4) 
The West, including the 11 States in the Mountain and Pacific 
divisions. 

Some of the data used herein, particularly those for commercial 
farms only, are estimates based on reports for a sample of farms. 
Data that are based on reports for a sample of farms are shown 



in italics or by a note if the data are presented in tabular form. 
A description of the sampling technique and the reliability of 
sample data are given in the Introduction to Volume II, "General 
Report," of the 1954 Census of Agriculture. 

Commercial farms are, in general, those with a value of sales 
of farm products amounting to $1,200 or more. Farms with a 
value of sales from $250 to $1,199 were also classified as com- 
mercial if the farm operator worked off the farm less than 100 
days and if the income which the operator and other members of 
his family received from nonfarm sources was less than the total 
value of farm products sold. 



SECTION I 
Land 



128 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT OF TOTAL LAND AREA IN FARMS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




I I UNDER 10 
EIHlOTO 19 
WM 20 TO 39 
j%%% 40 TO 59 

*fO FARMS 



US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



Figure 2. 



LAND IN FARMS 



The principal agricultural uses of land are for crops and for 
pasture ; however, not all of the land used for agricultural pur- 
poses is classed as farmland. Although almost all land in crops 
is considered farmland, millions of acres of land are used for 
grazing but are not enumerated as "laud in farms." Thus, of 
the 1,903,824,640 acres of land surface in the United States, 79.4 
percent was used for agricultural purposes in 1954, although only 
60.8 percent was classified as land in farms. Land not in farms 
was not used in the tenure classification. 

The proportion of the land area in farms showed an upward 
trend to 1950. The farm area in 1954 was almost the same as in 
1950. The relatively stable farm area, for the country as a whole, 
fails to reveal the differences which have been occurring in the 
States and in larger geographic regions. Decreases in land in 
farms, between the 1950 and 1954 enumerations, occurred in all 
States each of the Mississippi River, except Florida. Although 
decreases also were reported in five States west of the Mississippi 
River, the combined loss — nearly 18 million acres — was almost 
offset by increases in the western half of the country and in 
Florida. 

In the Northeast the downward trend in the land area devoted 
to agriculture has been almost continuous since 1880. By 1900, 
this area had 2% million fewer acres of farmland than at the 
peak in 1S80. From 1900 to 1954 the Northeastern States, col- 
lectively, lost another 24 million acres of farmland, or about 3 
out of every 8 acres. 

The North Central Region comprises one-fourth (25.4 percent) 
of the total land surface in the continental United States and 
one-third (34.0 percent) of the farmland. The farm area in this 
region apparently reached its peak about 1945. At that time, 



82.5 percent of the laud area was within farm boundaries. Rela- 
tively small declines in the acreage in farms have been reported 
in the two intercensal periods since that time. In the period 
1945-54, this region lost more than 5 million acres from its farms 
so that by 1954 the proportion of land in farms had dropped to 
81.4 percent. 

The South, which has 29.5 percent of the total land area in the 
United States, had, in 1954, only slightly more than two-thirds 
(68.7 percent) of its area in farms. The other third of the area, 
representing nonagricultural land, is largely ungrazed wooded 
tracts held by timber or paper companies or in other private 
holdings : swamps and tidal marshes ; rugged terrain some of 
which is in parks : eroded, abandoned lands once in farms but 
now overgrown with brush and trees ; and, of course, land re- 
quired by roads, cities, and industrial uses. Although economic 
forces could bring thousands of acres of these nonagricultural 
lands into a higher agricultural use through clearing and drain- 
ing, forestry is the presently preferred use for much of the area. 

Following the Civil War, acreage of land in farms in the South 
increased until 1900, after which date each successive Census 
through 1925 registered a decline. Thereafter, the trend was 
upward through 1950. Between 1950 and 1954, this region re- 
corded a loss of nearly 7 million acres from the farm area. This 
decrease would have been even greater if it had not been for a 
1,634,000 increase recorded in Florida. Abandonment of some of 
the poorer agricultural lands in the South, particularly in the 
Southern Piedmont and in the more mountainous and hilly areas, 
has been brought about in part by more attractive opportunities 
for earning a living through nonfarm employment in industry. 

The West has continued the expansion of its farmland area, 
without interruption, since the first Census of land in farms was 



Percent 
100 



eo 



100 



FARM TENURE 129 

LAND IN FARMS AS A PERCENT OF TOTAL LAND AREA, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1860-1954 




1954 



1950 



1940 



1930 



1920 
Percent 



1910 



1900 



1890 1880 



NORTHEAST 



100 



" ^ ™i ■■ ■■ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ 1 

1954 1950 1940 1930 1920 1910 1900 1890 1880 1954 1950 1940 1930 1920 1910 1900 1890 1880 

Percent Percent 




NORTH CENTRAL 




100 



80 



60 



40 



20 



WEST 



till. 



1954 1950 1940 1930 1920 1910 1900 1890 1880 



1954 1950 1940 1930 1920 1910 1900 1890 1880 



Figure 3. 



made in 1S50. This region, which comprises nearly two-fifths 
(39.6 percent) of the United States laud area, had only 44.S per- 
cent of its area in farms in 1954. The increase, in the 1950 to 
1954 period, approximated 13 million acres or 4.0 percent. Most 
of the increase in land in farms came about through incorporation 
of grazing lands into farms. 

Since about 1920, new lauds used for agriculture represented 
only a small part of the enlargement of the farm area. Much 
of the grazing land of the West comprises public domain land 
grazed under the permit system. This permit land is excluded 
from enumeration of land in farms, largely because multiple 
users have access to much of the land. An increasing acreage 
of the public land has gone over to single users through 
a leasing arrangement. These leased lands are included in the 



farmland area. About 17,300,000 acres of land were leased under 
the Taylor Grazing Act in 1954; this compares with 13 million 
acres in 1950 and 7,400,000 acres in 1940. 

(Continued on page 18S) 

Table 1. — Land in Farms as a Percent of Total Land Area, 
for the United States and Regions: 1880 to 1954 



Region 


1954 


1950 


1940 


1930 


1920 


1910 


1900 


1890 


1880 


United States 


60.8 
39.2 
81.4 
08.7 
44.8 


60.9 
42.4 

82.0 
69.9 
43.1 


55.7 
44.9 
80.2 
65.7 
33.9 


51.8 
47.6 
77.8 
61.0 
28.9 


50.2 
55.5 
77.4 
62.3 
23.0 


46.2 
60.7 
72.4 
63.1 
14.7 


41. 1 
63.1 
65.6 
64.4 
12.4 


32.7 
60.5 
53.0 
45.6 
6.3 


28.2 
65.6 


North Central 

South 

West 


12.8 
41.8 
3.5 



130 A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 

OWNERSHIP OF LAND AND LAND IN FARMS, FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1954 



INDIAN LANDS. 

55 MIL ACRES 

(a 9%) 




STATE ANO LOCAL 

31 2 MIL ACRES (2 7%) 

INDIAN LANDS _ 
40 8 MIL. ACRES 
(3 5%) 

CORPORATION S- 

57 5 MIL. ACRES 

(5.0%) 



FEDERAL 

13.6 MIL ACRESO 2%) 




TOTAL LAND 



LAND IN FARMS 



-^INCLUDING CORPORATIONS 



Figure 4. 



LAND OWNERSHIP 



Public and private ownership. — Although title to more than 
one-fourth of the land area of the United States rests with Fed- 
eral, State, or local governments, only 3.0 percent of the land 
in farms is publicly owned. Most of the land in farms owned 
by government is of low productivity and the acreage that is em- 
ployed in agricultural production is devoted almost entirely to 
grazing. 

Of the total land area of continental United States, 407.0 mil- 
lion acres, or 21.4 percent, are owned by the Federal Govern- 
ment ; 80.3 million acres, or 4.2 percent are owned by State gov- 
ernments ; and an estimated 17 million acres, or 0.0 percent, are 
owned by local governments. The Federal Government, in addi- 
tion to the land it owns, also administers 55 million acres of 
Indian lands. The 11 Western States comprising the Western 
Region contain 88.5 percent of the Federal land, and the propor- 
tion of Federal land in some States — such as Nevada, 87.1 per- 
cent ; and Utah, 70.2 percent — exceeds one-half the total land 
area of the State. 

Ownership of land in farms. — The land ownership policy of the 
United States, after the Preemption Act of 1830, is characterized 
by its emphasis on the maximization of fee simple ownership by 
individuals. With the exception of the lands of the 13 original 
colonies and the present borders of Texas, most of the land in the 
United States has at some time been owned by the Federal Gov- 
ernment. To promote the settlement and development of this 
country the Federal Government disposed of much of its land 
to States, schools, railroads, and individuals with the result that 
much of the land now under the direct control of the Federal 
Government is either in no economic use or in uses of general 



rather than individual interest. The principal exceptions, of 
course, are timber and grazing lands. 

The two principal agencies which deal with the use of Federal 
grazing lands are the Forest Service, Department of Agriculture, 
and the Bureau of Land Management, Department of Interior. 
The Forest Service in 1054 was responsible for permits and leases 
on 77.1 million acres of grazing land, and the Bureau of Land 
Management, for 175.7 million acres. 

Grazing land held by individual ranchers on a permit basis 
from the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management is not 
included in "land in farms" as determined by the Censuses of 
Agriculture. 

(Continued cm page 188) 

Table 2. — All Land and Land in Farms By Type of Owner, 
for the United States: 1954 

[Land in farms by type of owner based on a sample of approximately 200,000 farms] 





All land (farm and 
nonfirm) 


Land in farms 


Percent 


Type of owner 


Million 
acres 


Percent 
distribu- 
tion 


Million 
acres 


Percent 
distribu- 
tion 


in 

farms 


Total 


1. 903. 8 
1. 343. 6 

(NA) 
(NA) 

560.2 

407.9 

97.3 

55.0 


100.0 
70.6 

(NA) 
(NA) 

29.4 

21.4 

5.1 

2.9 


1. 158. 2 

1, 072. 6 

1, 015. 1 

57.5 

85.6 
13.6 
31.2 
40.8 


100.0 

92.6 

87.6 

5.0 

7.4 
1.2 
2.7 
3.5 


60.8 


Private, including corporate 

Private --- 


79.8 
(NA) 
(NA) 




15.3 


Federal .. 

State and local governments.-. 


3.3 
32.1 

74.2 







NA Not available. 



FARM TENURE 

LAND IN FARMS, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1954 



131 



ALL TENANTS 16.67, 
I92,57,,665 ACRES 



MANAGERS 8.6% -»- 
99,845,547 ACRES 




FULL OWNERS 34.2% 
395,544,319 ACRES 



PART OWNERS 40.6% 
470,229,9,80 ACRES 



Figure 5. 



TENURE OF FARMLAND 



Access to farmland. — Farm operators generally gain access to 
the services of land in two ways ; first, in perpetuity through 
ownership and second, for a term through lease. About one- 
half of the farmland in the United States, in 1954, was in farms 
in which only one general method, either ownership or tenancy, 
was used by operators. However, part-owner farms, containing 
both owned land and rented land, occupy a larger portion of the 
farmland than any other single tenure type. This mixed tenure 
is currently increasing in importance both in terms of land in 
farms and in number of farms. 

Land in farms is not, however, all of the same quality. Pro- 
portions of the land area alone do not show the relative produc- 



tivity of the land in the various tenure groups. We find a high 
rate of tenancy in fertile regions such as the Corn Belt and the 
Delta. In the less fertile areas we find the more extensive live- 
stock operations of managers. Some evidence of this quality 
differential by tenure is seen in the variation in the per-acre value 
of land. 

It is estimated that 8.9.0 percent of the 1,160,048,854 acres of 
farmland is contained in commercial farms and the remainder In 
other farms. Commercial full-owner farms contained 2S.5 per- 
cent of the total farmland; part-owner farms, 3.9. 7 percent; 
manager farms, 5.2 percent ; and tenant farms, 15.6 percent. 
Since commercial farms produce about 98 percent of the value of 
farm products sold, they account for a larger proportion of the 
products sold than of the farmland. 



132 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 

LAND IN FARMS OPERATED BY TENANTS, BY CLASS OF TENANT, FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1954 



(DATA ARE BASED ON REPORTS FOR ONLY A SAMPLE OF FARMS) 



OTHER 
2.8% 
5,311,200 ACRES 



•UNSPECIFIED 
4.6% 



CROPPERS 
SOUTH ONLY 
4.9% 
9,412,841 ACRES 



LIVESTOCK-SHARE 

15.6% 
29,676,080 ACRES 




CASH 

19.4% 

36,959,882 ACRES 



SHARE-CASH 
24.3% 



46,210,227 ACRES 



CROP-SHARE 

28.4% 

53,987,449 ACRES 



Figure 6. 



Land farmed by various classes of tenants. — Leasing arrange- 
ments are characterized by the form of rental payment. Rentals 
are almost always either a fixed commitment in cash or produce 
or a share of the produce. Share agreements also frequently 
contain a provision for the sharing of certain operational 
expenses. 

Most of the land in tenant-operated farms is leased under some 
form of share arrangement. Sharing may be restricted to crop 
production only, or to livestock and/or livestock products only ; 
it may include a share of both crops and livestock or livestock 
products ; or it may include a share of either or both crops and 
livestock and an additional cash payment for pasture, feed crops, 
or a dwelling. Crop-share arrangements — those in which land- 
lord and tenant shared in all crops but in none of the livestock — 
had the largest share of land in tenant-operated farms. Their 
holdings amounted to 53,987,449 acres, or 28.4 percent of all 



tenant-operated farmland, in 1954. The share-cash leases fol- 
lowed with 46,210,227 acres, or 24-3 percent. Livestock-share 
tenants had 29,676,080 acres in farms. Sharecropping represents 
another version of a share arrangement. In this case, the land- 
lord furnishes all of the workstock or tractor power as a part 
of his share in the operation of the sharecropper farm. Share- 
cropper lands in the South, totaling 9,412,841 acres, represented 
4.9 percent of the United States total for land in tenant-operated 
farms. 

Cash tenants, those paying cash as rent and no share of crops 
or livestock, operated 19.4 percent of all land in tenant-operated 
farms in 1954. Other tenants include those who pay a fixed 
quantity of product, those who maintain the land and buildings in 
exchange for rent, and those who use the land rent-free. This 
combined group had 5,311,200 acres or 2.8 percent of the total. 
(Continued on page 188) 



FARM TENURE 



133 



PERCENT OF FARMS AND FARM LAND OPERATED BY TENANTS, AND PERCENT OF TOTAL FARM LAND UNDER LEASE, 

FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1880-1954 

PERCENT 



80 
70 

60 
50 
40 

30 
20 



I 

UNITED STATES 



Percent of forms operated by tenants 
Percent of land operated by tenants 
Percent of all land in farms operated under lease 



10 - 




70 
60 



1900 



70 
60 
50 
40 
30 








NORT 


HEAS 


T 




- 


- 














- 


- 
















- 








"•■^^^ 














10 















'*»-~v 




- 













i 


i 


i 


i 





1920 1925 

PERCENT 



70 
60 
50 






1 

NORTH 


1 
CENTRAL 




- 
















- 


30 


- 






—*-*** 
»*"*^ 






•Sb— 




















10 
















- 













i 


1 


1 


1 



I860 1890 1900 



1920 1930 1940 1950 I960 



1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 I960 



- 






~~ 1 

SOI 


JTH 






- 


- 












P B 


- 








- 




„-- 


- — — 




- — >* 






- 








i 


1 


1 





70 
60 
SO 








WE 


:st 






- 
















- 




















30 

20 
















■"■" - 








IT^* - **""* 


--- 


— -. 


< ' 




10 


- 












V , 


• — 













i 


i 


1 


1 



1920 



1950 I960 

54C-I26 



Figure 7- 



Changes in land under lease. — In 1954, land operated under some 
form of tenancy arrangement approximated 400 million acres, 
or about 35 percent of the total farm acreage. Slightly more than 
one-half of the 400 million acres were operated by part owners 
and the remainder by tenants. This was the first time that land 
leased by part owners exceeded that operated by tenants. The 
190 million total for tenants in 1954 includes a relatively small 
acreage (less than 9% million acres) operated by sharecroppers 
in the South. 

A decreasing proportion of the land in farms has been under 
lease (used in its broadest sense) since 1935, when nearly 45 
percent of all farmland was in this category. The proportion of 
the farm area operated by tenants increased steadily from the 
turn of this century through 1935, at which point tenants op- 
erated 31.9 percent of the farmland. Thereafter, in each suc- 
cessive Census both a smaller acreage and a smaller percentage 
of the farmland have been in the control of tenants. By 1954 
407763—57 10 



this percentage was down to I6.4. On the other hand, leased 
land operated by part owners has steadily increased since 1935 
both in absolute acreage and in proportion to the total acreage 
for all farm operators. The percentage leased by part owners in 
1935 was 12.7 and by 1954 it exceeded 18 percent. 

A considerable amount of capital is required by a farm op- 
erator who gives or contemplates giving his full attention to 
farm production. With a given amount of capital and available 
credit, he has some choice as to the amount of land he will farm. 
He may become a tenant or an operating owner. In order to use 
an ever-increasing amount of labor-saving, expensive equipment 
to a fuller capacity, he may elect to be a tenant with more land ; 
whereas, if he elects to be an owner, he may enlarge his farming 
operations by becoming a part owner. Thus, for several Censuses, 
farms of both part owners and tenants have been increasing In 
{Continued on page 188) 



134 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT OF ALL LAND IN FARMS OPERATED UNDER LEASE, OCT.-NOV, 1954 




LEGEND 

PERCENT 

I | UNDER 20 

t%%3 20 TO 39 
40 TO 59 
| 60 AND OVER 
* NO FARMS 

JS DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO. A54-289 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Figure 8. 



Geographic distribution of leased land. — In general, there is a 
higher proportion of tenancy in areas of higher quality land. 
The Corn Belt, notably northwestern Iowa and northern Illinois, 
has a relatively high proportion of its farmlands under some form 
of tenancy. The same may be said of that part of the Great 
Plains engaged primarily in crop, rather than livestock, produc- 
tion. The lands in the Delta region of Arkansas and the Coastal 
Plains of the Carolinas also are rather heavily tenanted. An 
important exception are the range lands In the West which have 
a relatively low productivity per acre but yet are leased in large 
blocks for grazing purposes. 

The value of land tends to be high in areas in which relatively 
large quantities of capital and labor per acre are required. If 
the financial resources of the farm operator are limited, he may 
choose to rent land in order to obtain a suitably large unit. Thus, 
the percentage of land under lease tends to be high where land 
values are high. The highest proportion of land leased. 43.7 per- 
cent, is found in the West North Central division ; whereas, the 
lowest proportion of land under lease, 102 percent, is in New 
England. 

Although the percent of land under lease has declined from 
44.7 in 1!I35 to 35.1 in I'.i54 for the country as a whole, not all 
areas have changed to the same degree. Since 1'JoO, the South 
is the only regiou that has experienced a decline in the proportion 
of farmland rented; the three other regions have had slight in- 
creases. 

A tenure pattern which originated in one section of the country 
may be quite different from that which developed in another 
section. At the two extremes may be cited (1) the Pilgrims in 
Massachusetts who divided the land of the colony and established 
each family on its own farmstead, and (2) in several of the 
Southern States, large grants of land were made to companies 
and individuals who brought over indentured individuals for 



colonization. This was followed by the introduction of slave 
labor on plantations. After the Civil War, many planters without 
funds for hiring labor and laborers without management expe- 
rience or lands joined forces in a landowner-sharecropper 
arrangement. This resulted in many small holdings in a tenant 
status. 

Land ownership was made easier in some States where free or 
low-cost lands could be acquired for settlement. After settle- 
ment, alternating periods of high land values and economic de- 
pressions made it difficult for many beginners or tenants to be- 
come owners. In some areas droughts and other natural hazards 
caused a later out-movement of settlers who either maintained 
ownership or relinquished their rights to the land. This is to 
say that, through the years, the tenure pattern has been changing 
and at a different direction or rate of change as between States. 

Table 3. — Percent of All Land in Farms Operated Under 
Lease, for the United States and Geographic Divisions: 
1930 to 1954 



Area 


1951 


1950 


1945 


1940 


1935 


1930 


United States .- 


35.1 

14.5 
42.2 
32.5 
31.9 

10.2 
16.1 


35.4 

13.8 
42.1 
34.5 
31.1 

9.1 
15.6 
38.1 
43.8 
26.9 
30.2 
39.8 
30.2 
34.0 


37.7 

14.4 
46.1 
35.4 
33.6 

7.1 
17.5 
39.4 
48.9 
30.2 
31.6 
39.2 
33.5 
33.7 


44.1 

17.2 
51.6 
41.8 
40.9 

10.4 
20.0 
40.9 
56.0 
37.8 
38.1 
45.1 
41.2 
40.0 


44.7 

18.0 
50.5 
43.9 
43.1 

10.7 
21.2 
41.3 
53.7 
41.3 
40.1 
46.6 
44.5 
39.3 


43.7 
17.2 




48.9 


South 


42.7 


West 


42.4 


Geographic Divisions 

New England ... 

Middle Atlantic 


D. ;i 

20.4 
40.4 


West North Central 


43.7 
23.4 
26.5 
39.0 
30.7 
36. 


52.4 
39.0 




39.2 


West South Centra! 


45.9 


Mountain 

Pacific 


43.8 
38. S 



FARM TENURE 



135 



COUNTIES IN WHICH AT LEAST HALF OF THE LAND IN FARMS WAS 
UNDER LEASE TO THE OPERATOR, 1910. 1935, 1940. AND 1945 



1935 




BASE FIGURES ARE FROM THE BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



U S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 



NEG 46371 BU REAU OF AG RICULTU RAL ECONOMI CS 



COUNTES W WHICH AT LEAST HALF OF THE LANO IN FARMS WAS 




<, .^COUNTIES IN WHICH AT LEAST HALF OF THE LANO IN FARMS WAS UNDER LEASE TO THE OPERATOR. 
p*M~ ~~^_ OCT-NOV. 1954 




Figure 9- 



Concentration of leased land. — The reduction in tenancy since 
1935 can be seen in a general way by noting the increase in coun- 
ties in which less than half of the land in farms is under lease. 
By 1910 the United States contained all its present States with 
the exception of Arizona and New Mexico, and yet commercial 
agriculture in many parts of the country was still maturing. In 
that year, 403 counties had over half their farmland under lease. 
As a benchmark, the year 1910 helps to indicate the increase of 
land under lease to a peak of 471 million acres in 1935 at which 
time 1,107 counties had at least half of their farmland under lease. 
Since 1935, the number of counties with over half the land under 
lease declined to 1,017 in 1940, 592 in 1945, and 510 in 1950. In 



T.i."V4 there was 482 counties with one-half or more of their land 
under lease. Certain areas — notably the Mid-Plains, Corn Belt, 
and Arkansas-Mississippi Delta — continue to have a relatively 
heavy concentration of land under lease. 

Since 1950, some slight shifts may be noted in the concentration 
of leased land. Most of the decrease in the number of counties 
with 50 percent or more of farmland under lease was in the South. 
Otherwise, the pattern of leased land concentration remained 
about the same in 1954 as in 1950, with slight changes accounted 
for by minor changes in the proportion of land which would move 
a county from the "less than half" to the "half or greater" cate- 
gory or vice versa. 



136 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



NUMBER OF FARMS, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES 
AND REGIONS, 1880 - 1954 



FARMS 
(thous.) 



4,000 



2,000 





FARMS 
(Ihous) 







NORTH CENTRAL 




- 


- 
















- 






- 














-». 


- 






— ■«, 










' 


' 


—^ 


1 


- 



1880 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 I960 IB80 1890 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 I960 

FARMS " 

(thous.) 



FARMS 








i 










(thous.) 








SOI 


JTH 








- 




- 














- 




- 














\ - 




























■s?Z- 


- 


rr< ^ 


^ 


*< 


-» 


— 
































__.^-' 


^ 
i 


^ 


- 


- 









- 






WE 


ST 






- 


- 




€. // 


^^•~ 

•^^ 






0, — "*^ 


v >. - 






/ 








1 


1 



1950 I960 

54C -132 



Figure 10. 



TENURE OF FARMS 



Changes in the number of farms. — In 1954, the number of farms 
in the Nation was nearly 600,000 below the number recorded in 
1950. The 1954 total of approximately 4.8 million farms was also 
the lowest recorded at any Census since 1890, at which time there 
were about 4.6 million units. The 1954 number of farms also 
represented a drop of more than 2 million from the peak reached 
in 1935. The more restrictive definition of a farm used in 1950, 
and again in 1954, accounted for a small part of the decline in the 
number of farms for the last two Censuses as compared with 
earlier years. The change in definition in 1950 accounted for a 
drop of an estimated 150,000 to 170,000 farms between 1945 and 
1950, most of which were owner-operated. 

Changes in the tenure of farm operators. — In 1954, the Census 
reported 2,736,951 full owners, 856,933 part owners, 20,647 man- 
agers, and 1,167,885 tenants in the United States. The number of 



farms in every tenure category, except part owners, has decreased 
since 1950. 

Regional comparisons show that, in varying degrees, the 
changes in tenure generally have been in the same direction 
throughout the country since the depression of the 1930's. The 
number of full owners, managers, and tenants is decreasing and 
the number of part owners is increasing slightly. 

Operators who farm only land which they own represent 57.2 
percent of all farm operators. The number of full owners in 
1954 — 2,736,951 — is the lowest since 1925, when this tenure was 
first classified separately. 

From 1SS0 to 1930, both the number of tenants and the per- 
centage of tenance increased continuously. Since 1930, the per- 
centage of farms operated by tenants has shown successive de- 
creases, although the highest number of tenants was not reached 
until 1935. Tenant-operated farms in 1954 were fewer than for 
(Continued on pape 188) 



FARM TENURE 



137 



NUMBER OF FARMS. 1954 




FARMS OPERATED BY FULL OWNERS 

NUMBER, 1954 



J iA&^JARMS OPERATED BY NONWHITE TENANTS (SOUTH ONLY) 

NUMBER. 1954 




FARMS OPERATED BY ALL TENANTS 

NUMBER. 1954 





Figure 11. 



Geographic distribution of tenure groups. — Tenants have not 
been so numerous in the Northeast and the West as in the South 
and in the North Central Region. More than one-half of all 
tenants are located in the South. 

Tenant farms are most prevalent in cotton-and-tobacco grow- 
ing areas. These predominantly southern-grown crops require a 
large amount of hand labor as measured in hours per acre. Such 
farms are usually small in total area. Tenant farms are also 
numerous in areas where the productivity of land is relatively 
high. Northern Illinois, northwestern Iowa, and the eastern 
part of the Great Plains are examples of such areas. 

Part-owner farms, while showing a fairly uniform distribution, 
are more prevalent in the wheat- and corn-producing areas. Farm 
(Continued on page 188) 



Color of farm operators. — The Census classifies farm operators 
as "white" or "nonwhite." Nonwhite includes Negroes, Indians, 
Chinese, Japanese, and all other nonwhite races. In 1954, there 
were 483,650 nonwhite farm operators in the United States. Of 
these, 465,216, or 96.2 percent, were in the South where the non- 
white farm operators are predominantly Negro. In the West, 
most of the nonwhite farm operators are Indians. In the South, 
nonwhite operators are concentrated in the Coastal Plains and 
in the Mississippi Delta. There was a loss of 97,269 in the num- 
ber of nonwhite operators between 1950 and 1954 for the country 
as a whole and 93,874 for the South. The percentage of farm 
tenancy among nonwhite operators dropped from 64.0 in 1950 to 
59.6 in 1954 for the United States and from 65.4 to 61.0 percent 
for the South during the same period. 



COMPARISON OF CHANGES IN NUMBER OF FARMS, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES 

1945-1950 AND 1950-1954 



NUMBER OF FARMS-INCREASE AND DECREASE 
1950-1954 




NUMBER OF FARMS - INCREASE AND DECREASE 
JANUARY 1. 1945-APRIL 1.1950 




'yV-FARMS OPERATED BY FULL OWNERS-INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER. JANUARY 1. 1945-APRIL 1.1950 




s w>mTi»m o> 



!U.W- FARMS OPERATED BY PART OWNERS-INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




UNITED STATES NET INCREASE V 
32.010, OR 3 9 PERCENT 



\^4 ICOUNTT UNIT BASK) \Jf 



^V-FARMS OPERATED BY PART OWNERS-INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER. JANUARY 1. 1945-APRIL I. 1950 




auttu o- the a*»a 



k}5-^FARMS OPERATED BY ALL TENANTS - INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




„ FARMS OPERATED BY ALL TENANTS-INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER, JANUARY I. 1945-APRIL I, 1950 



UNITED STATES NET DECREASE 
414.292 OR 22 3 PERCENT ' 




, Af'Ul'MI >.* ■.- .<W-< I 



Figure 12. 



CHANGES IN NUMBER OF FARMS, BY COLOR AND TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR THE SOUTH: 1950-1954 



WHITE OPERATORS (SOUTH ONLYHNCREASE AND DECREASE 
IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




k>i-JARMS OPERATED BY NONWHITE OPERATORS-INCREASE AND DECREASE 
IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




WHTE OWNERS(SOUTH ONLY) - INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




NONWHITE OWNERS (SOUTH ONLYI-INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




WHITE TENANTS (SOUTH ONLYI-INCREASE AND DECREASE 
IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 



V 




FARMS OPERATED BY NONWHITE TENANTS (SOUTH ONLY) 
INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




■ '"I *P1VJ1 



SJV FARMS OPERATED BY WHITE CROPPERS (SOUTH ONLYI-INCREASE AND DECREASE 
IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




FARMS OPERATED BY NONWHITE CROPPERS (SOUTH ONLY) 

INCREASE AND DECREASE 

IN NUMBER. 1950-1954 




Figure 13. 



140 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Ufr 



PERCENTAGE OF ALL FARMS OPERATED BY TENANTS, 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 



1954 



ItA 



c* 



X 



fta 



J 



LEGEND 
PERCENT 

I I UNDER 20 B59 SO TO 79 

i 20 TO 39 H DO ANO OVER 

£IH!40 TO 59 



US DEPARTMENT Of COMMERCE 




UNITED STATES AVERAGE 
24 4 PERCENT 



MAP NO A54 -02 I 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Figure 14. 



Farm tenancy. — No agricultural Census since 1880 has reported 
as few tenants as the 1,167,885 reported in 1954 : this number is 
1.7 million less than the peak number in 1935. Operators who 
own none of the land they cultivate represented, in 1954, a 
smaller proportion of all farm operators than at any time in the 
history of the Nation. However, one-fourth of the farms and 
one-fourth of the cropland are still farmed by tenants. 

One of the important features of tenancy in agricultural 
production is that owners of resources (land, capital, and labor) 
may combine these resources without the necessity of a per- 
manent transfer. Tenancy is a means for a skilled manager to 
operate a farm even with limited capital and land. Conversely, 
it is a convenient arrangement for the owner of resources who 
cannot, or prefers not to, participate in the actual farming opera- 
tion. Tenancy has frequently been viewed as part of the course 
toward ownership through successive steps of farm laborer, 
tenant, part owner, owner operator, and landlord. It is recog- 
nized, however, that several of these rungs of the so-called agri- 
cultural ladder might be bypassed. Census data indicate that 
many tenants become owners. In 1954, 70.5 percent of the farm 
operators under 25 years of age were tenants, whereas only 9.3 
percent of the operators 65 years or older were tenants. The 
percentage of tenants was consistently lower as the age of the 
operator increased. 

The concentration of tenant farms, while traditionally great 
in the South, has made certain notable shifts since Census data 
became available. One of the principal reasons for the relatively 
large number of tenant farms in the South was the sharecropping 
system and its association with cotton and tobacco. Since many 
of these tenant farms in the South are very small, they account 
for a higher proportion of the farms than the land in farms. 

In the Plains there is a heavier concentration of land under 
lease than of the number of tenant farms because of the large 



acreages operated by tenants and the large leased acreages of 
part owners. In the high risk Plains area the number of coun- 
ties in which at least half of the farms are operated by tenants 
has varied from Census to Census. The Corn Belt has had a 
relatively heavy concentration of both number of tenant farms 
and rented land in farms ever since shortly after the beginning 
of this century. 

Considerable variation exists in the method of leasing as be- 
tween different areas and types of farming. Croppers, of course, 
are reported only in the South. Crop-share rent is found in vary- 
ing degrees throughout the country, and is common on commer- 
cial farms. Crop-share arrangements may also be combined with 
a fixed cash rental — for example, for buildings, pasture, or hay- 
land — to form the share-cash combination frequently reported by 
operators in the Eastern Great Plains and Corn Belt. Cash 
leasing is used less frequently than the other methods of rental 
except for livestock-share. It is important in many of the graz- 
ing areas of the West, in the South, and in New England. 

Table 4. — Percent of all Farms Operated by Tenants, for 
the United States and Regions: 1880 to 1954 



Year 


United 
States 


North- 
east 


North 
Central 


South 


West 


1954 


24.0 
26.8 
31.7 
38.7 

42.1 
42.4 
38.6 
38.1 

37.0 

35.3 
28.4 
25.6 


6.0 

6.8 
8.6 
12.6 

13.8 
12.5 
13.0 
17.2 

18.2 
20.8 
18.4 
16.0 


23.3 
24.2 
29.1 
35.4 

36.3 
34.1 
32 
31.1 

28 9 

27.9 
23.4 
20.5 


29.4 
34.1 

40.4 
48.2 

53.5 
55.5 
51.1 
49.6 

49.6 
47.0 
38.5 
36.2 


12. 1 


1950 

1945 


12.9 
14.5 


1940 

1935 

1930... 

1925 

1920 


21.3 

23.8 
20.9 
18.7 
17.7 


1910 

1900 


14.0 
16.6 


1890 


12.1 


1880 - ... 


14.0 







COUNTIES IN WHICH AT LEAST HALF OF THE FARMS WERE OPERATED BY TENANTS 1880, 1900, 1920, 1930, 1940, 

1950, AND 1954 



1950 




MOST FREQUENT METHOD OF RENTING FARMS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 
1 I CASH E-ffvi-l SHARE 

i i share-cash ^h croppers' 1 
♦ includes counties with no tenants or 

with only other and unspecified tenants 
u croppers shown separately only for the 

south and 7 counties in southeastern missouri 

us department of commerce 



Figure 15. 



142 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT OF RENTED FARMS, BY CLASS OF TENANT, FOR THE UNITED STATES 

AND REGIONS: 1950 8k 1954 




CASH 

TENANTS 



SHARE- 
CASH 



CROP- 
SHARE 



LIVESTOCK- OTHER 
SHARE AND 

UNSPECIFIED 



CASH SHARE- 
TENANTS CASH 



CROP- LIVESTOCK- OTHER 
SHARE SHARE AND 

UNSPECIFIED 




CASH SHARE- CROP- LIVESTOCK- CROPPERS OTHER 
TENANTS CASH SHARE SHARE AND 

UNSPECIFIEO 




CASH SHARE- 
TENANTS CASH 



CROP- LIVESTOCK- OTHER 
SHARE SHARE AND 

UNSPECIFIED 



Figure 16. 



Changes in class of tenant by regions. — Most tenancy arrange- 
ments require rental payment in the form of a share of the crops 
or livestock. For the country as a whole, a slight increase in the 
proportion of livestock-share leases and a slight decrease in the 
proportion of cash leases were reported between 1950 and 1954. 

In 1954, 162,144, or 3.4 percent of all farm operators, were 
cash tenants and 165,566, or 3.5 percent, were share-cash tenants. 
In share-cash arrangements the principal market crop is fre- 



quently under a crop-share rental. Crop-share leases were used 
on 333,254, or 6.9 percent of all farms, and livestock-share ar- 
rangements were reported on 109,494, or 2.3 percent of all farms. 
Sharecroppers numbered 272,572 and accounted for 5.6 percent 
of all farms. Sharecroppers represented 23.3 percent of all 
tenants in 1954, a position not greatly different from the one 
they occupied in 1920 when this group was first separately 
classified and at which time they comprised 22.9 percent of all 
tenants. 



FARMS OPERATED BY CLASS OF TENANT, 1954 



FARMS OPERATED BY ALL TENANTS 

NUMBER. 1954 




FARMS OPERATED BY CASH TENANTS 

NUMBER. 1954 




FARMS OPERATED BY SHARE-CASH TENANTS 

NUMBER. r954 




FARMS OPERATED BY CROP-SHARE TENANTS 

NUMBER. 1954 




(EXCUUMG CROPPERS IM Tne SOUTH) 333.734 

(LESS CROPPERS IN 7 SOUTKE4STERN 
COUNTIES IN MISSOURI 3.437 

CROP-SHARE TENANTS AS MAPPED 329.797 



FARMS OPERATED BY LIVESTOCK-SHARE TENANTS 

NUMBER. 1954 




FARMS OPERATED BY CROPPERS 
NUMBER. 1954 




SOUTHERN STATES J71.37J 

7 COUNTIES IN SOUTHEASTERN 
MISSOURI 3.437 



TOTAL 276.029 



Figure 17- 



The number of tenant farms. — With some exceptions, the prin- 
cipal areas of concentration of tenants, as might be expected, 
follow the areas of concentration of all farms ; for example, the 
Great Lakes Region, the Piedmont, and New England. In terms 
of change, however, it may be noted that, whereas the proportion 
of all farms operated by tenants in the United States as a whole 
dropped from 26.8 percent in 1950 to 24.4 percent in 1954, the 
South showed a greater decline, from 34.1 percent to 30.1 percent. 

Particular types of rental arrangements are associated with 
certain areas. These variations can be accounted for, partially 
at least, by differences in type of farming, climate, technology, 
population type and concentration, and economic conditions. 

Crop-share rentals are found in their various forms in many 
parts of the country. A very high proportion of the leasing of 
farma growing tobacco is on a share basis. Crop-share rentals 
are also found with relatively high frequency in the Mississippi 



Delta area and in the rice-producing portions of Louisiana and 
Texas. Both ends of the Great Plains — North Dakota and 
Texas — employ the crop-share lease to a relatively large extent. 

Livestock-share leases are almost exclusively in the Corn Belt 
and adjacent States such as Kentucky and Nebraska. 

Cash leases are used most frequently for part-time or residen- 
tial farms, for grazing land, and for crops with relatively stable 
yield patterns or in areas where production contains less risk 
and uncertainty. Consequently, they are used principally in the 
South, the Corn Belt, eastern Plains, New England States, and 
the States along the Pacific Coast. 

Croppers, of course, are reported only in the South. This par- 
ticular class of tenant is associated with the cotton and tobacco 
culture both of which traditionally required intensive cultivation. 
In the 1950-54 period, the number of croppers declined about 21 

percent. 



144 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



VALUE OF LAND AND BUILDINGS, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1900-1954 




BILLIONS OF 
DOLLARS 
6 



BILLIONS OF 
PERCENT DOLLARS 




BILLIONS OF 
DOLLARS 



40 






1 

SOUTH 








30 














- 


20 


- 






h^r- 




s 
>• 


- 


10 


"****- 














«...• 





1940 



VALUE OF LAND AND BUILDINGS 



50 
40 



NORTH CENTRAL 



PERCENT 
100 



BILLIONS OF 
PERCENT DOLLARS 

100 30 




Figure 18. 



Total value of farm real estate. — The total value of land and 
buildings in 1954 was 97.6 billion dollars, almost a six-fold 
increase over the value reported in 1900. The long-run trend is 
an increase in land values, with a cyclical peak in 1920 followed 
by a decline which continued through 1935. Land values of all 
farms, regardless of tenure of operator, increased since 1940, but 
full owners showed a more rapid increase than tenants. The 
data reveal that full owners continue to control the greatest 
amount of land and buildings, as measured by value. The pro- 
portion of the total value of land and buildings represented by 



farms operated by tenants has decreased since 1920 with a more 
pronounced decrease since 1940. The general decline in the 
proportion of the value of land and buildings controlled by ten- 
ants reflects, to an extent, the decrease in the proportion of farms 
operated by tenants. The proportion of land in farms operated 
by tenants is also on the decrease, having dropped from 29.4 in 
1940 to 16.6 in 1954. 

In 1954, for the Nation as a whole, and for all regions except 
the North Central, the total value of farm real estate operated 
by part owners was greater than that operated by tenants. How- 
ever, recent trends indicate an increasing importance of farm 
real estate operated by part owners in the North Central Region. 



FARM TENURE 



145 



AVERAGE VALUE OF LAND AND BUILDINGS PER ACRE, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 

DOLLARS 
1 1 UNDER 25 ES^ 100 TO 149 

f: j 25 TO 49 E&£§3 150 TO 199 

E%^ 50 TO 74 H 200 AND OVER 

i 75 TO 99 

' NO FARMS 
U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



AVERAGE VALUE OF LANO AND BUILDINGS PER ACRE -INCREASE AND DECREASE, 1950-1954 

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 

PERCENT INCREASE 
[^~~ 1 LESS THAN 10 RBJSB 10 TO 49 
F-^l 10 TO 19 BQQ *> TO 59 
%%%| 20 TO 29 m 60 AND OVER 

f» ] PERCENT jlCREASE 



0' IN[ CC»MJi 



Figure 19- 



Per acre values of farm real estate. — The highest per-acre values 
of farmland and buildings, except for isolated cases, were reported 
in the more urbanized areas of the Northeast, the more productive 
locations of the Corn Belt area, and the Irrigated and crop- 
specialty areas of the Far West. In most of these areas of higher 
land values, particularly the Corn Belt, there is a greater con- 
centration in the proportion of farmlands operated by full 
tenants. 



Changes in the value of farm real estate: 1950-1954. — From 
1950 to 1954 the average per-acre value of land and buildings In 
the United States increased 29.1 percent. The greatest per- 
centage increases were in the areas with low land values; and, 
conversely, the smallest increases were in the areas with high 
values. The must drastics changes (50 percent and over) since 
1950 took place in the Columbia River Basin, Central Valley of 
California, southeast Texas, southern Arizona, and Florida. 



146 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



AVERAGE VALUE OF LAND AND BUILDINGS PER FARM, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR. FOR THE 
UNITED STATES AND REGIONS! 1954 AND 1950 



THOUSANDS 
OF DOLLARS 



UNITED STATES 




THOUSANDS 
OF DOLLARS 



PART 
OWNERS 



ALL 

TENANTS 



SHARE 
CASH 



CROP 
SHARE 



LIVESTOCK CROPPERS OTHER AND 

SHARE SOUTH ONLY UNSPECIFCO 



100 



THE NORTHEAST 




FULL PART ALL 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS 



CROP LIVESTOCK OTHER AND 
SHARE SHARE UNSPECIFIED 



THOUSANDS 

Of DOLLARS 

100 



80 



60 



40 



20 



THE SOUTH 




FULL PART ALL CASH SHARE CROP LIVESTOCK CROPPERS OTHER 8 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS CASH SHARE SHARE UNSPECIFIED 



THOUSANDS 

OF DOLLARS 

100 



80 



60 



40 



20 



THE NORTH CENTRAL 




FULL PART ALL CASH 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS 



SHARE 
CASH 



CROP LIVESTOCK OTHER AND 
SHARE SHARE UNSPECIFIED 



THOUSANDS 

OF DOLLARS 

100 




FULL PART ALL CASH 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS 



CROP LIVESTOCK OTHER AND 
SHARE SHARE UNSPECIFIED 



1950 



54C-I44- 



Figure 20. 



Average value of land and buildings per farm. — Ordinarily the 
more productive lands are more attractive to tenancy, and farms 
under tenant operators (sharecroppers excepted) are larger 
than those under owner operators. Consequently, the value 
of land and buildings per farm reported for tenants was higher 
than that for owners. Part-owner farms showed higher per farm 
values than either full owners or tenants. 

Farms under share-cash and livestock-share leases continued 
to show (compared with 1950) the highest per-farm values for 
fully rented farms for the United States as a whole and for all 
the regions except the Northeast. The pattern of average values 



by tenure of operator is quite similar to that for 1950, except 
that the values under share leases have increased slightly more 
than those under cash leases. 

The high value of land and buildings per commercial farm for 
part owners is due to large size rather than high value per acre. 
The relatively high value of commercial farms operated by share- 
cash and livestock-share tenants, however, appears to be due to 
both large size and a high value per acre compared with lands of 
other tenure groups. The increases in per-farm values reported 
in 1954 over those reported in 1950 were most pronounced on 
part-owner, share-cash, crop-share, livestock-share, and unspec- 
ified tenant farms. 



FARM TENURE 



147 



SUBUNITS IN MULTIPLE UNITS AS A PERCENT OF ALL FARMS. 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 



US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 




PERCENT 

MULTIPLE- UNIT AREA 22.9 

ALABAMA , 5 . 

ARKANSAS ,. , 

FLORIDA jj 

GEORGIA „.„ 

KENTUCKY , s Z 

LOUISIANA .53 

MISSISSIPPI 3.5 

MISSOURI „= '? 

NORTH CAROLINA ... |q n 

SOUTH CAROLINA ... „". 

TENNESSEE , aQ 

TEXAS e ,2 

VIRGINIA. ., |8 r 6 



MULTIPLE UNITS 
CZD NOT IN MULTIPLE-UNIT AREA 



MAP NO. M54-009 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Figure 21. 



MULTIPLE-UNIT OPERATIONS 

The nature of multiple units. — A classification as broad as that 
set up by the Census Bureau definition of a farm necessarily in- 
cludes many different types of agricultural units. Some of these 
types, because of their distinctive characteristics, are given sep- 
arate treatment in the Census reports. Multiple-unit operations 
comprise one such special class. 

Many landholdings, particularly in the Southern States, con- 
tain several farms, as farms are defined by the Census Bureau, 
but in reality these farms belong to one landlord, and in many 
instances they are managed as a single farm business unit. 
The listing of these farms only as individual farms gives an in- 
complete picture of the actual nature of farming in these areas 
and, for this reason, it has been considered desirable to present 
statistics for the overall management units as well as for the 
separate farms. Information has been collected pertaining to 
such characteristics as the number, size, relative importance, 
and major crops of certain types of multiple-unit operations. 

To qualify as a multiple-unit operation, a landholding must 
consist of two or more farms, one of which may be the "home" 
farm, and all others must be operated by sharecroppers. Thus, 
the distinguishing feature of multiple-unit operations, as here 
defined, is that the landlord provides all of the work power for 
the farms in the unit. Statistics have been compiled for those 
counties in which multiple-unit operations form a significant part 
of the agriculture. In 1954, these counties numbered nearly 
900, most of which were in the Southeast. 

Distribution. — The concentration of multiple units was heaviest 
in the Mississippi Delta region, with pockets in eastern North 
Carolina and southwestern Georgia. In Mississippi, more than 



35 percent of all farms were in multiple units and these units 
contained almost half of the cropland harvested in the State in 
1954. In the multiple-unit area of Arkansas, the percentages for 
farms and cropland harvested were 31.2 and 38.6, respectively. At 
the other extreme, in the newer agricultural regions of the 
South — Texas and Florida — this type of farm organization is 
relatively insignificant. For the multiple-unit area as a whole, 
more than one-fifth of all farms were part of multiple-unit 
operations. 

Cotton and tobacco. — The nature of multiple-unit operations 
becomes clearer when we consider the type of farming that is 
associated with them. Cotton and tobacco seem to be particularly 
well adapted to this type of operation. Nearly 35 percent of the 
total cotton acreage harvested was on multiple-unit farms. The 
percentage of cotton acreage in multiple-unit farms was 55.8 for 
Mississippi. The percentages of tobacco grown on multiple-unit 
farms were smaller. Both of these crops require large amounts 
of hand labor in planting, growing, and harvesting, and the 
cropper system provides this labor without large outlays of 
capital and at the time it is needed. In the production of cotton 
in particular, the multiple-unit organization permits concentra- 
tion of managerial functions in the hands of the landlord, en- 
ables him to supervise closely liis labor force, and makes unneces- 
sary the risking of the rash outlay that the use of hired labor 
would involve. 

Past and future. — The kinship of modern multiple-unit opera- 
tions with pre-Civil War plantation organization is very clear. 
During the decades following the War, a number of circum- 
stances combined to produce the cropper system as we know it 
today. Cotton and tobacco were even more the staples of the 
South than they are at present: landowners found themselves 



148 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



COTTON ACREAGE HARVESTED IN MULTIPLE UNITS AS A PERCENT 
OF TOTAL COTTON ACREAGE HARVESTED, 1954 

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS) 




U 5 DEPARTMENT Of COMMERCE 



vtV' 


LEGEND 




PERCENT 


ES3 UNDER 


10 


K£2lO TO 


24 


822325 TO 


39 


BSS40 TO 


54 


HB 55 AND 


OVER 


□ no cotton 


□ not in 


MULTIPLE 



PERCENT 

MULTIPLE- UNIT AREA.. 34 4 

ALABAMA 26 .2 

ARKANSAS 46 8 

FLORIDA 7.9 

GEORGIA 40 7 

KENTUCKY 58 7 

LOUISIANA--- 36.7 

MISSISSIPPI 55 8 

MISSOURI 31 .4 

NORTH CAROLINA 34 9 

SOUTH CAROLINA 39 

TENNESSEE- 37 9 

TEXAS 14 2 

VIRGINIA 27 3 



UNIT AREA 



MAP NO. M54-025 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Figure 22. 



in need of labor to produce these labor-intensive crops, but few 
had the cash for paying wage hands; and ex-slaves had virtually 
no alternative but to return to working the land of their former 
owners. The "furnish" system and the sharing of the crop 
developed to meet the needs of these groups. 

Sharecropping and the multiple-unit operations associated with 
sharecropping, however, have been undergoing rather funda- 
mental changes for the past several decades. The reasons for 
these declines are many and varied. Probably the most important 
force at work is the migration of croppers into nonfann jobs in 
response to the relative attractiveness of industrial employment. 
Reinforcing this factor have been the shift westward of our 
cotton areas, the mechanization of cotton production, and the 
relatively low income condition of many of the cotton farmers. 



Perhaps the most basic development has been the rapid and con- 
tinuous decline in the total number of sharecroppers, noted earlier 
in this report. The total has dropped from 783,459 in 1930 to 
276,029 in 1954, a decrease of nearly two-thirds. As a conse- 
quence of the decrease in the number of sharecroppers, during 
this same period there was a substantial decline in the number 
of farms in multiple-unit operations. Between 1950 and 1954, 
the two years for which we have comparable statistics, the num- 
ber of farms in multiple units (in the 1954 multiple-unit area) 
decreased from 466,273 to 403,186. 

The decline in the number of multiple-unit farms between 1950 
and 1954 has been largely in those farms producing cotton rather 
than tobacco. 



FARM TENURE 



149 



TOBACCO ACREAGE HARVESTED IN MULTIPLE UNITS AS A PERCENT 
OF TOTAL TOBACCO ACREAGE HARVESTED, 1954 

(ECONOMIC AREA UNIT BASIS) 




U S DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



LEGEND 

PERCENT 

10 
24 
39 
54 
OVER 

□ NO TOBACCO 

□ NOT IN MULTIPLE-UNIT AREA 



PERCENT 

MULTIPLE - UNIT AREA „.3I 

ALABAMA 19 3 

ARKANSAS 1/ 

FLORIDA 139 

GEORGIA 312 

KENTUCKY 18.7 

LOUISIANA (NA) 

MISSISSIPPI U. 

MISSOURI y 

NORTH CAROLINA 37 6 

SOUTH CAROLINA 34.3 

TENNESSEE 27 1 

TEXAS 1/ 

VIRGINIA 32 7 

U NO TOBACCO 
(NA) NOT AVAILABLE 



MAP NO M54-OI2 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Figure 23. 



SECTION II 



Production 



FARM TENURE 



153 



TYPE- OF- FARMING AREAS, BASED ON TYPE ACCOUNTING FOR 50 PERCENT 

OR MORE OF COMMERCIAL FARMS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




LEGEND 

TYPE-OF-FARMING AREA 
IIM CASH-GRAIN 
IsESJ COTTON 
hm2 other field-crop 
hi] vegetable 
3fruit-ano-nut 

*N0 FARMS 



■I LIVESTOCK (OTHER THAN 
DAIRY AND POULTRY) 

I I GENERAL (NO ONE TYPE 
50 PERCENT OR MORE) 



US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO AS4 -210 



BUREAU OF Tit CENSUS 



Figure 24. 



TYPE OF FARMING 

The vast differences in types of farming in the United States 
have resulted from a number of important natural economic and 
cultural conditions. These diverse conditions, through a varied 
agriculture, have been reflected in the tenure pattern. 

A complex agriculture. — Such factors as variations in tem- 
perature, soil, rainfall, and the availability of land for agriculture 
determine the type of farming in the several areas. The wide 
variation in temperature has caused such areas as the Dakotas 
to specialize in spring wheat, barley, and flax to suit their short 
growing season and, in contrast, permitted the Deep South to 
become the world's largest cotton-producing area. The high, 
rugged mountain terrain of the West and the low rainfall have 
mostly excluded agriculture or confined it to grazing and special 
crops in a few restricted areas. The western mountain ranges 
have also been largely responsible for the lack of rainfall in much 
of the Great Plains area. Rainfall in the eastern one-half of the 
Nation, however, has been adequate to accommodate whatever 
the other physical and economic conditions required. Soils vary 
from the relatively infertile podzols of the Lakes region to the 
rich alluvium of the Mississippi. These and other physical and 
biological factors have combined with many important cultural 
conditions to form a complex agriculture. 

No less important are the economic forces that have called for 
increases or decreases in production of particular types and at 
certain locations. Costs and returns, both in money and in grati- 
fication, have been basic in the development of agricultural pro- 
duction and in the ways that people work together to attain this 
production. 



Types of farms. — In 1054, farms were classified by type on 
the basis of the sales of a particular product or group of products 
that accounted for 50 percent or more of the total value of prod- 
ucts sold. If the sales from a product or a group of products did 
not represent 50 percent of the value of all products sold, the farm 
was called "general." Tenants operated a greater proportion of 
the field-crop farms than of the livestock farms. Owners and 
part owners operated most of the livestock farms and almost all 
of the poultry and fruit-and-nut farms. The "general" farms 
were divided tenurewise in roughly the same proportions as all 
commercial farms. 

Cash-grain farms are found in northern and south-central 
Plains States and in the region of northeastern Washington. Of 
course, large quantities of small grains and corn are grown in the 
Corn Belt region, but much of the grain in this area is marketed 
through livestock. Of the 537,838 commercial cash-grain farms 
in 1954, 35.6 percent were operated by owners, 31.5 percent by 
part owners, and 32.7 percent by tenants. Since 1950, the num- 
ber of commercial cash-grain farms had increased by 107,449. 
Fifty-two percent of this increased number were operated by full 
owners, 36* percent by part owners, and only 13 percent by tenants. 

Cotton farms, which are traditionally labor-intensive (but are 
rapidly becoming more mechanized in the commercial areas), are 
operated mainly under rental arrangements. In 1954, the 525gOS 
commercial cotton farms were 24.3 percent full owner operated, 
16.2 percent part owner operated and 59.3 percent tenant operated. 
Twenty-eight percent of the commercial cotton farm operators 
were croppers. There were 84,099 fewer commercial cotton farms 
in 1954 than in 1950. During this period there was an increase 
in the mechanization of cotton farming and a heavy migration 
of labor out of agriculture. 



154 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT OF FARMS IN EACH TYPE- OF- FARM GROUfJ 
BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, COMMERCIAL FARMS 
FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1954 



CASH- GRAIN 

COTTON 

OTHER FIELD-CROP 

VEGETABLE 

FRUIT-AND-NUT 

DAIRY 

POULTRY 

LIVESTOCK OTHER 
THAN DAIRY 
AND POULTRY 

GENERAL 



MISCELLANEOUS 
FARMS 




| FULL OWNERS 
Y///\ MANAGERS 



PART OWNERS 

ALL TENANTS 

64C -16 I 



Figure 25. 



Other field-crop farms are those growing peanuts, potatoes, 
tobacco, sugarcane, and sugar beets. Of these crops, tobacco is 
most significant in Virginia, North Carolina, and Kentucky. 
Sugarcane predominates in southern Louisiana. Farms classified 
by type on the basis of potatoes, peanuts, and sugar beets do not 
predominate in most of the areas where these crops are grown. A 
much higher proportion of these crops are grown on other types 
of farms. Tobacco and peanut enterprises are associated with 
the relatively high rate of tenancy on "other field-crop" farms. 
Full owners comprised 38.5 percent, part owners, 18.1 percent : 
and tenants, J/3.3 percent of other field-crop farms in 1954. 

Vegetable farms, which involve relatively small acreages of 
highly developed land and require very close supervision and man- 
agement, are most frequently operated by owners or part owners. 
In 1904, 52.0 percent of commercial vegetable farms were full- 
owner-operated, 29.8 percent were part-owner-operated, and only 
11.1 percent tenant-operated. 

{Continued on paye 188) 



Table 1. — Percent Distribution of Commercial Farms in 
Each Type-of-Farm Group, by Tenure of Operator, for 
the United States: 1954 

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



Type of farm 



All commercial farms 

Cash-grain 

Cotton 

Other field-crop 

Vegetable 

Fruit-and-nut 

Dairy 

Poultry 

Livestock other than dairy and 

poultry 

General _ 

Miscellaneous 





Tenure of operator 




Full 
owners 


Part 
owners 


Managers 


Tenants 


Percent 


Percent 


Percent 


Percent 


47.9 


22.7 


0.5 


28.8 


35.6 


31.5 


.2 


32.7 


24.3 


16.2 


.2 


59.3 


38.5 


18.1 


.2 


43.3 


52.0 


29.8 


1.1 


17.1 


81.7 


11.5 


2.5 


4.3 


61.6 


24.3 


.5 


13.6 


83.0 


10.2 


.5 


6.4 


55.3 


24.2 


1.0 


19.6 


48.9 


27.3 


.3 


23.5 


80.6 


12.2 


1.9 


5.4 



All com- 
mercial 
farms 



Percent 
100.0 
16.2 
15.8 
11.1 
1.0 
2.5 

16.5 
4.6 

20.9 
10.4 
1.1 



FARM TENURE 



155 



PERCENT OF VALUE OF SPECIFIED CROPS ANO LIVESTOCK SOLD, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR 
FOR COMMERCIAL FARMS, FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1954 



TENURE OF OPERATOR 



CLASS OF TENANT 




cash i-:-::-;:] share -cash V/A. share 

■ CROPPER Kggg OTHER 



Figure 26. 



CROP AND LIVESTOCK OUTPUT 



The volume of production. — Estimates made by the United 
States Department of Agriculture indicate that gross cash 
marketings in 1954 totaled more than $30 billion, or just $3 bil- 
lion under the all-time high for cash marketings of $33 billion 
reached in 1951. As a measure of total physical volume of pro- 
duction, without effects of price variation, the United States 
Department of Agriculture's index of farm marketings gives 
some idea of the growth of farm production. According to this 
index of farm marketings (based on 1947-49=100), aggregate 
production rose from 51 in 1910 and 100 in 1950 to 111 in 1954. 
The index of livestock products (based on 1947—49=100) rose 
from 50 in 1910 and 103 in 1950 to 117 in 1954. The index of 
crops grown (based on 1947-49=100) rose from 53 in 1910 and 
96 in 1950 to 102 in 1954. The volume of production in terms of 
the index of farm marketings was, at that time, an all-time high. 
Crops had fallen off somewhat from previous years, but this 
was representative of the shifts in type of production toward 
livestock, not a reduction of overall output. 

Although total value of all farm products sold by tenure of 
operator was not available from the 1954 Census of Agriculture, 
some specified crop and livestock values were reported. The 
commodities that are classified by tenure of the operator may be 
used to illustrate the relationship between the production 
processes and tenure. 

The different tenure forms, as they are commonly used, have 
particular characteristics that adapt them to certain types of 
production. Around each type of agriculture there have evolved 
tenure arrangements associated with that particular type of 
agriculture. Some of the factors that might have influenced this 
are the relative importance of a farm as a home; the relative 
degree of skill that may be required ; the amount of labor re- 
quired : the relative importance of investment in buildings, land, 
livestock, and machinery ; the kind and degree of government 
controls and incentives ; the risks involved ; and the length of the 
production cycle. 

Crops. — Full owners on commercial farms operated 31.1 per- 
cent of the 78,133,60S acres of cornland; part owners, 29.8 per- 
cent; managers, O.S percent; and tenants, 33.6 percent. On full- 
owner farms, 23.7 percent of the cropland harvested was in corn ; 



on part-owner farms, 19.0 percent ; on manager farms, 11.5 per- 
cent; and on tenant farms, 2S.7 percent. The tendency for ten- 
ants to have a large portion of their cropland in corn is slightly 
more pronounced in the case of corn grown for grain. Acres of 
corn grown for grain as a percent of all cropland harvested was 
19Jt for full owners, 15.6 for part owners, S.8 for managers, and 
26.2 for tenants. Virtually all of the corn produced by tenants 
in the commercial corn area is grown on farms that have crop- 
share or share-cash leases, and the corn itself is usually grown 
on a share arrangement. 

A relatively large percent of the cotton acreage is operated by 
tenants. In 1954, 43.6 percent of the acreage in cotton was 
operated by tenants on commercial farms, whereas 20.0, 30.1, and 
2.3 percent, respectively, were operated by full owners, part own- 
ers, aud managers. Sharecropping and crop-share tend to be the 
most common leasing arrangements. In such arrangements, it is 
a rather common practice for the landlord to contribute a high 
degree of supervision. 

(Continued on pope 1SS) 

Table 2. — Percent Distribution of the Value of Specified 
Crops and Livestock Sold, by Tenure of Operator of 
Commercial Farms, for the United States: 1954 

(Data are based on reports for only a sample of farms] 











All 


Tenants 














Item 


Full 


Part 


Man- 


ten- 






Crop- 




Other 




owners 


owners 


agers 


ants 




Share- 


and 


Crop- 


and 












Cash 


cash 


live- 
stock- 
share 


pers 


un- 
speci- 
fied 




Per- 


Per- 


Per- 


Per- 


Per- 


Per- 


Per- 


Per- 


Per- 




cent 


cent 


cent 


cent 


cent 


cent 


cent 


cent 


cent 


Corn 


26.1 


29.0 


0.7 


44.2 


5.2 


46.6 


41.9 


3.2 


3.1 


Cotton 


21.0 
31.1 


31.9 
18.9 


4.3 
.6 


42.7 
49.4 


7.2 
2.0 


6.5 
2.3 


48.6 
40.9 


33.4 
50.3 


4.3 


Tobacco 


4.4 


Cattle and 




















calves 


37.5 


34.9 


6.6 


21.0 


14.3 


29.0 


50.9 


.9 


4.9 


Hops and pigs. - - 


38.3 


26.3 


.9 


34.4 


9.1 


32.6 


53.2 


1.2 


3.9 


Chickens 


72.5 


14.7 


3.7 


9. 1 


19.6 


12.6 


34.4 


11.5 


21.9 




66.8 
48.7 


18.8 
30.7 


1.5 
1.7 


12.9 
18.9 


15.5 
28.3 


33.0 

17.4 


40.5 
45.4 


1.4 
1.2 


9.6 


Milk 


7.6 







156 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT OF CROPLAND HARVESTED REPRESENTED BY ACRES HARVESTED OF THE PRINCIPAL CROPS. 

BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR COMMERCIAL FARMS 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



FULL OWNERS 

PERCENT 




UNITED STATES 

PART OWNERS MANAGERS 

PERCENT PERCENT 



ALL TENANTS 
PERCENT 



10 20 30 40 50 O 10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 O 10 20 30 40 50 






CORN 



TOBACCO 



COTTON 



NORTHEAST 

FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS ALL TENANTS 

PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 

O 10 20 30 40 50 O 10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50 




FULL OWNERS 

PERCENT 
10 20 30 40 50 




NORTH CENTRAL 

PART OWNERS MANAGERS 

PERCENT PERCENT 

10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 




ALL TENANTS 

PERCENT 
10 20 30 40 50 




CORN 
HAY 

TOBACCO 
COTTON 



NA 



NO 
NA 




NA 

NA 



NA 
NA 



SOUTH 

FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS ALL TENANTS 

PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 

10 20 30 40 50 O 10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 O 10 20 30 40 50 







CORN 



TOBACCO 



COTTON 



FULL OWNERS 

PERCENT 




WEST 

PART OWNERS 

PERCENT 



MANAGERS 

PERCENT 



ALL TENANTS 

PERCENT 



O 10 20 30 40 50 10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 10 20 30 40 50 




CORN 



TOBACCO NA 





NA - NOT AVAILABLE 



Figure 27. 



FARM TENURE 



157 



PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF ACRES OF THE PRINCIPAL CROPS HARVESTED, 
BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR COMMERCIAL FARMS, 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



UNITED STATES 



FULL OWNERS 
PERCENT 
20 30 40 50 60 



PART OWNERS 

PERCENT 
10 20 30 40 



30 



MANAGERS 

PERCENT 

10 20 O 



TENANTS 

PERCENT 
20 30 40 



50 




CORN 
HAY 

TOBBACO-" 
COTTON II 



NORTH EAST 



FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS TENANTS 

PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 

10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 O 10 20 10 20 30 40 50 





NORTH CENTRAL 





3 


FULL OWNERS 
PERCENT 
20 30 40 50 6C 




PART OWNERS 

PERCENT 
3 10 20 30 40 50 


MANAGERS 

PERCENT 
10 2C 




TENANTS 

PERCENT 
D 10 20 30 40 50 


CORN 








^^™ 






[ 










HAY 

TOBBACO-^ 
COTTON ■" 






















1 











CORN 
HAY 



TOBBACO 



COTTON 



SOUTH 



FULL OWNERS 



PART OWNERS 



MANAGERS TENANTS 

PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 

10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 O 10 20 O 10 20 30 40 50 




WEST 

FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS TENANTS 

PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT PERCENT 

10 20 30 40 50 60 10 20 30 40 50 10 20 10 20 30 40 50 



CORN 
HAY 

TOBBACO-" 
COTTON -" 




^ SOUTH 




SOUTH ONLY 



l 




Figure 28. 



407763— r.7 11 



158 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT DISTRIBUTION 



OF ALL LAND IN FARMS ACCORDING TO MAJOR USES, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, 
FOR THE UNITED STATES- 1945-1954 



ALU FARM OPERATORS 



FULL OWNERS 



PART OWNERS 



MANAGERS 



ALL TENANTS 



SHARE-CASH 



SHARE (CROP-SHARE AND 
LIVESTOCK-SHARE) 



CROP-SHARE 



LIVESTOCK-SHARE 



CROPPERS (SOUTH ONLY) 



OTHER AND UNSPECIFIED 




100 



I9S4 
1950 
1945 

1954 
1950 
1945 

1954 
1950 
1945 

1954 
1950 
1945 

1954 
1950 
1945 

1954 
1950 
1945 

1954 
1950 
1945 

1954 
1950 
1945 

1954 
I960 
1945 



••••••v. vc*> 



....... ........... ..... ^^yj. 1 




N A NOT AVAILABLE 

IQOfl^M TOTAL CROPLANO 

KNNKSaa^ TOTAL PASTURE 

ft^f.V-.V/J TOTAL WOODLAND 

B33 CROPLAND HARVESTED AND CROPLANO NOT HARVESTED AND NOT PASTURED 

|>C^i CROPLAND USED ONLY FOR PASTURE 

1 OTHER PASTURE (NOT CROPLAND AND NOT WOODLAND) 
WOODLAND PASTURED 

Y:::-:yj woodland not pastured 

1 I OTHER LAND(HOUSE LOTS, WASTELAND, ETC.) 

Figure 29. 



LAND USE 

Major land uses. — The total acreage of cropland In the United 
States declined from 479,371,116 acres in 1949 to 461,937,776 acres 
in 1954. The acreage of pastureland, however, increased from 
619,691,813 in 1949 to 647,366,156 in 1954. Although total crop- 
land declined, the cropland per farm increased from 94.8 acres 
in 1949 to IO4.3 in 1954. Cropland in commercial farms averaged 
122.5 acres in 1949 and 133.9 acres in 1954. The average acreage 
of cropland increased in all tenures, except for managers, but 
the average acreage of pasture showed even greater increases. 

Since tenants tend toward crop production and managers to- 
ward livestock production, it is not surprising that in 1954 the 



cropland in commercial tenant-operated farms represented a 
higher percentage of all land in their farms than for any other 
tenure, 61.8, and the cropland in commercial manager-operated 
farms represented the lowest percentage, 13.2. 

Commercial farms operated by tenants under crop-share lease 
arrangements tend to have the highest proportion of cropland. 
In 1954, 74.8 percent of land in commercial crop-share farms was 
cropland, and 20.0 percent was pastureland. In contrast, crop- 
land in commercial cash-rented farms was only 27.3 percent of 
the land in farms and pastureland was 70.9 percent. Cropper 
farms, of course, contain a very high proportion of cropland since 
they are associated almost exclusively with cash-crop enterprises, 
notably cotton and tobacco. In 1954, for commercial cropper 



FARM TENURE 



159 



PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF CROPLAND, LAND PASTURED, AND WOODLAND 
BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR COMMERCIAL FARMS 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



UNITED STATES 




PERCENT 
60 



FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS ALL TENANTS 



B~"fe^ M-~ffl M-res 



JBLsOS IT — fvvi . 



SHARE-CASH CROP- SHARE 



LIVESTOCK- 
SHARE 



CROPPERS OTHER AND 

(SOUTH ONLY) UNSPECIFIED 



50 



40 



30 



20 




NORTHEAST 



NORTH CENTRAL 



■affl 



— -»— - 1 



1111 



FULL PART MANAGERS ALL CASH SHARE- CROP- LIVE- CROPPERS OTHER 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS CASH SHARE STOCK ANO 

SHARE UNSPECIFIED 




FULL PART MANAGERS ALL CASH SHARE CR0P_1 LIVE- CROPPERS OTHER 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS CASH SHARE STOCK- AND 

SHARE UNSPECIFIED 




SOUTH 



I l-ll Jfo m^_ 



PULL PART MANAGERS ALL CASH 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS 



E 



Bag 



I . PASTURE 



CROP- LIVE- CROPPERS OTHER 
SHARE STOCK- ANO 

SHARE UNSPECIFIED 




WEST 



■ ft 



FULL PART MANAOERS ALL CASH SHARE 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS CASH 



11 " 



CROP LIVEj^ CROPPERS OJ£ER 

iHARE STOCK ANO 

SHARE UNSPECIFIED 



Figure 30. 



farms 73.1 percent of the land was cropland and 17.2 percent, 
pastureland. Much of the woodland and pastureland of multiple- 
unit operations is retained in the home farm. 

Regional variations. — In the Northeast, the largest proportion 
of both cropland and pastureland is operated by full owners. 
This is in contrast with the West where a major share of each 



is operated by part owners. In the South and North Central 
regions, tenants account for a greater share of cropland than in 
the other two regions. Tenant farms with crop-share leases gen- 
erally contain a high proportion of cropland in all regions, par- 
ticularly in the West and South. Livestock-share arrangements 
are most common in the North Central region. 



160 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



ACRES 
600 



AVERAGE SIZE OF FARM, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR 
THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1900-1954 

UNITED STATES 















FULL OWNERS 
TENANTS 
PART OWNERS 














CROPPERS 










- 


- — - — _____ 
















r= 







""^."— 


- 














i 


i 


' 





1910 

NORTHEAST 




ACRES 
500 



1940 I960 

NORTH CENTRAL 



300 






1950 '54 



ACRES 
400 



SOUTH 



200 



- 












-\ 












= __. 


_*—^. 


— — — . 






,- 


■ 






-•** 


^^^^^" " 








1 




1 



ACRES 
2500 



2000 



1500 



WEST 



500 



1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 "54 1900 



-^^^— r -- 



1920 1930 1940 



Figure 31. 



SIZE OF FARM 

Increases in farm size. — One of the outstanding characteristics 
of twentieth century agriculture in the United States has been 
the growth in farm size. Since the total acreage of land in farms 
has changed little in this period, it follows that most of the in- 
crease in average farm size has come from the reduction in farm 
numbers. In 1954, 599,746 fewer farms were recorded than in 
1950, while the average size of farm increased from 215.3 acres 
to 242.2 acres. For the United States as a whole, this trend 
toward larger and fewer farms is accelerating. 

The largest increases in average farm size have taken place 



in part-owner farms. Since 1910, the only reduction in the size 
of farms operated by part owners occurred in the post World War 
II period. Part of this reduction may have been due to the re- 
turn of servicemen whose lands had been operated under lease 
by other farmers. Between 1950 and 1954, the average size of 
part-owner farms increased 36.7 acres or 7.2 percent. Part-owner 
farms have increased in number and in acreage per farm since 
1950. Both owner and tenant farms have increased in size since 
1935. 

Acreage is only one measure of farm size. Other factors of 
production such as labor, capital, and management also must be 



FARM TENURE 



161 



taken into account if anything is to be said about the relative 
productivity of various sizes of farms. Farm size is most im- 
portant in relation to tenure as tenure affects (1) the total quan- 
tity and (2) the proportions of various factors used on the farm. 
Quality of the land, as well as rainfall, soil, temperature, slope, 
and location, is important in comparisons of farm size in differ- 
ent regions. To a certain extent, quality of land is associated 
with tenure. For example, manager-operated farms contain a 
much higher proportion of uncultivated and low valued land than 
do tenant farms. For the United States as a whole, in 1954, 
tenant farms were the only farms on which the average acreage 
pastured did not exceed the average acreage of cropland. 

Farm size by regions. — In all regions, with but one exception, 
average farm size ranged upward from full owners, tenants, part 
owners to managers. The exception occurred in the South where 
the average size of farms of full owners was greater than that of 
tenants. The low average size of tenant farms in the South 
can be attributed largely to the small acreages operated by 
(Continued on page 189) 



Table 3. — Average Size of Farm, by Tenure of Operator, 
for the United States and Regions, 1954 and 1950 



Tenure of operator 


United 
States 


North- 
east 


North- 
west 


South 


West 


All farms: 

1954 


Acres 
242.2 
215.3 

144.5 
135.6 

548.7 
512.0 

4, 835. 8 
4, 473. 2 

164.9 
146.8 


Acres 
120.9 
111.0 

102.4 
97.6 

195.2 
179.2 

460.7 
390.1 

124.5 
119.1 


Acres 
230.9 
212.2 

145.7 
137.3 

418.1 
397.4 

1, 187. 5 
1. 234. 5 

243.1 
222.8 


Acres 
166.7 
148.2 

132.4 
123.2 

360.9 
332.3 

2,941.4 
2, 989. 6 

95.5 
89.7 


Acres 
798.2 


1950 


702.9 


Full owners: 

1954 


234.2 


1950 _-_ 


225.2 


Part owners: 
1954 . 


2, 112. 4 


1950 


1, 889. 3 


Managers: 

1954 


14, 830. 9 


1950 . 


13, 168. 2 


Tenants: 

1954 


511.0 


1950 


449.7 



PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF SIZE GROUP OF CROPLAND HARVESTED, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, 
FOR COMMERCIAL FARMS, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 




10-19 20-29 30-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500ondOver Acres 1-9 10-19 20-29 30-49 50-99 100-199 200-499 500ondOwr 




FULL OWNERS KSSSSS PART OWNERS 



407763—57 12 



Figure 32. 



H2 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



\}V^^ IRRIGATED LAND AS A PERCENT OF ALL LAND IN FARMS FOR 20 STATES, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 








LEGEND 
PERCENT 

I UNDER 10 |:: : :": : j 30 TO 39 

I I 10 TO 19 5SSSS 4 ° TO 49 

W'-;\ 20T0 29 H 50 AND OVER 

* NO FARMS 

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



20 STATES AVERAGE 
2.6 _ 



MAP NO ASA- 267 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Figure 33. 



IRRIGATION 



Irrigated farms and acreage. — The United States, in 1954, con- 
tained 324,437 farms reporting some irrigation. These farms re- 
ported 29,799,482 acres irrigated or 2.6 percent of all farmland. 
The farms reporting irrigation represented 6.8 percent of all 
farms and 8.0 percent of commercial farms. The average size 
of commercial irrigated farms was 109.7 acres in 1954, an increase 
of 8.5 acres since 1949. There were 17,820 more irrigated farms 
in 1954 than in 1949. In 1954, 58.6 percent of all the irrigated 
farms were full-owner operated and 23.0 percent were part- 
owner operated. Of all the irrigated land in farms, 34.2 percent 
was operated by full owners and 3S.5 percent by part owners. 
Tenants operated 16.8 percent of the irrigated farms and 20.2 per- 
cent of the irrigated land. Managers operated 1.6 percent of all 
the irrigated farms and 7.1 percent of all irrigated land. 

Regional variations. — Irrigation is of considerably greater im- 
portance in the relatively arid West than in the eastern portions 
of the country. In the 17 Western States and Arkansas, Florida, 
and Louisiana, 301,870 farms reported 29,183,428 acres irrigated 
in 1954. The most extensive areas of irrigation are found in the 
far western States such as Nevada, Arizona, Idaho, and Cali- 



fornia. In Nevada, for example, 87.8 percent of the farms re- 
ported some irrigation, whereas, in North Dakota, only 0.6 per- 
cent of the farms were irrigated. In the 20 States, the irrigated 
cropland harvested was reported for 271,160 farms and amounted 
to 24,419,703 acres or 90.1 acres per farm. 

The tenure of operators of irrigated farms varied among the 
States. In Colorado, about one-fourth of the irrigated farms, and 

22.4 percent of all farms, were tenant operated. However, in 
Utah where S5.0 percent of all farms were irrigated, only 5.1 per- 
cent of the irrigated farms and 5.6 percent of all farms were 
operated by tenants. In Louisiana and Arkansas a relatively 
small percent of all farms were irrigated, but all the rice was 
produced by irrigation ; in these two States, respectively, 30.3 and 
43.1 percent of the irrigated farms were tenant operated. 

The pattern of tenure on irrigated land in farms is similar to 
that suggested by the number of farms. In Nebraska, in 1954, 

42.5 percent of the irrigated land was tenant-operated. Arkan- 
sas, with 37.7 percent tenant-operated and Louisiana, with 34-8 
percent, had relatively larger proportions of their irrigated land 
in farms operated by tenants. Managers operated 24-1 percent of 
the irrigated farmland in Florida where a large part of the 
truck-crop production is irrigated. 



FARM TENURE 



163 



PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF IRRIGATED FARMS, BY 

TENURE OF OPERATOR FOR 17 WESTERN STATES, 

ARKANSAS, LOUISIANA AND FLORIDA, 1954 AND 1950 



PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF IRRIGATED LAND IN FARMS 

BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, 17 WESTERN STATES, 

ARKANSAS, LOUISIANA, AND FLORIDA, 1954 AND 1950 



PERCENT 
•90 60 



CALIFORNIA 

TEXAS 

IDAHO 

COLORADO 

MONTANA 

OREGON 

WYOMING 

NEBRASKA 

ARIZONA 

UTAH 

ARKANSAS 

WASHINGTON 

LOUISIANA 

NEW MEXICO 

NEVADA 

FLORIDA 

KANSAS 

OKLAHOMA 

SOUTH DAKOTA 

NORTH DAKOTA 

: Hi FULL 




AND MANAGERS f ^\j PART OWNERS \'.:y/:'.\ TENANTS 

54C- 122 




FULL OWNERS AND MANAGERS 



PART OWNERS vXv] TENANTS 



Figure 34- 



Table 4.— PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF IRRIGATED FARMS AND LAND IN FARMS, BY TENURE OF 
OPERATOR, FOR 17 WESTERN STATES, ARKANSAS, LOUISIANA, AND FLORIDA: 1954 

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





Irrigated farms 


Irrigated acres 


State 


Irrigated farms 


Irrigated acres 


State 


Full 
owners 

and 
mana- 
gers 


Part 
owners 


Ten- 
ants 


Full 

owners 
and 

mana- 
gers 


Part 
owners 


Ten- 
ants 


Full 
owners 

and 
mana- 
gers 


Part 
owners 


Ten- 
ants 


Full 

owners 

and 

mana- 
gers 


Part 
owners 


Ten- 
ants 


Total, 20 States... 

California 

Texas 


Percent 
60.6 

71.5 
38.7 
0?.7 
56. 4 
52.3 

69.9 
50.5 
29.1 
64.3 
67.5 


Percent 
22.8 

17.2 
32.3 
18.8 
19.6 
34.0 

21.0 
31.3 
30.3 
2.3.3 
27 '.4 


Percent 
16.6 

11.3 
29.0 
18.6 
24.0 
13.7 

9.2 
18.2 
40.7 
12.3 

5.1 


Percent 
41.1 

43.8 
26.8 
50.0 
44.5 
41.2 

54.4 
42.7 
23.6 
43.8 
54.2 


Percent 
38.6 

40.9 
41.4 
29.2 
29.7 
47.(1 

35.7 
44.0 
33.9 
41.9 
40.5 


Percent 
20.4 

15.3 
31.7 
20.8 
25.8 
11.8 

9.9 
13.3 
42.5 
14.2 

5.2 


Arkansas 

Washington. 

Louisiana ._. 


Percent 
27.7 
73.8 
39, 9 

us 1 
76. 9 

74.8 
26.7 
37.7 
40.2 

55. 7 


Percent 
29.1 
17.4 
29.9 
20.8 
15 9 

16.5 
50.2 
40.0 
43.0 
38 5 


Percent 
43.1 

B '.I 
31). 3 
11. 1 

7.3 

8.7 
23.0 
22.4 

16.8 
7.8 


Percent 
25.2 
52.0 
17.3 
45.0 
72.3 

69.4 
15.5 
28.0 
33.9 
44.2 


Percent 
37.1 
34.2 
47.9 
34.5 
23.3 

24.0 
56.4 
47.0 
46.8 
50.1 


Percent 
37.7 
13.9 
34.8 
20.5 




Florida 

Kansas 

Oklahoma . 


4.4 


Colorado 

Montana 

Oregon 


6.6 
28.1 
25.1 
19.2 




5.7 








Utah 









164 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



NUMBER OF FAMILY WORKERS (INCLUDING OPERATOR) AND HIRED WORKERS PER FARM REPORTING, 
COMMERCIAL FARMS, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



UNITED STATES 
















t - x - xx ^ rw. 




OOO" 


!»' sesae 


w-mu 


—sm —J$m 





FULL OWNERS 



PART OWNERS 



NORTHEAST 
















Jl 


JJ. 




-H 



NUMBER 
25 



NORTH CENTRAL 




ALL FULL PART MANAGERS TENANTS 

FARMS OWNERS OWNERS 



ALL FULL PART MANAGERS TENANTS 

FARMS OWNERS OWNERS 



SOUTH 




NUMBER 
29 



WEST 














J J 


■ ggfl 


i J|: 



ALL 
FARMS 



FULL PART MANAGERS TENANTS 

OWNERS OWNERS 



ALL FULL PART MANAGERS TENANTS 

FARMS OWNERS OWNERS 



FAMILY WORKERS 



HIREO WORKERS 



Figure 35. 



FARM LABOR 



Changes in the use of farm labor. — Labor, measured in terms 
of total value of production, remains the most important factor 
in agricultural production. However, the general trend in the 
pattern of production has been a substitution of capital for labor. 
Mechanization and other features of the production process bring- 
ing about a capital-labor substitution have been important in 
reducing the total man-hours of work on farms by one-fourth 
since World War II and about 15 percent since 1947-49. Most 
of this reduction of labor has come about in crop production. 

The total amount of labor used for farm work, as estimated by 
the United States Department of Agriculture, has declined from 
22,547 million man-hours in 1910 to 14,642 million man-hours in 
1954. While these reductions in labor were taking place, sub- 
stantial increases were being made in total agricultural produc- 
tion. The result is that the index of output per man-hour (base 
1947^19=100) has increased from 46 in 1910 and 112 in 1950, to 
126 in 1954. 

Estimates by the United States Department of Agriculture in- 
dicate that in 1954 there was an annual average of 8,451,000 per- 
sons employed on farms, of which 6,521,000 were hired workers. 
These estimates show that the number of persons employed in 
agriculture has declined since the end of World War I. 



The index of farm employment (base 1910-14=100) had de- 
clined from 69 in 1950 to 62 in 1954. More of the drop in the farm 

Table 5. — Number of Family (Including Operator) and 
Hired Workers Per Farm Reporting, 1 Commercial Farms, 
by Tenure of Operator, United States and Regions: 1954 

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



Area and type of worker 


All 
farms 


Full 

owners 


Part 
owners 


Mana- 
gers 


Tenants 


United States: 


Number 
1.7 
3.8 

1.7 
3.6 

1.7 
2.0 

1.8 
4.8 

1.6 

6.5 


Number 
1.6 
3.2 

1.7 
3.4 

1.7 
2.0 

1.6 
3.6 

1.6 
4.5 


Number 
1.8 
4.0 

1.8 
3.6 

1.8 
2. 1 

1.8 
5.3 

1.7 
5 9 


Number 
1.3 
12.2 

1.4 

14.7 

1.3 

6.0 

1.3 
12.0 

1.2 
17.5 


Number 
1.8 




3.9 


Northeast: 


1.0 




2.7 


North Central: 


1.6 




1.8 


South: 


2.0 




5.4 


West: 


1.6 




5.6 







i For specified dates: September 26-October 3 for 33 States and October 24-30 for 15 
States. 



FARM TENURE 



165 



EXPENDITURE FOR HIRED LABOR PER COMMERCIAL FARM, BY TENURE 
OF OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



UNITED STATES 




At 



TENANT CASH SHARE- COOP- LIVE- CROP- OTHER AND 

CASH SHARE STOCK- PER3 UNSPECIFIED 

SHARE 



FULL PART Mia*- TENANT CASH SHARE- CROP- LIVE- CROP- OTHER AND 

OWNERS OWNERS SEWS CASH SHARE STOCK- PCM UNSPECIFIED 

SHANE 



SOUTH 




DOLLARS 
10,000 

8,000 

6,000 

4,000 


WEST 




J 24,564 


1 


1 


ll ■■ 




ml IhJ lis 


1 



TENANT CASH 



Figure 36. 



employment index in this period appears to be due to the 700,000 
decrease in number of family workers than to the 160,000 de- 
crease in number of hired workers. The index of family workers 
decreased from 71 in 1950, to 64 in 1954, while the index of hired 
workers decreased from 61 to 57. 

Labor as a factor of production. — Labor has certain character- 
istics distinguishing it from land and capital that are important 
to farm tenure. Most, and frequently all, of the labor is contrib- 
uted by the farm operator in all major types of tenure with the 
exception of manager-operated farms. Even on manager-oper- 
ated farms the operator generally makes substantial contributions 
of labor himself in addition to exercising control of the hired 
labor. This means that, although ownership and control of land 
and capital may vary by tenure type, the labor input is regulated 
primarily by the operator in all tenures. Another important 
characteristic of labor, in its relation to tenure, is that labor 
services must be used as they become available — they cannot be 
stored up. The availability of labor during critical periods may 
be an important element, for example, in setting the terms of a 
leasing agreement. Another important characteristic of the labor 
factor is that, since it is attached directly to a person, its mobility 
and use are partly affected by nonmonetary work preferences, 
habits, and other values of the individual. Therefore, a farm 
tenure arrangement usually reflects more than the monetary in- 
terests of the parties involved. 



The quantity of labor which the operator combines with other 
factors of production depends upon the amount of the expected 
reward and the probability of receipt of the reward. Tenure 
may affect either. A leasing arrangement, for example, may di- 
vide the return to several enterprises, each on a different basis. 
Under such conditions the tenant will tend to devote his labor 
to those enterprises that yield him the greatest return, neglecting 
the enterprises favoring the landlord. Uncertainty of the length 
of tenure may cause tenants to favor the use of their labor for 
enterprises that yield immediate return. The tenure of owner- 
operators includes responsibility for mortgages, taxes, and gov- 
ernment payments, and these conditions may affect the way in 
which labor is used. Large debt or tax commitments will tend 
to cause operators, who wish to protect their equity in the farm, 
to shift their labor into more certain crops even though their 
long-run average return may be lower. 

The tenure of the operator also appears to be related to the 
kind of labor (family or hired) used on the farm. Part of this 
may be due to the different sizes of units, variations in type of 
farm, and the financial condition associated with different 
tenures. 

Farm workers by tenure of farm operators. — The same major 
tenure categories of farms that have relatively large acreages 
also have large numbers of farm workers. In 1954, the average 

(Continued on page 189) 



166 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT OF FARMS REPORTING TRACTORS (OTHER THAN 

GARDEN) BY TENURE OF OPERATOR. COMMERCIAL FARMS 

UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 AND 1950 



Region and tenure 
UNITED STATES 
FULL OWNERS 

PART OWNERS 

MANAGERS 

ALL TENANTS 

Cosh 

Share-cosh 

Crop- share 

Livestock-share 

Croppers U 

Other and 
unspecified 

THE NORTH 

FULL OWNERS 

PART OWNERS 

MANAGERS 

ALL TENANTS 

Cash 

Share-cash 

Crop- share 

Livestock- shore 

Other and 
unspecified 

THE SOUTH 

FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 
Cash 

Shore-cash 
Crop- shore 
Livestock- share 

Croppers 

Other and 
unspecified 

THE WEST 

FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 
Cosh 

Share-cosh 
Crop-shore 

Livestock- share 

Other and 

unspecified 



Percent 

30 40 50 




Figure 37- 



EQUIPMENT AND FERTILIZER 

A dominant characteristic of the recent changes in American 
agriculture is the rapid mechanization of commercial farms. 
There have been substantial increases in the number of tractors 
and also in the number of s|>ecialized machines such as pick-up 
balers, milking machines, and corn pickers. As farm numbers 
decrease and labor moves out of agriculture, greater farm 
production is being made possible partly from increased 
mechanization. 

Increase in power. — One index of increased mechanical power 
applied to agricultural production is the number of tractors. The 
number of tractors on farms rose from 3,609,281 in 1950 to 
4,692,341 in 1954. This 30.0 percent increase in numbers does not 
represent the only change in work capacity, however, for tractors 
have increased in horsepower and versatility. Tractor numbers 
now approximate the number of farms in the United States. 
Excluding the many small noncommercial units, the ratio of 
tractors to farms would be approximately 1% to 1. The geo- 
graphic distribution of tractors, however, is not proportional to 
the number of farm units. (See figure 38.) The average 
number of tractors on commercial farms in the North Central 
Region, for example, is 1.6, whereas in the South the average is 
O.S per farm. 

Work power and tenure. — Work power, as represented by the 
percent of farms reporting tractors (figure 37), is related 
differently by the form of tenure in different regions. In the 
North 92.6 percent of the commercial tenant farms and 81.6 per- 
cent of the commercial full-owner farms reported tractors (other 
than garden ) in 1954. The percent of tenant farms in the West re- 
porting tractors was 85.3, whereas 72.3 percent of the full-owner 
farms reported tractors. In the South, however, 34.3 percent of 
the tenants reported tractors compared with 53.9 percent reported 
by full owners. The low percent of tractors on southern tenant 
farms is perhaps partly a function of the relative difference in 
financial condition of northern and southern tenants. Many 
tenants in the North are tenants because they consider it is 
more profitable to invest in machinery and equipment rather than 
land, whereas a large proportion of tenants in the South do not 
have sufficient capital to invest in either equipment or land. This 
condition of relatively limited capital in the South may also 
account partially for the fact that between 1950 and 1954 the pro- 
portion of tenant commercial farms reporting tractors (other than 
garden) showed an increase of only 38.9 percent in this area, 
whereas full-owner farms reporting tractors increased 46.5 per- 
cent and part-owner farms reporting increased 28.8 percent. To a 
lesser extent, a similar pattern of increase was reported for 
the North and the West (figure 37). 

Part-owner and manager farms, as may be expected by their 
tendency to be larger than tenant or owner-operated farms, re- 
ported the highest percentage of tractors in 1950 and 1954. 

An important contribution to the increase of agricultural pro- 
duction was the substitution of petroleum for feed crops as a 
source of power. In general, the degree to which this transition 
has been effected is indicated in a comparison of farms with 
tractors and no horses or mules and farms with horses or mules 
and no tractor (figure 38). 

Specialized machines. — The percent of farms reporting tractors 
is an indicator of the extensiveness of mechanization ; whereas, 
the degree of intensity or thoroughness of mechanization may be 
inferred from the use of specialized machines. Figure 39 shows 
the percent of commercial farms using some specialized machines 
in comparison with the percent of farms reporting tractors. 



FARM TENURE 



167 



NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL FARMS BY CLASS OF WORK POWER ANO TENURE OF OPERATOR 
FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



THOUSANDS 
• 00 | 




UNITED STATES 




FULL OWNERS 



PART OWNERS 





NORTHFAST 












H&,vl . 1 


« 2 2 9 4 04 2 


2 .9 1 



THOUSANDS 
400 



FULL OWNERS 



PART OWNERS 



FULL OWNERS 



THOUSANDS 
400 



THOUSANDS 




FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS TENANTS CROPPERS 

I CLASS I -TRACTOR AND NO HORSE ^ CLASSJH- HORSE AND NO TRACTOR 

388 CLASS H- TRACTOR ANO HORSE Kj CLAS5H- NO TRACTOR ANO NO HORSE 




wm^m. 



CROPPERS (SOUTH ONLV) 




PART OWNERS 



300 
200 




WFST 











IsLra 


M&- 3 2 i 3 -4 


m 


FULL OWNERS 


PART OWNERS MANAGERS 


TENANTS 



TRACTORS ON FARMS 

NUMBER, 1954 



UNITED STATES TOTAL 
4,692.341 



US OEPARTMENT OF OOMMER&E 




MAP NO A54-024 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



Figure 38. 



168 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT OF COMMERCIAL FARMS REPORTING TRACTORS, COMBINES, MILKING MACHINES, CORN PICKERS 
AND PICKUP BALERS, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR; FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS 1954 




FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS TENANTS 



FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS TENANTS 





FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS TENANTS CROPPERS 

E559 TRACTORS RSaSS COMBINES 



[':.'■';'.] CORN PICKERS 



FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS 

W//A MILKING MACHINES 

| PICK-UP BALERS 



Figure 39- 



In 1954, there were 923,709 farms that reported ownership of 
at least one combine ; this represents an increase of 25S,331 farms 
over the number that reported combines in 1950. The number 
of combines also has increased, rising from 713,633 in 1950 to 
979,050 in 1954. The proportion of commercial part-owner farms 
reporting combines was double that of commercial full-owner 
farms and greater than that of tenants. Part of this differential 
may be due to the difference in farm size or kind of farm. Part 
of the differential also may be due to the superior capital posi- 
tion of part owners. As in the case of tractors, the change in 
number does not show all of the increased capacity or that, as 
more combines become self-propelled, they decrease the labor- 
operator requirements and free tractors for other purposes. 

Milking machines were reported on 712,022 farms in 1954. This 
number of farms represents an increase of 11.9 percent over 1950. 

The number of farms reporting corn pickers in 1954 was 676,088 
and the number of corn pickers reported was 687466. This repre- 
sents an increase of 228,701 farms and 231,947 corn pickers since 
1950. The percentage of both part-owner and tenant-operated 
farms reporting the use of corn pickers is higher than either 
full-owner or manager farms. This may be accounted for by the 
large size and high proportion of cropland in part-owner and 



tenant farms in the principal corn-producing regions and so does 
not necessarily imply that tenancy is associated with higher 
mechanization. 

In 1954, U^,872 farms reported balers and 427,279 of these 
farms were commercial farms. A higher proportion of manager- 
operated farms reported pick-up balers than any of the other ten- 
ures. The widest differentials were found in the South and North 
Central and were probably associated with greater emphasis on 
livestock enterprises on manager-operated farms. The number 
of farms reporting pick-up balers in 1950 was 191,658 and the 
(Continued on page 1S9) 

Table 6. — Percent of Commercial Farms Reporting Specified 
Equipment, by Tenure of Operator, United States, 1954 

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



Equipment 



Grain combine... 
Milking machine 

Corn picker 

Pick-up baler 



Commer- 








cial farms 


Full own- 


Part 


Mana- 


report- 


ers 


owners 


gers 


ing 








Percent 


Percent 


Percent 


Percent 


26.9 


20.5 


40.9 


30.8 


20.6 


21.6 


25.1 


19.8 


19.9 


15.0 


25.9 


18.4 


12.8 


11.3 


19.5 


31.9 



Tenants 



Percent 
26.6 
15.6 
23.5 
9.7 



FARM TENURE 



169 



PERCENT OF FARMS USING COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER, 
BY TENURE, COMMERCIAL FARMS, UNITED STATES 
AND REGIONS: 1954 



AVERAGE EXPENDITURE PER ACRE FOR COMMERCIAL FERTIL- 
IZER AND FERTILIZER MATERIAL, BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, 
COMMERCIAL FARMS, UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



Region and Tenure 

UNITED STATES 
FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 
Cosh 

Shore- cosh 
Crop-shore 
Livestock-share 
Croppers U 

Others and 
unspecified 

THE NORTH 

FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 
Cosh 

Share-cosh 
Crop- shore 

Livestock-share 

Other ond 
unspecified 

THE SOUTH 

FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 
Cosh 

Shore-cosh 
Crop-shore 
Livestock-shore 



Croppers 

Other ond 
unspecified 



THE WEST 

FULL OWNERS 

PART OWNERS 

MANAGERS 

ALL TENANTS 
Cosh 

Shore-cosh 
Crop- share 

L ivestock 

Other ond 
unspecified 



Percent 




Region and Tenure 

UNITED STATES 
FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 
Cash 

Share-cosh 
Crop-share 
Livestock-shore 

Croppers LI 

Other and 
unspecified 

THE NORTH 

FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 

Cash 

Shore- cash 

Crop- share 

Livestock-share 

Other and 
unspecified 

THE SOUTH 

FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 
Cosh 

Share-cosh 
Crop- shore 
Livestock-shore 



Croppers 

Other ond 
unspecified 



THE WEST 

FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 
Cosh 

Shore-cosh 
Crop-shore 

Livestock- shore 

Other ond 
unspecified 



Dollars per Acre 




Figure 40. 



Fertilizer use and tenure. — The increased use of commercial 
fertilizer also helps to account for the growth of agricultural 
production. The use of commercial fertilizer has more than 
trebled in the period 1940-54. In the United States 17,811,999 
tons of fertilizer w,ere purchased in 1954 for use on com- 
mercial farms. For those farms reporting fertilizer, the rate 
of application was 307 pounds per acre. In all three major 
areas of the United States (figure 40), a higher proportion of 
tenant farms reported the use of fertilizer than full owners, while 
croppers showed the highest percentage of all farms. Differences 
between tenure groups, however, are slight and perhaps could be 
explained by the differences in type of farm. There are wider 
407763—57 13 



differences between areas than between tenure categories. 

Leasing arrangements, to the extent that they dissociate costs 
and returns, may affect resource combinations. A tenant or 
landlord who bears the full cost of fertilizer and receives only a 
share of the increased productivity, will tend to apply less ferti- 
lizer, than if the costs were also shared per acre. In 1954, com- 
mercial cash tenants spent an average of $9.97 per acre for 
commercial fertilizer and crop-share tenants spent $8.39 per acre. 
To a certain extent the larger expenditure by cash tenants may 
be because, in the short run, the cash tenant receives all of the 
return resulting from increased production. 
(Continued on page 190) 



170 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 

AVERAGE EXPENDITURE PER COMMERCIAL FARM FOR SPECIFIED COST ITEMS, 
BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



DOLLARS 
7,000 



UNITED STATES 



6,000 
5,000 
4,000 
3,000 
2,000 
1,000 




DOLLARS 

7,000 
6,000 
5,000 
4,000 
3,000 
2,000 
1,000 



DOLLARS 
6,000 

5,000 

4,000 

3,000 

2,000 

1,000 



FULL OWNERS 

NORTHEAST 



PART OWNERS 



$&Z2- 



FULL OWNERS 



PART OWNERS 



vm 




)OLLARS 
6,000 






NORTH CENTRAL 
















5,000 
4,000 
















3,000 












2,000 
















..*% 










ES 


V77!m 777? 


Mm W/ 




Wm 



FULL OWNERS 



PART OWNERS 



DOLLARS 
7,000 

6,000 

5,000 

4,000 

3,000 

2,000 

1,000 





SOUTH 



"^ fcrry-Ai ££Z , 



w 



FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS 

fyZA MACHINE HIRE \ j FEED 

SPECIFIED FARM EXPENDITURES 



DOLLARS 
7,000 

6,000 

5,000 

4,000 

3,000 

2,000 

1,000 





WEST 







12,273 
















_J 








['.:: 










m 


.-_■■.'..; 


Wft 


m™ W< 



FULL OWNERS 
[y.y'.j GASOLINE 



PART OWNERS 



fy/Jt COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER 



Figure 41. 



Changes in costs. — As farms continue to increase in size and 
total agricultural production continues to increase, expenditures 
become more important to the individual farm and to the agri- 
cultural industry. In addition to the general increases in costs 
attendant to increased production, there have been shifts in 
combination of production factors which have changed the com- 
position of farm costs. Many of these changes in farm expendi- 
tures have been accompanied by adjustments in tenure arrange- 
ments or even in the form of tenure. 

One important shift in the production pattern influencing the 
structure of costs has been the substitution of working capital 
for labor. In general, there has been an increase of capital and 
a decrease of labor, in physical terms, per acre of farmland. For 
example, machine hire on commercial farms increased from 
$579 million in 1949 to $603 million in 1954 and expenditures for 
gasoline and petroleum increased from $1,091 million in 1949 to 
$1,312 million in 1954, while hired labor costs decreased from 
$2,336 million in 1949 to $2,216 million in 1954. 

Both the form of tenure and the conditions of a particular 
tenure arrangement may be affected by the type and level of 
farm expenditures. Owner-operatorship might be the most ef- 
ficient tenure form if, for example, relatively large expenditures 
are required from the operator for repair of fences, buildings, or 

(Continued on page 190) 



Table 7- — Average Expenditure per Commercial Farm 
Reporting Specified Cost Items, by Tenure of Operator, 
for the United States and Regions: 1954 



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




Specified expenditure arid area 


All 
com- 
mercial 
farms 


Full 

owners 


Part 
owners 


Managers 


Tenants 


Machine hire: 


Dollars 
291 
218 
246 
259 
764 

1,444 
3,059 
1,291 
981 
2,959 

492 
432 
511 
395 
778 

446 
525 
430 
389 
971 


Dollars 
244 
198 
213 
226 
502 

1,482 
3,018 
1,127 
1,158 
2,785 

380 
359 
384 
331 
£13 

363 
414 
331 
358 
616 


Dollars 
391 
254 
289 
383 
1,059 

1,560 
3,138 
1,387 
1,156 
2,652 

686 

607 

664 

580 

1,149 

633 
733 
536 
582 
1,618 


Dollars 

2,055 

501 

744 

1,570 

5,301 

9,256 
10,044 
7,277 
5,895 
21, 598 

1,899 
1,373 
1,254 
1,862 
2,895 

3,360 
2,078 
1,703 
3,475 
6,205 


Dollars 
258 




253 




258 


South - 


210 


West - 


868 


Feed: 


1,092 




2,576 




1,438 


South 


410 


West - 


2,864 


Gasoline and other petroleum 
products: 


472 




448 




671 




303 


West 


862 


Commercial fertilizer: 
United States 


379 




589 




488 


South -- 


283 


West . -- -- 


1,116 










SECTION III 
People 



population: total, non-farm, and farm, 
united states. 1910 to 1954 




i960 

S4C-43 



U.S. FARM POPULATION 



/ 32 \ 




. f !y 324 \ 


^J 30 5 \ 








V mil y^ 1 




^v""- y 










1920 


■ \ 


1933 


V *" L ylL 

1940 ^* 


1950 


f 22 2 

1955 


W 


.: i..,. 


i . . . , 


1.. . . -'. I . 


, ,1, ,"i,-i 


....!.. 


■ 1 . 


..1 .- 



M» fflOW TWf BUREAU OF THE CENSUS AND THE AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE 



MIGRATION TO AND FROM FARMS. U.S. 1920-53 













































\' 








/\_ 


/\-^__ 














/ / 




"'•<J 


\\ 










1 \ & FROM FARMS 


•"' 






I \, 




■■' 




\.- 


--..-'"•• 




.-"■" 




\ 


.-...-- 1 ' 


FARMS 



















1920 1925 



1930 1935 

d l.omtormt. 1950 54 



1950 1955 



RESIDENCE OF LABOR FORCE 

Farm and Non farm, U.S. 1950 
RURAL FARM URBAN, RURAL NONFARM 



LABOR FORCE 



Farm 



Nonfa 




20 10 10 20 30 40 

MILLIONS OF PERSONS 

SOURCE CENSUS OF POPULATION, 1950 
JS DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG 56(10-2246 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



PERCENTAGE CHANGE IN THE: FARM POPULATION, SELECTEO 
PERIODS, UNITED STATES AND REGIONS, 1920-54 





DECREASE 




INCREASE 


1950-54 






m- 




V.V.V.V.V.V/ 






1940-50 


^jiiiiiiiil 




mmm-Ji ..-.- 








1930-40 
1920-30 




1 ■'*■'* 




■ 






WM 



25 20 15 10 

u s H9 NORTHEAST f 



5 5 10 15 20 25 

! NORTH CENTRAL igg&l SOUTH | . ) WEST 



RESIDENCE OF THE FARM LABOR FORCE 

By Kind of Worker,U.S.,1950 

RURAL FARM URBAN, RURAL NONFARM 



LABOR FORCE 

Farmers and 
farm managers 

Family 
workers 

Other (arm 
laborers 



1 


1 — 1 


1 


1 

1 


lllllllfl 1 


1 


1 


1 



2 2 

MILLIONS OF PERSONS 



SOURCE: CENSUS OP POPULATION. 1950 
US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG 561111-224? AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



TENURE OF FARM WORKERS 

COMMERCIAL FARMS 


Owner and 
manager families 


HSfe *■*"? r T&ffi~ i i gnj sj K 1 37m«i 






Tenant families 


-, '^feVHV^'!."'" ■'"^B ,6 mit - 


OTHER FARMS 




Operator families 


, ,",,-'* jfej 1 1-5 mil. 


HIRED WORKERS 

Regular workers \//s/sS/S/V\ ^ m '' 


Seasonal workers 


^^^y^^^^^^^^^k ° 


DATA FOR 33 STAT 
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRlCU 


•iS, SEPTEMBER 26- OCTOBER 2, FOR IS STATES. OCTOBER 24-30. 1954 

.TUBE NEG. 56IMI-2243 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



<- Figure 42. \ 



FARM TENURE 



173 



PEOPLE 

The implications of farm tenure extend through the entire 
framework of human relationships associated with the use of 
farm land. Tenure deals with the rights, privileges, and re- 
sponsibilities of all persons participating in agricultural pro- 
duction, and in the allocation of the returns to the participants. 
It is also concerned with the alternative economic and social 
considerations which influence the participants in their tenure 
relations. Farm tenure, in its broad sense, is the social struc- 
ture under which our agricultural resources are utilized. This 
section of this report deals with farm tenure in its relation to 
farm people. 

FARM POPULATION 

The tenure of the farm population is only partially reflected by 
the tenure under which farms are operated. In addition to farm 
operators and their families, the farm population includes some 
farm laborers and other families who live on farms but do not 
operate them. A few farm operators, on the other hand, do not 
live on farms. Also, the livelihood of many farm families is 
only partially or secondarily dependent on agriculture. 

The farm population increased along with total population 
until about World War I, reaching a peak of 32,530,000 persons 
in 1916, according to estimates of the Bureau of the Census. At 
that time, there was about one person on farms for each two 
persons in the nonfarm population. Since 1916, the trend in the 
number of persons on farms has been generally downward with 
only 21,S90,000 on farms in 1954, or approximately 1 person 
on farms for each 6 not on farms. 

Migration, both from and to farms, has been large with an 
average from 1920 to 1954 of about one person in each 16 of the 
farm population each year moving from farm to nonfarm, and 
one in 25 moving from nonfarm to farm, according to estimates 
of the Agricultural Marketing Service of the United States De- 
partment of Agriculture. The net migration from farms has 
exceeded the natural increase (excess of births over deaths) by 
approximately 300,000 persons per year. 

This physical movement of persons from and to farms accom- 
panied an even larger movement between farm and nonfarm 
employment. Many farm persons who take nonfarm jobs do not 
move away from the farm, and many who move to the farm do not 
give up their nonfarm employment. 

Tenure of the farm population. — In considering tenure of the 
farm population, we must take into account the large proportion 
of the farm population primarily and secondarily dependent on 
nonfarm employment or income. For many farm residents, the 
farm serves principally as a place of residence rather than a 
means of livelihood. 

The tenure of the farm population is reflected in the tenure of 
the work force represented in the farm population. According 
to the 1950 Census of Population, 6,933,405 of those persons classi- 
fied by residence as rural farm were in the labor force on April 
1, 1950. Of these 5,174,657, or 74.6 percent, were in the farm 
labor force and 1,758,748 were in the nonfarm labor force. An 
additional 1,056,064 persons in the farm labor force were urban 
or rural nonfarm residents. 

Of the 5,174,657 persons in the farm-labor force residing on 
rural farms, 3,853,395 were classed as farmers and farm man- 
agers; 554,549, as unpaid family workers; and 766,713, other 



farm workers and foremen. These other farm workers and fore- 
men were made up almost entirely of hired farm workers. These 
rural farm residents in the farm-labor force represented 82.8 
percent of the total farm-labor force on April 1, 1956. 

Rural farm residents, however, do not account for the entire 
farm-labor force. Urban residents accounted for 117,238 of the 
farmers and farm managers classified in the 1950 Census of Popu- 
lation and rural nonfarm residents accounted for an additional 
232,550 farmers and farm managers. These farmers and farm 
managers, who were nonfarm residents, accounted for 8.3 percent 
of the total. A slightly smaller proportion (7.5 percent) of the 
family workers on farms were nonfarm residents. Nearly half 
(47.1 percent) of the hired farm workers were nonfarm residents. 

The tenure situation of farm people is also reflected by the 
tenure of farm workers as reported in the 1954 Census of Agri- 
culture. In 1954, there were 9,597,343 persons reported as work- 
ing on farms during specified week ( September 26-October 2 for 
33 States and October 24-30 for 15 States). Of these workers, 
4,142,352 were farm operators, 2,725,341 were unpaid family 
workers, and 2,729,650 were hired workers. If the family is con- 
sidered as a unit, a farm operator and unpaid members of his 
family may be grouped. Thus, we can consider both farm oper- 
ators and unpaid members of their families on the basis of the 
tenure of the farm operator. A further classification is provided 
by the segregation of farms other than commercial. These other, 
or noncommercial fanns, account to a large extent for those 
farms which serve primarily as a place of residence. 

Of the 9,597,343 farm workers reported in the 1954 Census, 
3,685,341 were farm owners or managers of commercial farms and 
unpaid members of their families; 1,637,44$ were tenant farm 
operators of commercial farms and unpaid members of their fam- 
ilies; 1.544-906 were operators of noncommercial farms and mem- 
bers of their families ; and 2,729,650 were hired farm workers. 
Of the hired workers, however, about one-fourth (25.3 percent) 
were regular workers employed 150 or more days during the year 
and three-fourths (7^.7 percent) were seasonal workers. The 
specified week was a period of near peak employment in many 
areas. Of the 1,544,906 unpaid family workers (including oper- 
ators) on noncommercial farms, most were owner-operators and 
members of owner-operator families. Probably little more than 
one in eight were tenant operators and members of tenant-oper- 
ator families. 

The number of farm owners has remained relatively unchanged 
since 1910 (see Number of Farms by Tenure in section I) except 
about 1930 when substantial numbers of owners were unable to 
maintain an equity in their farms, and in 1954 when, due pri- 
marily to consolidation of farms into larger operating units, there 
was a sharp drop in the total number of farms. The number of 
tenants increased from 1910 until 1935, then declined. In 1954, 
there were only 40.8 percent as many tenants as in 1935. The 
proportion of tenancy declined from 42.4 percent in 1935 to 24.4 
percent in 1954. According to estimates of the Agricultural Mar- 
keting Service, United States Department of Agriculture, the an- 
nual average number of hired farm workers remained relatively 
constant from 1910 to 1929, at about 3.4 million persons and at 
25 percent of the average number of all farm workers. (See 
Farm Labor in section II.) Since 1929, the average number of 
hired farm workers has declined, with an average of 1.9 million 
hired farm workers in 1954 representing 22.8 percent of the aver- 
age number of all farm workers in 1954. 



174 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



AGRICULTURAL NET INCOME AND NON-AGRICULTURAL NET INCOME 

Billion UNITED STATES, 1910-1954 

Dollars 

350 



AGRICULTURAL NET INCOME AS PERCENT OF TOTAL NATIONAL 
Percent INCOME, UNITED STATES, 1910 - 1954 





1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 

54C-46 



n l I ' I I I ' I I i I I I I I i i i i i i i i i , , i i , , i 

1910 1915 1920 1925 1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 

54C-47 





NET INCOME FROM FARMING 

Received by Nonfarm Population, U.S. 




% 

20 
10 
0. 


■ 


l\ 


A 








/^A> 


f v 


X 


W 


sS 


> 1 1 > 1 1 1 1 1 








* 1 1 ii i i.i i 


1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 19 

SOURCE. ESTIMATES, US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
U S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG. 56 110*2245 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SEf 


60 

VICE 



NET INCOME OF FARM POPULATION 

From Farming and Nonfarm Sources, U.S. 



NONFARM SOURCES 




1935 



1955 



1960 



SOURCE ESTIMATES, US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
US DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG 56 (I I ]- 2244 AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH SERVICE 



Figure 43. 



FARM INCOME AND TENURE 



The 1954 net income originating from agriculture was more 
than three times that of 1910 according to estimates of the Agri- 
cultural Marketing Service of the United States Department of 
Agriculture. The number of persons employed in agriculture in 
1954, on the other hand, was less than two-thirds the 1910 farm 
employment. 

This agricultural net income includes more than the net income 
of farm operators from farming. It also includes wages for farm 
labor, net farm rents, and interest on farm-mortgage debt. Most, 
but not all, of the total agricultural net income of farm operators 
from farming goes to farm residents. But nearly one-half of 
farm wages, about two-thirds of the net farm rents, and practi- 
cally all of the interest on farm-mortgage debts goes to nonfarm 
residents. In 1954, 15.1 percent of the total agricultural net 
income went to nonfarm residents. 

The income of farm residents, on the other hand, is not limited 
to income from agriculture. Many persons living on farms re- 
ceive income from nonfarm sources. In 1954, according to esti- 
mates of the Agricultural Marketing Service of the United States 
Department of Agriculture, 28.5 percent of the net income of the 
farm population was from nonfarm sources. 

Tenure arrangements, in respect to rights in the use of farm 
lands and in the division of income from land, are influenced by 
the whole economy, nonfarm as well as farm. For example, 
farm tenants who receive much of their income from nonfarm 
sources may rent the farm primarily as a place to live rather 
than as a source of livelihood. In bargaining for the use of the 
farm, its value as a residence may be preeminent in the con- 
sideration of the would-be tenant. The landlord may consider 



its rent potential from agricultural use as well as residential 
use. The agricultural possibilities of many of these places, how- 
ever, are very limited resulting in paramount consideration being 
given to their residential potential by both tenants and landlords. 

Distribution of farm income by tenure. — In the 1954 Census of 
Agriculture, 69.6 percent of the farms were classed as commercial. 
The remaining 30. ^ percent, consisting principally of part-time 
and residential farms, account for a high proportion of the farm 
population dependent primarily on income from nonfarm sources. 
The tenure of these noncommercial farms is determined in large 
part by considerations other than the farm as a business enter- 
prise. For the most part, they are owner-operated with only 
13.0 percent tenancy as compared with 2S.S percent tenancy for 
commercial farms. A high proportion of the tenants on these 
noncommercial farms pay cash rent or payments other than share 
of crops or livestock. 

For commercial farms, the tenure distributions vary by in- 
come. In general, the higher the gross farm income the lower 
the percentage of farms in that income group operated by full 
owners. The opposite holds for part owners. The proportion 
of part-owner farms represented in the lower economic classes 
is low but this ratio increases with each higher economic class 
of farm. The proportion of farms operated by managers, also, 
increases with increases in the gross farm income. For tenants, 
the proportion of tenancy is lower for both the lowest and highest 
economic classes than for the intermediate classes. Of Class VI 
farms, the lowest economic class of commercial farms in respect 
to gross income, 63.6 percent were operated by full owners; 11.5 
percent, by part owners; 0.1 percent, by managers; and 24-8 per- 

(Continued on page 190) 



FARM TENURE 175 

PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF COMMERCIAL FARMS IN EACH ECONOMIC CLASS, 
BY TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



UNITED STATES 



10 20 



FULL OWNERS 

PERCENT 
30 40 50 60 70 



PART OWNERS MANAGERS 

PERCENT PERCENT 

10 20 30 40 50 O 10 O 




f\ 



TENANTS 

PERCENT 
10 20 30 40 




THE NORTH 



FULL OWNERS 
PERCENT 
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 



PART OWNERS MANAGERS 

PERCENT PERCENT 
10 20 30 40-50 (3 10 O 




TENANTS 

PERCENT 
10 20 30 40 50 




THE SOUTH 



FULL OWNERS 

PERCENT 



10 


20 


30 


40 50 


60 


70 


80 9 














J 






CLASS I 
























CLASS n 


























CLASS m 
















class nr 


















CLASS Z 








CLASS 51 





























PART OWNERS 

PERCENT 
10 20 30 40 




MANAGERS 

PERCENT 

50 10 O 



Fl 



TENANTS 

PERCENT 
10 20 30 40 50 




THE WEST 



FULL OWNERS 

PERCENT 

30 40 50 60 



70 80 90 



PART OWNERS 

PERCENT 

10 20 30 40 



MANAGERS 

PERCENT 
50 10 O 



TENANTS 
PERCENT 
10 20 30 40 50 




Figure 44. 



176 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT OF COMMERCIAL FARMS IN EACH TENURE GROUP REPORTING 
A TELEPHONE, ELECTRICITY, AND RUNNING WATER, FOR THE 
UNITED STATES AND REGIONS; 1954 




FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS TENANTS 



PERCENT 
100 



iSOUTHl 









$ 


































\i 














il 



FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS TENANTS 




FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS TENANTS CROPPERS 



FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGER TENANTS 



ELECTRICITY 



RUNNING WATER 



54C-I24 



Figure 45. 



Specified facilities on farms by tenure of operator. — Income in 
terms of the well-being of the population is reflected by the fa- 
cilities in the dwelling. In the 1954 Census of Agriculture, elec- 
tricity was reported on 9,1.0 percent of the farms, telephone on 
4S.S percent, and running water on 58.8 percent. For commer- 
cial farms, the ratios were 93.8 percent reporting electricity, 52.5 
percent telephone, and 60.8 percent running water, as compared 
with !)1.2, J/0.3, and 5 j.O percent, respectively, for noncommercial 
farms. 

The proportion of farms reporting each of these specified fa- 
cilities was generally less for tenants than for owners. This 
difference was less pronounced for electricity than for telephone 
or running water, and less in the North and West than in the 
South. In the North and West, nearly as high a proportion of 
tenants as owners reported electricity. In the North Central 
region as high a proportion of tenants reported electricity as full 
owners. For this region, the proportion of tenants reporting 
telephones was higher than for either full owners or part owners. 



In the South, the proportion of farms reporting each of these 
specified facilities was much less than for other regions and the 
difference between tenants and owners was more pronounced. 
The proportion of farms reporting telephone and running water, 
respectively, was much lower for tenants than for owners, and 
much lower for croppers than for other tenants. In the South, 
J,.3 percent of the croppers and 11.3 percent of all tenants on com- 
mercial farms reported telephone as compared with 33. / f percent 
of the full owners and 35.1 percent of the part owners. Running 
water was reported by 13.!) percent of the croppers and Z.'i.l per- 
cent of all tenants on commercial farms, as compared with 58.1 
percent for full owners and 60.2 percent for part owners. The 
proportion of croppers reporting electricity was as high as that 
for tenants other than croppers, and the difference in the pro- 
portion of tenants reporting electricity and owners reporting 
electricity was much less than for either telephone or running 
water. The proportion of all tenants reporting electricity was 
86.6 percent as compared with 93.1 percent for full owners and 
94.5 percent for part owners. (Continued on page 190) 



FARM TENURE 



177 



PERCENT OF ALL FARM OPERATORS WORKING OFF THEIR FARMS IN 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




I l iffjnFB 15 

] \S TO 29. Bi 

! 30 TO 44 
*N0 FARMS 

U S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO A54 060 



BUREAU OF THE CENSUS 



FARM OPERATORS WORKING OFF THEIR FARMS 100 DAYS OR MORE 

INCREASE AND DECREASE. IN NUMBER. 1949-1954 




FARM OPERATORS WITH OTHER INCOME OF FAMILY EXCEEDING VALUE OF 
AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS SOLD. 1954 




Figure'46. 



OFF-FARM EMPLOYMENT AND PART-TIME 
FARMING 

In the 1954 Census of Agriculture, 60.7 percent of the farm op- 
erators reported that they or some member of their family living 
with them received income from sources other than from the 
farm operated. Of all farm operators, 27.9 percent reported 
working off their farms 100 or more days during the year, and 
29.S percent reported other income of the family greater than 
value of farm products sold from the farm operated. 

Considerations in the tenure arrangements of these farm op- 
erators, partially or primarily dependent on other employment 



or other income, are quite different from those of operators wholly 
or primarily dependent on agriculture. 

Farm operators with other employment and other income in- 
clude: (1) Farmers who work at nonfami jobs during slack sea- 
sons; (2) farmers who supplement their farming with part-time 
work off the farm; (3) persons, employed full time at nonfarm 
jobs, who live in rural areas convenient to their place of employ- 
ment and have sufficient agricultural production to qualify as 
farms; and (4) persons, both farm and nonfarm, who retire on 
the land and augment their retirement income with some agri- 
cultural activity. 



178 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT OF FARM 
FARMS 100 DAYS 
UNITED STATES 

UNITED STATES 

FULL OWNERS 

PART OWNERS 

MANAGERS 

ALL TENANTS 
Cosh 

Share- Cosh 
Crop -share 
Livestock- share 
Croppers! South Only) 
Other and unspecified 

THE NORTHEAST 
FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 

Cash 

Share sash 

Crop-share 

Live stock -share 

Other and unspecified 

THE NORTH CENTRAL 
FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 

Cash 

Share -cash 

Cfop- shore 

Livestock-share 

Other and unspecified 

THE SOUTH 

FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 

Cash 

Share-cash 

Crop- share 

Livestock- share 

Croppers 

Other and unspecified 

THE WEST 

FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
MANAGERS 
ALL TENANTS 

Cash 

Share -cash 

Crop-share 

Livestock -shore 

Other and unspecified 



OPERATORS WORKING OFF THEIR 
OR MORE. BY TENURE, FOR THE 
AND REGIONS - . 1954 AND 1950 

Percent 

10 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 90 10 




O 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 60 90 100 




10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100 




K) 20 30 40 SO 60 TO 80 90 100 

mm 




10 20 30 40 50 60 TO 80 90 100 




E2 1950 



Figure 47- 



S4CI3I 



Tenure and off- farm work. — Only one-third (32.5 percent) of 
the farms operated by persons working off their farms 100 or more 
days were classed as commercial farms in the 1954 Census. The 
farms of most operators working off their farms 100 or more 
days were primarily places of residence. The gross sales of farm 
products were generally small. The operators of only 13.0 per- 
cent of all commercial farms reported 100 or more days of off-farm 
work as compared with 61.8 percent for farms other than com- 
mercial. 

A large majority of operators working off their farms 100 or 
more days were owner operators, mostly full owners. Full 
owners accounted for 72.3 percent of the total ; part owners, 12.6 
percent ; tenants, U t .9 percent ; and managers, 0.2 percent. The 
full owners working 100 or more days off their farms accounted 
for more than one-third (35.1 percent) of all owner operators. 
Part owners reporting 100 or more days of off-farm work com- 
prised one-fifth (19.3 percent) of all part owners, and tenants 
who worked off their farms 100 or more days represented one- 
sixth (17.3 percent) of all tenants. 

Among the tenant groups, cash tenants and other and unspec- 
ified tenants reported nonfarm work in about the same propor- 
tion as full owners. Possibly this higher proportion of cash and 
other tenants reporting off-farm work was due to the large num- 
ber of persons with nonfarm jobs who were renting dwellings pri- 
marily. A smaller proportion of share-cash and share tenants 
reported off-farm work than cash or other and unspecified tenants. 
The percentage of livestock-share tenants reporting off-farm work 
was smaller than that for any other tenure group, with 7.1 per- 
cent reporting 100 or more days of work off the farm. This small 
percentage of livestock-share tenants working off their farms may 
have been due to the work requirements of their livestock enter- 
prises. 

Other income. — The number of farm operators with other in- 
come greater than their gross income from the operation of their 
farms overlaps, to a considerable extent, the number of operators 
who work a considerable portion of the year at jobs off their 
farms. As might be expected, therefore, the distributions of the 
two groups are quite similar. 

The proportion of farm operators reporting other income varied 
considerably among the tenure groups. Most of the operators 
reporting other income were full owners. Nearly two-fifths of 
all the full owners (39.0 percent) reported other income greater 
than the value of sales of products from the farm operated. These 
full owners accounted for nearly three-fourths of all full-owner 
operators (73.2 percent) of farms other than commercial farms 
and one-seventh of the full-owner operators (lkk percent) of 
commercial farms. 

The percentages of part owners and of tenants with other in- 
come exceeding sale of agricultural products were less than one- 
half that of full owners. There was considerable variation, how- 
ever, among the tenant subclasses. The proportions of cash ten- 
ants and other and unspecified tenants with other income ex- 
ceeding sales of products from the farm operated were similar to 
that of full owners. Very few livestock-share (4.9 percent) and 
share-cash tenants (6.1 percent) reported other income greater 
than sales of agricultural products. A somewhat higher propor- 
tion of crop-share tenants and croppers reported other income 
with 12.9 and 11.2 percent, respectively, reporting other income 
greater than sales of farm products. 



FARM TENURE 



179 



PERCENT OF FARM OPERATORS WITH OTHER INCOME OF FAMILY EXCEEDING THE VALUE OF FARM PRODUCTS 
SOLD, BY TENURE, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1950 AND 1954 




FULL OWNERS PART OWNERS MANAGERS ALL TENANTS CASH 



SHARE- CASH CROP-SHARE 



LIVESTOCK- CROPPERS OTHER AND 

SHARE (SOUTH ONLY) UNSPECIFIED 





FULL MHI MANAGERS ALL CASH SHARE- CROP- LIVESTOCK- OTHER ft 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS CASH SHARE SHARE UNSPEC 



FULL PART HANAOERS ALL CASH SHARE- CROP- LIVESTOCK- OTHER ft 

OWNERS OWNERS TENANTS CASH SHARE SHARE UNSPEC 







SOUTH m 




J 

•i;5 




am 




M_ 




1 


w 










V 

1 


i 1 


£ 




94C- 136 



Figure 48. 



180 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



AVERAGE NUMBER OF YEARS ON PRESENT FARMS. BY 

TENURE OF OPERATOR, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 

1954 AND 1950 



UNITED STATES 

10 



ALL OPERATORS 
FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
ALL TENANTS 
Cash 

Share - cash 
Crop -share 

Livestock- share 

Croppers 

(South only) 
Other ond 

unspecified 



ALL OPERATORS 
FULL OWNERS 
PART OWNERS 
ALL TENANTS 

Cash 

Shore - cash 

Crop- shore 

Livestock-shore 

Other ond 
unspecified 



2C 



//////////SS////////////////S/////////////////////////////////////'/////////, 



'////////////y///s/////////////////////////////////////////////s//////////////////////////.'// 



/////////////////////////////////////■//////////////////////////////////////////// 



'////S////////S//////////////S////S, 



/S///////////////SS///////////////S///SS* 



'///////////S//////////S//////S//////SS// 



■//////////////S//S/////////////S//J 



S//S///S////S////////SSSS//SS///SS/ 



■////////////////////////////, 



V//SS/SSS/SS/S/S/S-//S///S/SSS/////S/S////S///S 



NORTHEAST 
5 10 



NORTH CENTRAL 

10 



'///////////s///////////////////////j 



v//////y///////s//////////////////////. 



'SS/SSS/S/SSSSSS/SS/S/S/SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSj 



r-//////////////////i 



'/////s/sss/ssssrsss. 



'/////////////////// 



//////////////////A 



'////////////////S/SS/j 



V//////////////////////S////S. 



//////////////SS////////S/////////////?. 



'/////SSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS 




SOUTH 

10 




O'her ond 
unsptcified 



Othor and 

unspecified 



'////////////////j 



////////////////////////S//SS, 



'///////////////////////////////. 



///////////////S///////S////S///// 




Other ond 
unspecified 



VSA 1950 



Figure 49. 



OCCUPANCY, MOBILITY, AND LENGTH OF 
TENURE 

Average number of years on present farm. — Farm operators in 
the United States at the time of the 1054 Census had been on their 
farms an average of 14 years. At the 1950 and 1045 Censuses, 
farm operators had occupied their farms an average of 13 years, 
and at the 1040 Census 12 years. The average period of occu- 
pancy was slightly higher in the Northeast and North Central 
regions than in the South and West. Owner operators, on an 
average, had occupied their farms more than twice as long as 
tenants. In 1054, owner operators had occupied their present 
farms an average of 16 years as compared with 7 years for 
tenants. 

Much of this difference may be explained by the differential in 
age of owners and tenants. In 1954, owners averaged 9.8 years 



older than tenants. Among the younger farm operators, tenants 
outnumber owners ; among the older operators, owners predomi- 
nate. (See "Age and Residence of Farm Operators," this sec- 
tion.) Tracing each age group of farm operators through suc- 
cessive Censuses, for which tenure data are available by age of 
operator, shows that the proportion of tenancy has consistently 
decreased with increases in age. The percentage of tenancy in 
the higher age groups is small (9.3 percent for farm operators 
65 years old and over in 1954). Most tenants move to the ranks 
of farm owners or cease to operate farms by the time they reach 
the higher age groups. For owners who were formerly tenants 
on the farm now occupied, years of occupancy of the present 
farm include their years of occupancy as tenant. 

Generally, full owners had occupied their farms longer than 
part owners, although in the West part owners averaged slightly 
longer periods of occupancy than full owners. This longer period 



FARM TENURE 



181 



PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF FARM OPERATORS IN EACH TENURE, BY YEARS 
ON PRESENT FARMS, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS - . 1954 




LESS THAN 5 YEARS 5 TO 9 YEARS 10 YEARS OR MORE 



LESS THAN 5 YEARS 5 TO 9 YEARS 10 YEARS OR MORE 



|FULL OWNERS jggggsJRART OWNERS p^^J ALL TENANTS j jCROPPERS (SOUTH ONLY) 

Figure 50- 



182 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



YEARS ON FARM- NUMBER OF OPERATORS REPORTING, 
BY TENURE, FOR THE UNITED STATES: 1910 TO 1954 



Hundreds of Thousands 
10 15 



UNDER 5 YEARS 
1954 

1950 

1945 

1940 

1935 

1930 

1920 

1910 

5 TO 9 YEARS 

1954 

1950 

1945 

1940 

1935 

1930 

1920 

1910 

10 YEARS ANO 0VE 
1954 

1950 

1945 

1940 

1935 

1930 

1920 

1910 




| FULL OWNERS 
1 MANAGERS 



J PART OWNERS 
MM TENANTS 



PERCENT OF FARM OPERATORS ON PRESENT FARMS I YEAR 
OR LESS, BY TENURE: 1910 TO 1954 

Percent 
5 O 15 20 25 30 35 



1954 


BMBB 












1950 


'tuffliutugi/'h 










1945 


m'mmwtttcmr™™" 






^^ 








1940 


1* 












1935 


*juwww*jumi 


1930 




































1920 




_ 






1910 



















N a Not AvollabJe BB Full Owner ^g Part Owners 

I I Manager ■ 



Figure 51. 

of occupancy for full owners may also be attributable, in part, 
to age differentials. Part owners include many operators who 
have taken over additional land during their prime. Full owners 



include some operators who have semi-retired on the farm. Full 
owners averaged 5.G years older than part owners. 

Among the classes of tenants, share-cash tenants and other 
and unspecified tenants had been on their farms somewhat longer 
than cash tenants, share tenants, and croppers but this difference 
was not great and did not hold for all regions. In the North 
Central region, the period of occupancy of crop-share tenants was 
less than for livestock-share tenants, but in all other regions there 
was no appreciable difference. In the South, croppers reported 
a period of occupancy slightly less than crop-share and livestock- 
share tenants, who in turn reported shorter periods of occupancy 
than cash tenants and share-cash tenants. In the West, there 
was little difference among the tenant classes except for a slightly 
longer period of occupancy reported by share-cash tenants. 

Distribution of farms by years on present farm. — More than 
one-half of all farm operators (5S.8 percent) in 1954 had been 
operating their present farms 10 or more years, one-fourth {25.1 
percent) had occupied their farms 5 to 9 years, and one-fifth (21.6 
percent) had been on their farms less than 5 years with 1 in 15 
(6.6 percent) reporting 1 year or less. Through the years the 
proportion of farm operators occupying their farms 10 years or 
longer and 5 to 9 years has been increasing, and the proportion on 
their farms less than 5 years decreasing. In 1910, more than 
one-half (51.S percent) of the farm operators had been on their 
farms less than 5 years. 

Most owner-operators have occupied their farms 10 or more 
years. In 1954, more than three-fifths of the owner-operators re- 
ported occupancy of their farms for a period of 10 or more years. 
Only 144 percent had begun operation of their farms within 5 
years preceding the Census. The proportions were similar for 
both part owners and full owners. 

A high proportion of tenant-operators have accupied their 
farms only a short period of time. In 1954, of all tenant-operators 
44.5 percent had been on their farms less than 5 years and more 
than one-third of these (16.1 percent of all tenants reporting) 
had been on their farms 1 year or less. In the Northeast and 
North Central regions, a substantially smaller proportion of ten- 
ants than in the South or West had occupied their farms less 
than 5 years, a higher proportion 10 or more years. In the South, 
the proportion of croppers who had occupied their farms 10 or 
more years was lower than for tenants other than croppers. 
More than one-half of all croppers (54-8 percent) had occupied 
their farms less than 5 years. 

The smaller proportion of tenants than owners on present 
farms 5 or more years may be explained in part by age differen- 
tials, in part by greater mobility of tenants from farm to farm, 
and in part by farmers who leave the ranks of tenants to become 
owners. 

Operators on present farm 1 year or less. — The greater mobility 
of tenant ojierators is also shown in the proportion of farmers 
who reported occupancy of their farms 1 year or less. In 1954, 
only 1 in 30 owner-operators (3.5 percent of full owners, and 3.1 
percent of part owners reporting) had occupied their present 
farms 1 year or less. Of all tenant-operators reporting year of 
occupancy 1 in 6 (16.1 percent) had occupied their farms no 
longer than 1 year. For croppers the ratio was 1 to 4 (24.2 per- 
cent). Some of these farm operators who had been on their 
farms only 1 year or less were obviously new operators, but many 
were operators who had moved from other farms. 



FARM TENURE 



183 



PERCENT OF FARM OPERATORS ON PRESENT FARMS I YEAR OR LESS BY MONTH OF OCCUPANCY 
OCTOBER TO NOVEMBER. 1954, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS 




NORTHEAST ^^ NORTH CENTRAL 

j Jj in ill. 1 1 



JAN-FEB MAR-APR MAY-JUNE JULY-AUG SEPT-OCT NOV-DEC 



JAN-FEB MAR-APR MAY-JUNE JULY-AUG SEPT-OCT NOV-DEC 




JAN-FEB MAR-APR MAY-JUNE JULY-AUG SEPT-OCT NOV-OEC 



JAN-FEB MAR-APR MAY-JUNE JULY-AUG SEPT-OCT NOV-DEC 



Figure 52. 



Moving dates. — The time of year farmers move is indicated by 
the months farm operators reported they began operating their 
farms. A tabulation for the 1954 Census for those farm operators 
who began operating their farm within a year preceding the 
enumeration, by bimonthly periods show that in the North Central 
region and in the South a high proportion of farmers move at a 
rather definite time of year while in the Northeast and in the 
West farmers move throughout the year with less pronounced 
peak periods. In the North Central region most farmers moved 
in March-April, with lfi.2 percent of those who moved during the 
year moving in these months, followed by January-February with 
17.4 percent. In the South most farmers moved in January- 
February, this period accounting for about one-half (.',9.7 per- 



cent) of those moving during the year, followed by November- 
December (22.6 percent). 

In the Northeast most farmers move during the spring and 
early summer. More than one-fourth (2S.3 percent) of those 
who moved during the year moved in March-April. Almost one- 
fifth (1S.9 percent) moved in May-June. In the West most 
farmers moved in late winter and early spring, with a heavy 
movement in January-February (1H.2 percent) and reaching a 
I>eak in March-April (£.5.7 percent). For the United States as a 
whole, January-February is the period when most farmers move 
(36.7 percent), followed by March-April (22.6 percent), and No- 
vember-December (18.5 i>ercent). 



184 A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 

AVERAGE AGE OF FARM OPERATORS, BY TENURE, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1940-1954 




FULL OWNERS 



PART OWNERS 



TENANTS 

Figure 53. 





FARM TENURE 



185 



AGE AND RESIDENCE OF FARM OPERATORS 

Average age of farm operators. — The average age of farm oper- 
ators in 1954 was 49.6 years. The high percentages of older 
farmers were in areas where the rate of tenancy was low and 
where there were relatively large numbers of residential farms 
(gross value of sales of farm products under $250). The average 
age of farm operators increased by 1.6 years from 1940 to 1954. 
In the South, the average age increased by 3.4 years during this 
period. 

Tenants averaged considerably younger than owners. Many 
tenant-operators become owners, thus reducing the number of 
older operators among tenants and increasing the number of 
older operators among owners. 

Part owners average older than tenants but younger than full 
owners. Operators who rent land from others to supplement 
land owned are generally persons who have accumulated sufficient 
capital and equipment to operate additional land but are young 
enough to have the stamina and ambition to handle the additional 



acreage. After passing their prime they may curtail their opera- 
tions by giving up their rented land. In this instance they pass 
into the ranks of full owners, thus reducing the number of older 
operators among part owners. 

A high proportion of the older farm operators are full owners. 
Most farm operators who are successful in achieving farm owner- 
ship, either through inheritance or purchase, do so before middle 
age. Also, many older owner operators remain on the farm in 
semiretirement. Added to these semiretired farmers are older 
persons retired from nonfarm employment who acquire farms and 
semiretire on the land. 

Tenants averaged 42.2 years of age as compared with an average 
of 53.4 for full owners, 47.8 for part owners, and 45.3 for man- 
agers. Among the several classes of tenants, livestock-share 
tenants were the youngest (with an average of 38.5 years) and 
cash and other and unspecified tenants were the oldest (average 
age of 44.5 years for cash tenants and 45.1 years for other and 
unspecified tenants). 



PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF FARM OPERATORS IN EACH TENURE GROUP, BY AGE, FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 




Under 25 25-34 3544 
Yeors Yean Years 


45 54 5564 
Years Years 


6 5 Yean w 
Years 


Under 25 
Years 


25 34 
Years 


35-44 

Yeors 


45 54 
Years 


5564 
Yeors 


6 5 Years 
Yeors 


■ ALL OPERATORS B3S FULL OWNERS 


ESSSSS3 PART OWNERS 


I'.]'- •-. :i TENANTS 












54C-I65 



Figure 54- 



186 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



PERCENT DISTRIBUTION OF TENANT OPERATORS IN EACH TENURE GROUP, BY AGE, 

FOR THE UNITED STATES AND REGIONS: 1954 



UNITED STATES 




SOUTH 



WEST 




46" 64 


SB -6« 


66 TEARS UNOER ZS 


23-34 


33 " 44 43 ■ 34 


SB- 64 65 YEARS 


YEARS 


TEARS 


AMD OVER YEARS 


YEARS 


YEARS YEARS 


YEARS AND OVER 


Y.y.'.-'A SHARE 


CASH 


X/XX CROP-SHARE 


B3J 


LIVESTOCK-SHARE 


R£££j CROPPERS 



Figure 55. 



Distribution of farm operators by age groups. — In 1954 nearly 
one-half of all farm operators (1(8.0 percent) were 35 to 54 years 
of age, more than one-third (36.9 percent) were 55 years old or 
older, and only 1 in 7 (15.1 percent) was under 35. One in 6* (16.6 
percent) of all farm operators was 65 years old or over. Since 
1910 the proportion of operators of intermediate age has remained 
rather constant, but the proportion of older operators has been 
increasing and the proportion of younger operators decreasing. 
In 1910 only 23.6 percent of farm operators were 55 years old 
and over and 28.9 percent were under 35. By 1954 there were 
only one-half (50.0 percent) as many farm operators under 35 as 



in 1930 and only two- fifths (SS.8 percent) as many as in 1910. 
The total number of all farms in 1954 was about 25 percent lower 
than in 1930 and 1910. 

To operate a farm today requires a much greater capital in- 
vestment for machinery and equipment than a few decades ago. 
Also, the cost of operation is much higher, requiring large cash 
outlays for such items as tractor fuel, hybrid seeds, commercial 
fertilizers, pesticides, etc. Young men have difficulty in com- 
manding the necessary capital to operate farms on their own 
account. 



FARM TENURE 



187 



.PERCENT OF FARM OPERATORS REPORTING RESIDENCE OFF THEIR FARMS, 1954 

(COUNTY UNIT BASIS) 




I i UNDER 5 

MM 5 TO 9 
1H1 10 TO 19 
•■NO FARMS 

US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE 



MAP NO ASA -049 



BUREAU Of THE CENSUS 



Figure 56. 



Operators residing off their farms. — In 1954, 6.2 percent of the 
farm operators reporting as to their residence did not live on the 
farm operated. Some of these nonresident operators lived in 
rural areas near the farm operated ; others, as in Utah, lived in 
nearby villages. In instances where the farming operations can 
be restricted to very limited periods of time, the operator may 
live at a great distance. Examples are "suit case" farming in 
the wheat areas of the Great Plains and fruit and vegetable 
farming in Florida and Texas. In areas where a large part of 
the work is done by the family, as in most parts of the South 
and the Midwest, a very small percentage of farm operators do 
not live on the farm. 

All States east of the Mississippi River, except Florida, and 
those bordering the Mississippi River on the west had a rather 
low percentage of operators reporting residence off the farm 
operated. For most of this area the percentage of operators not 
living on the farm operated was usually less than 5. Only an 
occasional county had more than 10 percent of their farm oper- 
ators not living on the farm operated. In Florida and from 
North Dakota to Texas and westward the proportion of operators 
not living on their farms was generally higher, with many coun- 
ties having more than 10 percent of their operators living else- 
where than on the farm operated. In Florida 18.S percent of the 
operators who reported as to their residence did not live on the 



farm they operated. For Utah the percentage was 17.2 percent 
and for Arizona, 16.6 percent. Texas, North Dakota, California, 
Montana, Kansas, New Mexico, and Nevada were next in order 
with 10 percent or more of the farm operators not living on their 
farms. 

Of 67 counties with 150 or more nonresident farm operators in 
1954 and with these nonresident operators comprising 20 percent 
or more of all farm operators in the county, 17 were in Texas, 15 
in Florida, 11 in Kansas, 6 each in Oklahoma and Utah, 4 in 
California, 3 each in Colorado and Montana, and 1 each in Ari- 
zona and Washington. Cash grain, fruit (citrus) , or cotton farms 
were the predominant types of farms, or comprised a high pro- 
portion of the farms in most of these counties. Livestock types 
predominated in the Utah counties. 

Among the tenure classes, managers were outstanding in re- 
spect to the percentage of operators residing off the farm op- 
erated, with 11.1 percent not living on their farms. A somewhat 
higher proportion of tenants than owners resided off their farms, 
with 7.6 percent for tenants and 54 percent for owners. A 
slightly higher proportion of part owners than full owners resided 
off their farms. Among the tenants, the proportion not residing 
on their farms was highest for crop-share tenants, (11.8 percent) 
and lowest for livestock-share tenants (3.2 percent). 



188 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



(Continued from page 129) 
In summary, any future additions to the farmland area prob- 
ably will occur in the South and the West. Much of the area 
now remaining in nonagricultural use can be brought into agri- 
cultural use only through the application of relatively large 
amounts of capital and labor. Some expansion may be made by 
irrigating more land in the arid parts of the West ; by draining 
wet lands, particularly in the coastal area ; and by clearing 
wooded areas or timber lands. The greater part of any increases 
in agricultural production, however, will probably come from im- 
proved management, technological advancement, and greater 
quantities of fertilizer, water, and improved equipment. As the 
quantity and variety of factors of production increase per unit 
of land, the tenure arrangements associated with the land prob- 
ably will become more complex and more crucial in determining 
the level of production and the distribution of income. 

(Continued from paste ISO) 

Indian tribal and trust-allotted lands used for fanning and 
grazing total 48 million acres. Of these Indian lands, 3.9 million 
acres are in farms and 44.1 million acres are in grazing land. 

With the exception of the Western States, land in farms is 
held almost exclusively by individual owners. A tabulation based 
on a sample of approximately 200,000 farms indicated that, for 
the United States as a whole, 87.6 percent of the land in farms is 
held by individuals, 5.0 percent is held by corporations, 3.9 percent 
by Government, and 3.5 percent are Indian lands. The 17 West- 
ern States account for 56.6 percent of individually owned land in 
farms and 80.3 percent of corporately owned land. In these 
States most of the corporation land is used for grazing and 
orchard or crop-specialty farming. 

Full ownership provides the maximum in security-of-use ex- 
pectations and of use control over the farm operation. It pro- 
vides also old-age security and a stable estate for the farm op- 
erator. High land values, in many cases, however, have neces- 
sitated large debts and/or large cash outlays which reduce capital 
available for equipment and for meeting current operating 
expenses. 

As the number of farms decreases and their size increases, new 
ways of combining resources in production may be necessary. 
The division of ownership and control of the resources in farm 
operating units will bring forth increasingly complex tenure 
arrangements. 

(Continued from page 132) 
For a limited number of tenants, the form of rental payment was 
unspecified. It cannot be said with certainty into which group 
these would fall, hence their lands are portrayed in the diagram 
as "unspecified." 

The most discernible difference shown by the distribution in 
1954, as contrasted with the status in 1950, was an increase in 
the proportion of land in tenant-operated farms which was 
farmed by livestock-share tenants and a decrease in sharecropper 
lands. 

(Continued from page. 183) 

size. Some of the additional land accumulated by part owners 
and by tenants represents entire farms grouped with former 
holdings. This tends to reduce the number of farms reported 
in a Census. In other cases, the added acreage represents field- 
rented land owned by someone who may not be able, or may not 
care, to purchase equipment which he cannot use to capacity. 
If the owner who rents out his fields retains enough land for his 
own use for the operation to be classified as a farm, the net effect 
is to maintain the number of farms but to change the proportion 
of farmland in the various tenure categories. Tenure changes 



within a State or geographic region may follow an entirely dif- 
ferent pattern from that indicated for the United States as a 
whole. 

(Continued from page 136) 
any previous Census since 1890. The rate of tenancy in 1954, at 
24-0 percent, was the lowest reported since 1880, the first Census 
for which tenancy data are available. There has been, however, 
a faster decline in the percentage of tenancy than in the per- 
centage of land under lease. Part of this difference is due to 
the increased number of part owners and the amount of land they 
rent. Part-owner farms have increased consistently in numbers 
and in the proportion to all farms since 1940. An all-time high 
in number of part owners was attained in the 1954 enumeration. 

(Continued from page 137) 
units containing both owned and rented land are generally larger 
than full-owner or tenant farms and are frequently the result of 
the operator's effort to expand farm size without large immediate 
outlay or indebtedness. A fairly large proportion of the part- 
owner farms in the West originated through the leasing of range- 
lands for more effective operating units. 

Full-owner farms are also somewhat uniformly distributed, par- 
ticularly in the eastern part of the United States. There is some 
concentration in the southern Appalachians where productivity 
and prices of land are relatively low and in the eastern part of the 
North Central Region. Except in the South, full-owner farms 
are, on the average, smaller in area than those of the other 
tenures. 

(Continued from page 154) 

Fruit-and-nut farms require a relatively long waiting period 
from the time capital is invested in planting until the orchards 
begin to yield. This may help to explain why such a large pro- 
portion of fruit-and-nut farms are owner-operated. The 82,064 
fruit-and-nut farms in 1954 were 81.7 percent full-owner-operated, 

11.5 percent part-owner-operated, and 4.3 percent tenant-operated. 
More than one-fifth of the commercial farms of the United 

States are livestock farms (other than dairy and poultry). Most 
livestock farms are owner-operated. Even in the areas where 
livestock farms predominate, a high proportion of the tenants 
occupy crop-share farms. In 1954, 55.3 percent of the livestock 
farms were run by full owners, 24.2 percent by part owners, and 

19.6 percent by tenants. Of the 135,828 tenant-operated livestock 
farms, 33.5 percent were operated under livestock-share arrange- 
ments. 

Similarly, dairy and poultry farms are predominantly owner- 
operated, particularly poultry farms. Only 6.4 percent of the 
154,257 commercial poultry farms and 13.6 percent of the 548,763 
commercial dairy farms were tenant-operated. 

(Continued from page 155) 

Tobacco was grown on 1,557,039 acres in 1954. Nine Southern 
States accounted for 94.1 percent of the total tobacco acreage in 
the United States in 1954. While the acreage has increased only 
slightly since 1949, the production has increased by more than 150 
million pounds. The acreage of tobacco per farm is small and is 
subject to government controls; consequently, the value of land 
with a tobacco quota is relatively high. Labor requirements are 
large. Nearly one-half of the tobacco is grown by tenants and 
almost all of the tenants are either sharecroppers or crop-share 
tenants. 

Poultry and dairy. — Poultry and dairy production tends to be 
more of an owner operation than does crop production. The cap- 
ital investment in livestock, equipment, housing, etc., tends to be 
high in relation to the investment in land. Tenant commercial 
farms produce less than 17 percent of the chickens, less than 15 
percent of the eggs, and slightly more than 20 percent of the milk. 



FARM TENURE 



189 



In 1954, 3431,1,91 farms reported 3S3,970,8U chickens 4 months 
old and over. Compared to other enterprises, the proportion of 
noncommercial farms reporting chickens is high — about 30 per- 
cent. Probably a large share of these farms are retirement or 
part-time farms. The number of commercial poultry farms repre- 
sents only Jf.5 percent of all farms reporting chickens ; however, 
these poultry farms accounted for 64-3 percent of the value of 
all chickens and eggs sold. Chickens and eggs are commonly a 
supplemental enterprise on other types of farms. Cash leasing 
is more important in chicken and egg production than it is in 
either livestock (other than dairy) or crop production, but even 
so, all types of tenancy combined accounted for but a small per- 
cent of the total value. 

The number of farms reporting milk cows has declined from 
3,681,627 in 1950 to 2,956,900 in 1954. The number of milk cows 
reported in 1954 was 20,365,450, about 1 million less than in 1950. 
Yet total milk production has increased about 4.5 percent in the 
period 1950-54. Of the farms reporting milk cows, 73.3 percent 
were commercial farms divided as follows : 36.1 percent, full 
owners ; 18.7 percent, part owners ; 0.3 percent, managers ; and 
18.2 percent, tenants ; the remaining 26.7 percent were noncom- 
mercial farms. 

Cattle and hogs.— In 1954, 95,634,676 cattle and 57,912,006 hogs 
were reported on farms. Cattle numbers had increased by more 
than 18 million and hog numbers by 1.6 million since 1950. 

The length of the production process may influence the type of 
tenure. Although the differences are not large, perhaps the effect 
of the length of the production cycle may be illustrated by com- 
paring cattle to hog production. Figure 26 shows, for example, 
that tenant farms produce a greater share of the value of hogs and 
pigs than of cattle. In 1954, 32.5 percent of the hogs, but only 17.0 
percent of the cattle, were reported on tenant commercial farms. 
Of the commercial tenant farms 67.9 percent reported cattle and 
58.7 percent reported hogs. 

(Continued from page 161) 
croppers. Commercial cropper farms in the South averaged 36.9 
acres and noncommercial cropper farms averaged 21.0 acres in 
1954. 

With the exception of tenants in the South, the average farm 
size of any given tenure group is smallest in the Northeast and 
largest in the West. 

From the standpoint of production it is useful to separate the 
commercial farms from other farms. These "other" farms in 
1954 numbered 1,455,404 and contained 127,577,554 acres, with an 
average size of only 87.7 acres, whereas the average commercial 
farm contained 310.3 acres. By tenure, the average size of com- 
mercial farms for full owners was 207.3 acres ; part owners, 609.5 
acres; managers, 3,436.1 acres; and tenants (excluding croppers) 
238.2 acres. Commercial manager-operated farms were smaller 
than "other" manager farms which averaged 11,958.6 acres in 
1954. The "other" manager farms were large because they were 
predominantly institutional farms such as experiment stations, 
county farms, grazing associations, etc. The average size of 
commercial farms increased 34-7 acres or 12.6 percent between 
1950 and 1954, whereas the average size of "other" farms In- 
creased only 4-9 acres or 5.9 percent. 

Of the tenant-operated commercial farms in 1954, cash tenants 
had an average farm size of 349.3 acres and tended to be the 
largest ; and croppers, with an average farm acreage of 36.9, the 
smallest. Share-cash farms averaged 2S5.6 acres; crop-share, 
i76.6 acres ; livestock-share, 270.0 acres. All types of tenant 
farms, with the exception of sharecropper farms, have increased 
in size since 1950. 

(Continued from page 165) 
number of workers on commercial full-owner farms reporting in 
the United States was 2.3; on tenant farms, 2.5; on part-owner 
farms, 3.0; and on manager farms, 9.8. For average number of 



workers on commercial farms see table 5. The labor figures 
for 1954 relate to September 26-October 2 for 33 States and 
October 24-30 for 15 States. The specified week represented peak 
or near-peak period of employment for many areas. 

Although commercial manager-operated farms employed the 
largest number of persons per farm, they employed only 2.1 
percent of the total workers on commercial farms. In 1954, 42.4 
percent of the persons employed on commercial farms were on 
full-owner farms, 27.3 percent were on part-owner farms, and 
2S.2 percent were on tenant farms. 

On co mm ercial farms the number of family workers, including 
the farm operator, per farm reporting in 1954 was 1.8 for part 
owners and tenants and 1.6 for full owners. Manager farms em- 
ployed an average of only 1.3 family workers per farm reporting. 
The larger differences between tenures in terms of employment 
are in number of hired workers. Manager-operated commercial 
farms hired 12.2 workers per farm. Of these hired workers about 
one-half were regular workers (employed 150 or more days a year) 
and one-half were seasonal workers. About 72 percent of the 
hired workers on full- and part-owner commercial farms and about 
86 percent of the hired workers on tenant commercial farms were 
seasonal employees. 

Only about one-sixth of the commercial tenant farms — 16.3 
percent — reported hired workers in 1954. The average number 
of hired workers per farm — based on all commercial tenant 
farms — was 0.6, as compared with an average of 3.9 persons for 
those tenant farms reporting hired workers. 

Expenditures for farm labor. — The total outlay for hired farm 
labor reported by commercial and noncommercial farms for 1954 
in the Census of Agriculture was $2,279 million. This is $139 
million less than was reported for hired labor in 1949. As may 
be expected, most of the outlay for hired labor (97.2 percent) 
was made by commercial farms. Of the total expenditure for 
farm labor made by commercial farms in 1954, 37.8 percent was 
spent by full owners, 36.0 percent by part owners, 16.6 percent by 
tenants, and 9.6 percent by managers. Since manager-operated 
farms represented less than one-half of one percent of all the 
farms and accounted for 9.6 percent of the total outlay for hired 
farm labor, the per farm expenditure was high. As seen in 
figure 36, manager-operated farms dominate an array of 
average farm expenditures. The importance of labor expendi- 
ture by the other tenure groups lies in the aggregated expenditure 
of many farms with one, two, or three hired workers. 

(Continued from page 168) 
number of balers reported was 195,858. The increases between 
1950 and 1954, therefore, were 131.1 and 128.7 percent, respec- 
tively, for farms reporting and numbers of balers. 

Noticeable differences are reported in proportions of farms 
reporting the various specialized machines. Much of this dif- 
ference, of course, is due to the type of farming. The ratio of 
farms reporting corn pickers, for example, is higher in all tenures 
in the North Central than in any other region. The dairy-dom- 
inant Northeast had a much higher proportion of its farms re- 
porting milking machines. Whether measured extensively in 
terms of work power or intensively in terms of specialized ma- 
chines, the South has a smaller degree of mechanization than the 
other regions. 

In general, the part-owner and tenant-operated farms have the 
greatest degree of mechanization. To the extent that tenancy 
is a means whereby part owners and tenants can expand their 
operations without investing their limited capital in land, tenure 
arrangements are conducive to larger, more mechanized farms. 
Tenants in the South, however, are an exception for they have a 
smaller proportion of their farms mechanized than any of the 
other tenures. Only 14.O percent of croppers in the South re- 
ported a tractor. By definition of croppers, work power is fur- 
nished by the landlord. 



190 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 



Part-owner farms tend toward greater mechanization and show 
the highest proportion of farms reporting most types of ma- 
chines. The part-owner tenure is characterized by operators who 
are in a financial position which permits them, within limits, to 
choose between greater land ownership and expanding their op- 
erations with more equipment on rented land. 

(Continued from page 169) 

Although a smaller proportion of farms in the West reported 
the use of fertilizer than in the other regions, they reported a 
larger expenditure per acre. In the West, slightly more than 
1,0 percent of the farms reported fertilizer use, compared with 
almost 70 percent of the farms in the United States reporting 
fertilizer use. Commercial cash tenants in the West reported the 
highest average expenditure per acre for fertilizer, $21.39; this 
compares with $9.97 per acre reported for all cash tenants in the 
United States. 

(Continued from page 170) 
irrigation equipment, or if the supervisory and/or compensation 
problems are complicated. As an alternative example, if pro- 
duction expenses are large and sharing arrangements can be de- 
veloped easily, a share tenancy might be appropriate. 

Specified cost items. — The four specified expense items shown 
by tenure in figure 41 illustrate the differences in expenditures 
associated with various forms of tenure. The differences in type 
of farm and size of farm related to tenure should be kept in mind, 
however, so that not all of the variation in expenditure is at- 
tributed to the form of tenure alone. 

Two expense items that are relatively important in the budgets 
of manager farms are, as expected, hired labor and feed for live- 
stock and poultry. The average expenditure in 1954 for hired 
labor was $14,071, per farm reporting for commercial manager 
farms ; part-owner farms were the next highest with an average of 
$1,565. Full owners and tenants on commercial farms spent only 
#973 and $657 per farm, respectively, for hired labor. In 1954, 
managers spent $9,256 per commercial farm reporting for feed ; 
whereas, full owners spent an average of only $1,1)82; part own- 
erg, $1,550; and tenants, $1,092. 

The relative size of farms of the various tenure groups, i. e., 
from the large manager farms to the small full-owner farms, 



may account for the array of per farm expenditures for petroleum 
products. Other factors affecting expenditure that are related 
to tenure are type of farm and the geographic area. Commercial 
manager farms reporting in 1954 spent for gasoline an average of 
$1,899; part owners, $686; tenants, $1,72; and full owners, . 



(Continued from page 171,) 
cent, by tenants. Of Class I farms (the class representing the 
highest gross incomes) , 35.2 percent were operated by full owners ; 
38.2 percent, by part owners ; 1,.!, percent, by managers ; and 22.2 
percent, by tenants. In each of the intermediate classes, ap- 
proximately 30 percent of the farms were operated by tenants. 

These relationships held, in general, for each region. In the 
South however, there were relatively fewer full owners and more 
tenants in the lower economic classes than in the North and 
West. In the South, the proportion of farms operated by full 
owners was not appreciably higher for economic classes represent- 
ing intermediate incomes than for economic classes representing 
higher incomes. In the South, the highest proportion of tenancy 
was in Economic Class IV farms, with the proportion decreasing 
with each higher and with each lower class. In the North and 
West, the situation was almost the opposite with the highest 
proportion of tenancy in Economic Class II in the North, and Class 
I in the West, and the proportion decreasing with each lower 
class. 

(Continued from page 176) 

The difference in the proportion of full owners and part owners 
reporting the specified facilities was not great for any region. 
For the Northeast, the North Central region, and the South, the 
percentages were somewhat higher for part owners on commercial 
farms than for full owners. For the West, the percentages for 
part owners were slightly less than for full owners. 

For all regions, the percentage of managers reporting telephone 
and running water, respectively, was higher than for any other 
tenure group. In the North Central region and the South, the 
percentage of managers reporting electricity was higher than for 
other tenures. In the Northeast, the percentage of managers 
reporting electricity was less than for part owners and in the 
West, less than for all owners. 



FARM TENURE 
DIRECTORY OF TENURE DATA, 1954 CENSUS 



191 



Where found 



Geographic area for 
which available 



Period 



Classification 



Subjects covered 



Basis of tabulation 
of 1954 data 



Volume I, State Table 3. 
StateTable4. 



State Table 5. 
State Table 9. 



County Table 2. 
County Table 2a 



Economic Area 
Tables 7, 8, 9. 



Volume II, Chapter II: 
Table 6_ . 
Table 7. - 
Table S._ 

Table 9.. 
Table 10. 
Table 11- 



Table 12. 

Table 13. 
Table 14. 
Table 16. 
Table 17. 
Table 18- 

Table 20. 

Table 22. 

Table 24. 

Table 27. 

Chapter IV: 
Table 5.. 

Table 16. 



T3ble 17. 
Table 33. 
Table 34. 

Table 35. 



Chapter X: 
Table 1. 
Table 2. 



Tables 3,4.. 

Tables 5, 6. 
Tables 7, 8. 



Tables 9, 10, 

11, 12. 
Tables 13, 

14. 
Table 15.... 
Tables 16, 

17. 
Tables 18. 

19, 20. 

Tables 21, 
22. 



State.. 
State., 



State 

State 

County and State 

County and State (the South 
only and 7 counties in 
Southeast Missouri). 

Economic areas and State 



United States 

The South 

United States, the North, the 
South, and the West. 

United States 

The South 

United States, the North, the 
South, and the West. 

United States, the North, the 
South, and the West. 

United States 

The South 

United States 

The South 

United States, the North, the 
South, and the West. 

Divisions and States 

Divisions and States 

Divisions and States 

Divisions and States 



United States, the North, the 

South, and the West. 
United States 



The South. 



United States, the North, the 
South, and the West. 

Divisions and States 



Divisions and States. 



Thc South only, divisions, 
and States. 



United States. 
United States. 



United States and the South. 



United States and the South. 
United States and the South. 



United States and the South. 
United States and the South. 



Summary for 20 States 

United States and the South. 



United States and the South. 
Divisions and States 



1920 to 1954. 
1954 



1920 to 1954... 
1954. 



1954 and 1950. 
1954 



1954 and 1950. 



1910 to 1954... 
1910 to 1954... 
1954 and 1950. 

1940 to 1054... 
1940 to 1954 — 
1954 and 1950. 

1954 and 1950. 

1910 to 1954... 
1910 to 1954... 
1934 to 1954... 
1934 to 1954.. 
1954 and 1949 

1954 

1954 

1954 

1954. 

1954 and 1950. 
1930 to 1954... 

1954 and 1940- 

1954 



1930 to 1954- 
1954 



1950 and 1954- 
1954 



1954 and 1940 
1954 



1880 to 1954- - 
1900 to 1954 . 

1880 to 1954- . 
1900 to 1954. - 
1900 to 1954 - 
1950 and 1954. 

1900 to 1945 - 

1924 to 1954.. 

1900 to 1954 - 

1929 to 1954- - 

1925 to 1954 - 

1950 and 1954 



1945 to 1954. 



Color-tenure 

Commercial farms by tenure 
(color-tenure for the South). 



Race 

Commercial farms by tenure 
(color-tenure for the South). 

(Color.- 

\Tenure 

Color-tenure 



Commercial farms, by tenure. 



Tenure.- 

Color-tenure 

Commercial farms by tenure 

(color-tenure for the South) . 

Tenure 

Color-tenure 

Commercial farms by tenure 

(color-tenure for the South). 
Commercial farms by tenure 

(color-tenure for the South). 

Tenure 

Color- tenure 

Tenure 

Color-tenure 

Commercial farms by tenure 

(color-tenure for the South). 
Tenure (color-tenure for the 

South). 
Tenure (color-tenure for the 

South). 
Tenure (color-tenure for the 

South). 
Tenure 



Tenure (color-tenure for the 

South). 
Cash tenants 



Nonwhite cash tenants. 



Cash tenants by type of farm. 



Cash tenants 
Cash tenantS- 



Cash tenants by commercial 

and other. 
Cash tenants by commercial 

and other. 

Cash tenants by color 

Cash tenants by color, by 

commercial and other. 

Tenure 

Nonwhite by race (Negro and 

other). 

Tenure--. 

Color-tenure.. 

Color-tenure 

Tenure (color-tenure for the 

South). 

Color-tenure 

Color-tenure ._ 

Color-tenure 

Tenure 

Tenure (also nonwhite by 
tenure for the South). 

Commercial and other farms 
by tenure (also nonwhite 
by tenure). 

Tenure, with nonwhite by 
tenure for the United States 
and the South and non- 
white totals for the North 
and West. 



Farms, land in farms, cropland harvested and, 
for the South, one or more specified crops. 

Farms, land in farms, land use, value of land 
and buildings, specified operator charac- 
teristics, specified facilities and equipment, 
farm labor, specified farm expenditures, 
principal livestock, and specified crops. 

Farm operators 

Hired labor and wage rates 

Farms 

Farms, land in farms, and cropland harvested 
Farms, land in farms, and cropland harvested 



Farms, land in farms, land use, value of land 
and buildings, specified operator charac- 
teristics, specified facilities and equipment, 
farm labor, specified farm expenditures, 
principal livestock, and specified crops. 

Age of operator 

Age of operator 

Age of operator 

Residence of operator 

Residence of operator 

Residence of operator 

Years on present farm 

Years on present farm 

Years on present farm 

Off-farm work 

Off-farm work 

Off-farm work and other income 

Age of operator 

Residence of operator 

Years on present farm... 

Off-farm work and other income 

Farm wage rates _. 

Cash rent paid: also farms, owned and rented 

land, land in farms, cropland harvested, and 

value of land and buildings. 
Cash rent paid; also farms, owned and rented 

land, land in farms, cropland harvested, and 

value of land and buildings. 
Cash rent paid; also farms, owned and rented 

land, land in farms, cropland harvested, and 

value of land and buildings. 

Cash rent paid 

Farms, rented land, land in farms, value of 

land and buildings. 
Cash rent paid 

Farms, rented land, land in farms, value of 

land and buildings. 

Cash rent paid-- -. . 

Cash rent paid, farms, rented land, land in 

farms, value of land and buildings. 

Farms 

Farms 

Farms 

Farms.. 

Land in farms 

Value of land and buildings 

Value of land and buildings 

Cropland harvested and other specified land- 
use items. 
Summary uses of land 

Irrigated land 

Owned and rented land... 

Farms and farm characteristics in considerable 
detail. 

Farms, land in farms, land use, value of land 
and buildings. 



Sample. 
Sample. 



Complete count. 
Sample. 

Complete count. 
Complete count. 
Complete count. 



Sample. 



Sample.' 
Sample. 1 
Sample. 

Sample. 
Sample. 
Sample. 

Sample. 

Sample. 1 
Sample. 1 
Sample. 
Sample. 
Sample. 

Sample. 1 

Sample. 

Sample. 1 

Sample. 

Sample. 
Sample. 

Sample. 

Sample. 

Sample. 
Sample. 

Sample. 

Sample. 

Sample. 
Sample. 



Complete count. 
Complete count. 

Sample. 
Sample. 
Sample. 
Sample. 

Sample. 
Sample. 

Sample. 

Sample. 
Sample. 

Sample. 



Sample. 



See footnote at end of table. 



192 



A GRAPHIC SUMMARY 
DIRECTORY OF TENURE DATA, 1954 CENSUS— Continued 



Where found 


Geographic area for 
which available 


Period 


Classifi cation 


Subjects covered 


Basis of tabulation 
of 1954 data 


Volume II, Chapter X— Con. 




1880 to 1954... 
1900 to 1954... 
1950 and 1954- . 

1900 to 1954-,. 

1950 and 1954.. 

1950 and 1954.. 
1954 
















Complete count. 








25, 26. 27. 




Nonwhite by race (Negro and 

other) . 
Commercial farms by tenure. . 

Farms other than commercial 

by tenure. 
Part-time and residential 

farms by tenure. 

Tenure of multiple units 

Class of tenants of multiple- 
unit operators. 










Farms, land in farms, cropland harvested, 
value of land and buildings, and other 
specified farm characteristics, such as facul- 
ties, equipment, farm labor, expenditures, 
livestock, and crops. 

Farms (See Volume II, page 948, for method for 
obtaining data for additional items). 




30, 31, 32, 
33, 34, 35. 

Table 36. 




Sample. 








38. 
Vnliimp TTT, Part. 1 


Summary for multiple-unit 
areas and States. 

United States ,*"di visions, and 
States. 


1954 and 1950.. 
1930 to 1954__. 


Multiple units, subunits (Census farms), land 
in multiple units, specified crops, horses 
and mules. 

Farms 

Farm-mortage debt. _ 


Complete count. 


Part 5 


Complete count. 











1 Average age and average years from complete count.