1 191 
 •15 C65 
 spy 
 
Hollinger Corp. 
 pH8.5 
 
SB 191 
 •W5 C65 
 Copy l 
 
 [TED states department of agriculture 
 BULLETIN No. 943 
 
 Contribution from the Office of Farm Management and Farm Economics 
 H. C. TAYLOR, Chief 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 April 30, 1921 
 
 COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT 
 
 ON 481 FARMS IN THE STATES OF NORTH 
 
 AND SOUTH DAKOTA, MINNESOTA, KANSAS, 
 
 NEBRASKA, AND MISSOURI, FOR THE CROP 
 
 YEAR 1919 
 
 By > 
 M. R. COOPER and R. S. WASHBURN 
 
 Assistant Farm Economists 
 
 CONTENTS 
 
 Pago 
 A Problem Often Misunderstood ... 1 
 Application of Cost Data to Farm Organiza- 
 tion 3 
 
 Summary of Results 3 
 
 Basic Factors and Cost Estimates . . 4 
 Method, Scope, and Purpose of Present 
 
 Study 4 
 
 Geography of Production 6 
 
 Comparative Wheat Yields 11 
 
 Requirements of Production 12 
 
 • Page 
 
 Summary of Costs, by Districts . . . 13 
 Range in Cost per Acre, by Counties . 16 
 
 Net Cost per Bushel 21 
 
 Analysis of Items of Cost 25 
 
 Array of Farms According to Cost per 
 
 Bushel, by Counties 47 
 
 Cumulative Per Cent of Acreage Grown at 
 
 Various Costs per Bushel ..... 49 
 Cumulative Per Cent of Total Production 51 
 Individual Costs per Acre 54 
 
 WASHINGTON 
 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
 
 1921 
 
 WASHINGTON : GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE I llll 
 
 
/ 
 
 LIBRARY OP'CONGRESS 
 
N^5 
 
 <0* 
 
 UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 
 
 BULLETIN No. 943 
 
 Contribution from the Office of Farm Management 
 and Farm Economics 
 
 H. C. TAYLOR, Chief 
 
 Washington, D. C. 
 
 April 30, 1921 
 
 COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 By M. R. Cooper and R. S. Washburn, Assistant Farm Economists. 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 Page. 
 
 A problem often misunderstood 1 
 
 Application of cost data to farm organization . 3 
 
 Summary of results 3 
 
 Basic factors and cost estimates 4 
 
 Method, scope, and purpose of present study. 4 
 
 Geography of production 6 
 
 Comparative wheat yields 11 
 
 Requirements of production 12 
 
 Summary of costs, by districts 13 
 
 Page. 
 
 Range in cost per acre, by counties 16 
 
 Net cost per bushel 21 
 
 Analysis of items of cost 25 
 
 Array of farms according to cost per bushel, 
 
 by counties 47 
 
 Cumulative per cent of acreage grown at 
 
 various costs per bushel 49 
 
 Cumulative per cent of total production 51 
 
 Individual costs per acre 54 
 
 A PROBLEM OFTEN MISUNDERSTOOD. 
 
 "Cost of production" is a term which has been much used in 
 recent years, often, it is believed, without a full comprehension of its 
 significance. Some who had at first assumed that there was such a 
 thing as one definite and specific cost figure for each of the staple 
 farm products have become somewhat confused upon learning of 
 the wide range of costs on different farms, and may have come even 
 to doubt the utility of cost studies. It is rather difficult to arrive 
 at a figure which properly represents the cost of producing wheat, 
 or any other product, even on a given farm; furthermore, it is no 
 simple matter to interpret properly the results. Because a task is 
 difficult, however, is no reason for giving it up when the end in 
 view is so important as in this case. 
 
 Note. — Acknowledgment is due to Messrs. M. A. Crosby and G. H. Miller, of the 
 Office of Farm Management and Farm Economics, United States Department of 
 Agriculture, for assistance in collecting the data which are presented in this bulletin. 
 Acknowledgment is also due Miss Catherine R. Hawley, of the Office of Farm Man- 
 agement and Farm Economics, for excellent work in supervising the tabulation of 
 the data which are used as a basis for this discussion. Thanks are extended to the 
 numerous farmers who so willingly furnished information with reference to the cost 
 of wheat production; also to the county agents and business men of the respective 
 districts who so cordially assisted the enumerators in their work. 
 
 26218°— 21— Bull. 943 1 
 
2 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 When it was shown that cost studies invariably bring out a wide 
 range of costs instead of a single definite cost figure, the average 
 was suggested as the representative cost figure, and often so used. 
 Continued studies of the cost of producing farm products have 
 indicated, however, that the average does not serve the purpose. 
 It has been found that if prices merely equaled the average cost 
 there would result anything but an inspiring standard, since the 
 average usually tends to divide the producers into two groups of 
 about equal size, one of which is producing at a cost above the aver- 
 age and the other at a cost below the average. 
 
 To be of an} 7 great significance, cost figures must be presented in 
 terms of the ranges that exist in the final cost per unit of product 
 and in the various elements of cost. The variations in the cost 
 per unit of product in any representative farming area are so marked 
 that they should be considered in any use of cost figures. 
 
 The Office of Farm Management and Farm Economics aims to 
 present cost figures so that a complete picture of the range of indi- 
 vidual costs can be obtained at a glance. From the presentation of 
 the range of costs of farm products, it would appear that usually 
 from 40 to 50 per cent of the production is at costs above the average. 
 For this reason it is believed that, in order to stimulate adequate 
 production through a period of years, the price at which the crop 
 is sold will need to be appreciably above the average cost. It 
 follows that the cost that will cover the "bulk" of the production 
 of a given product is the figure that approximates what the price 
 should be to maintain the industry. This consideration has led to 
 the development of the " bulk-line" theory, which has recently 
 assumed an important place in the discussion of the relation of 
 production costs to price. The "bulk-line" theory is a modification 
 and an attempt at practical application of the "marginal cost" or 
 "greatest cost" theory of the relation of cost and price. In practice, 
 the "bulk line" has sometimes been drawn to include 85 per cent 
 of the production, but this is merely a tentative and more or less 
 arbitrary figure. In reality the position of the "bulk line" varies 
 with different commodities and from time to time, according to the 
 alertness with which farmers adjust their production to market 
 conditions. The "bulk-line" cost corresponds to the long-time 
 average price which is essential, one year with another, to stimulate 
 the production of that quantity of product which the market de- 
 mands. What this "bulk-line" cost will be depends upon a number 
 of factors, including the rate the farmer must pay for land, labor, 
 and capital, and the standard of living which farmers, as a class, 
 insist upon if they are to remain on the farm. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 3 
 
 APPLICATION OF COST DATA TO FARM ORGANIZATION. 
 
 The fanner is primarily interested in the total net profit from his 
 farm as a unit. The determination of the best possible combination 
 of enterprises that provides the proper balance in the use of land, 
 labor, and capital is a constant problem with him. Complete cost 
 studies aid in analyzing seasonal demands for labor and capital and 
 provide basic data of great value in planning farm reorganization. 
 
 The wide range in the costs computed for the wheat farms covered 
 in this study suggests that considerable variation must have existed 
 in the profits from producing wheat. It is not an easy matter to 
 
 SUMMARY OF RESULTS. 
 
 (197 spring-wheat records, 284 winter-wheat records.) 
 
 Cost per acre: 
 
 Spring wheat, $12.98 to $47.84; average, S22.40. 
 
 Winter wheat, $10.55 to $50.23; average, $27.80. 
 Cost per bushel: 
 
 Spring wheat, $1.15 to $14.38; average, $2.65. 
 
 Winter wheat, $0.96 to $8.24; average, $1.87. 
 Yield: 
 
 Spring wheat, 20.8 bushels per acre to less than 
 1 bushel; average, 8.4. 
 
 Winter wheat, 30 bushels per acre to 2.2 ; average, 
 14.9. 
 In the spring-wheat area about 33 per cent of the 
 production was on the farms having costs above the. 
 average; in the winter-wheat area about 40 per cent 
 of the production was on farms having costs above 
 the average. 
 
 overcome the handicap that may be imposed by unfavorable weather 
 or by certain diseases, or, perchance, by insect enemies. These are 
 risks that demand the constant attention of the grower. Partly 
 because of these risks, the progressive wheat farmer is intensely inter- 
 ested in the development of methods which will reduce his costs 
 per unit of product and increase his profits. 
 
 A study of production costs on several farms will provide mam- 
 suggestions with respect to practices that are more economical than 
 the customary methods on the majority of farms in the community. 
 Detailed analysis brings striking illustrations into the foreground. 
 When a better plan or a more economical practice is displayed, 
 farmers in general will appropriate the idea and will profit thereby. 
 
4 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Costs not only differ on different farms during the same crop sea- 
 son, but they also exhibit a considerable range on any individual 
 farm from year to year. The variations on the same farm from 
 year to year may be due in part to weather conditions or other crop 
 risks, or they may reflect the management of the operator. Even 
 the most successful wheat grower may have an "off year" in wheat 
 production, when the enterprise must be counted as a loss. Such a 
 man would not suffer such losses annually for several years in suc- 
 cession without considering a change to a more profitable enterprise. 
 There are men, however, who do continue in the business and who 
 do sustain losses from year to year in growing wheat. Others just 
 beginning farming may sustain losses in their initial crop seasons. 
 
 Thus in any year a considerable percentage of the producers of a 
 given crop have costs which are above the price which is essential 
 to stimulate adequate production through a series of years. Obvi- 
 ously the growers who habitually sustain losses must improve their 
 methods, introduce more profitable enterprises, or take up other 
 lines of business in which they may prove more efficient. 
 
 BASIC FACTORS AND COST ESTIMATES. 
 
 The basic acre-cost factors, such as hours of man and horse labor, 
 amounts of manure and fertilizer applied, and quantities of seed and 
 twine used, constitute much better measures of cost than the rela- 
 tively unstable dollar. If these factors are known, labor rates and 
 prices of materials can be applied for any given time, with the result 
 that a close approximation of the total cost per acre can be obtained, 
 which in turn will make possible a close estimate of the bushel cost 
 when the yield per acre is known. 
 
 Where a solid foundation of such basic material is accumulated, it 
 should provide a basis for the estimating of approximate acre and 
 bushel costs for various products at the end of each crop year, so soon 
 as the yield is known and before the crop is marketed. Thus, with 
 the progress of the work in this field of investigation and as the 
 detailed figures for a series of years are tabulated, the basic cost 
 factors become increasingly valuable, because they serve as the basis 
 of timely estimates which can not be made with any satisfactory 
 degree of accuracy without them. 
 
 METHOD, SCOPE, AND PURPOSE OF PRESENT STUDY. 
 
 The purpose of this bulletin is to give the farmers of the western 
 and northern plains, and others interested, as nearly as possible a 
 complete statement of the facts concerning cost of wheat production 
 for the season of the survey. With this in view, the data have been 
 tabulated and presented in the following pages to show the 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 5 
 
 average cost and the variation in cost on individual farms and groups 
 of farms in each area visited, and to indicate the more important 
 reasons for the great variations in cost per acre and per bushel on 
 individual farms. 
 
 The cost data were obtained from wheat growers to whom personal 
 visits were made. Each record represents the experience of an indi- 
 vidual farmer, the object being to learn for each farm visited, the 
 detailed facts of production relative to all wheat land operated by 
 the farmer during the crop year 1919. 
 
 This study is based on 481 farm records, of which 197 were obtained 
 in five representative counties of the principal spring-wheat States, 
 and 284 in nine counties in the leading winter-wheat States. Table I 
 shows the districts visited and the total harvested acreage and total 
 production on the farms visited in each district: 
 
 Table I. — Distribution of cost records, spring and winter wheat, 1919. 
 
 State and county. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County. 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 Total spring wheat. 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County. 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles Co 
 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 Total winter wheat. 
 
 Designation of area. 
 
 Larimore-Gilby 
 
 New Salem-Hebron. 
 
 Redfield. 
 
 Moorhead 
 
 Wheaton-firaceville. 
 
 Dodge City. 
 
 Larned 
 
 McPherson. 
 
 Marshall . . . 
 Carthage . . . 
 St. Charles. 
 
 Iloldredge 
 
 Crete-Dorchester. 
 Ogallala 
 
 Number 
 
 of 
 records. 
 
 197 
 
 2S4 
 
 Acres 
 har- 
 vested. 
 
 10,060 
 5,840 
 
 9,500 
 
 10,376 
 7,071 
 
 42, 847 
 
 9,817 
 9,092 
 4,652 
 
 2,362 
 2,949 
 3,035 
 
 4,404 
 2,008 
 4,395 
 
 42,714 
 
 Bushels 
 
 pro- 
 duced. 
 
 98,335 
 25,835 
 
 93,862 
 
 84,325 
 59, 690 
 
 362,047 
 
 130, S90 
 126, 838 
 59,034 
 
 38, 422 
 56, 730 
 59, 520 
 
 47, 744 
 36,334 
 79,612 
 
 635, 124 
 
 According to the Yearbook of the United States Department 
 of Agriculture for 1919, farmers in the United States harvested 
 49,905,000 acres of winter wheat, yielding 731,636,000 bushels, and 
 23,338,000 acres of spring wheat, yielding 209,351,000 bushels. 
 
 In this survey a total area of 43,940 acres seeded to winter wheat, 
 yielding 635,124 bushels, and a total area of 44,218 acres seeded to 
 spring wheat, with a total production of 362,047 bushels, were used 
 as the basis for computing costs. About equal acreages are shown 
 for the spring and winter wheat groups, though in 1919 the winter- 
 wheat acreage in the United States as a whole ,was a little more than 
 twice as large as the spring wheat acreage. 
 
6 BULLETIN 943, "IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 GEOGRAPHY OF PRODUCTION. 
 
 The geographical distribution of the 1919 wheat acreage of the 
 United States is shown by the accompanying map (fig. 1). Figure 2 
 shows the counties visited in each of the spring and winter wheat 
 States in the course of this study. 
 
 The northern boundary of the Cotton Belt more or less closely 
 coincides with the southern boundary of the Winter Wheat Belt. 
 Likewise the northern boundary of the Winter Wheat Belt coincides 
 with the southern boundary of the Spring Wheat Belt. Table II 
 shows the acreage and production of spring and winter wheat in the 
 States where records were obtained, as compared with the total pro- 
 duction in the United States. Of the spring-wheat area in 1919 
 about 66 per cent was in the States of Minnesota, North Dakota, and 
 South Dakota. Of the winter-wheat area in 1919, over 39 per cent 
 was in the States of Kansas, Missouri, and Nebraska. 
 
 Table II. — Importance of 1919 wheat acreage and production in States where records wt rt 
 
 obtained. 
 
 Region. 
 
 Acreage. 
 
 Per cent 
 of total 
 acreage 
 
 (U.S.). 
 
 Production. 
 
 Per cent 
 of total 
 produc- 
 tion 
 (U. S.) 
 
 SPRING WHEAT. 
 
 7,770,000 
 3,6.50,000 
 3,950,000 
 
 33. 3 
 
 15.7 
 16.9 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 53, 613, 000 
 29,200,000 
 36,735,000 
 
 25.6 
 
 
 14.0 
 
 
 • 17.5 
 
 
 
 Total 
 
 15,377,000 
 
 65.9 
 
 119,54s, 000 
 
 57.1 
 
 
 
 WINTER WHEAT. 
 
 11,594,000 
 4,271,(ino 
 3,716,000 
 
 23.2 
 8.6 
 
 7.4 
 
 150,722,000 
 57,699,000 
 
 54,997,000 
 
 20.6 
 
 
 7.9 
 
 
 7.5 
 
 
 
 Total 
 
 19,584,000 
 
 39.2 
 
 2(13,418,000 
 
 36.0 
 
 
 
 During the last 70 years the center of wheat production in the 
 United States has moved constantly from east to west. Seventy 
 years ago New York was one of the great wheat-producing States. 
 From New York the region of heaviest production has moved west- 
 ward, through Ohio, southern Wisconsin, and northern Illinois, 
 until now the center of production for winter wheat is in central 
 Kansas and for spring wheat in North Dakota. In 1919 Kansas 
 produced 16 per cent and North Dakota 5.7 per cent of all wheat 
 grown in the United States. 
 
 The agricultural development of these western and northern plains 
 has been largely responsible for the wheat production having kept 
 pace with our wheat consumption. Wheat is not grown to any ex- 
 tent in the South, because of the warm, humid climate, which results 
 in injury from fungus diseases, and also because of the competition 
 with the cotton crop. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
8 BULLETIN 943, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 CROPS GROWN IN AREAS SURVEYED. 
 
 Table III shows the percentages of the total crop acreage devoted 
 to the various crops grown in the regions of the survey. Of all the 
 crops grown, wheat occupies first place. (See fig. 3.) The percent- 
 age of the total acreage devoted to wheat ranges from 39 per cent in 
 
 WHEAT 
 
 AREA SURVEYED 
 
 N.DAKOTA 
 
 Grand Forks 
 
 DAKOTA 
 
 SpiNK 
 
 NEBRASKA 
 
 \Keith 
 
 COLO. 
 
 KANSAS 
 
 N.M. 
 
 TEX. 
 
 PMjmee J/^msPherson 
 
 OKLA. 
 
 Fig. 2.— Black areas indicate the counties where wheat records were obtained. 
 
 Saline County, Nebraska, to about 80 per cent in Ford County, 
 Kansas. 
 
 The percentage of total acreage devoted to wheat in Missouri and 
 Nebraska was considerably lower than in some other districts visited 
 because of the competition with corn in these States. In the spring- 
 wheat districts, because of the smaller amount of rainfall and the 
 shorter growing season, corn does not compete with wheat to so 
 great an extent. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 The oat acreage was fairly well distributed in all districts, with a 
 slightly larger acreage per farm in the spring- wheat districts. This 
 is to be expected, since oats require a cool climate. Barley was 
 
 Fig. 3.— Typicalfann scene in western Nebraska, where wheat is the reading farm crop. 
 
 found in all districts visited, except Missouri, but, like oats, was more 
 generally grown in the spring-wheat districts. 
 
 Table III. — Distribution of crop area, 1919 (4S1 farms). 
 
 State and countv. 
 
 Crop 
 
 acres 
 
 per 
 
 farm. 
 
 SPRING WHEAT AREAS. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks Countv. 
 
 573. 4 
 Morton County j 409. 2 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County . . . 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse Countv. 
 
 WINTER WHEAT AREAS. 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County. 
 Nebraska: 
 
 I'helps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith Countv 
 
 437.7 
 
 496.0 
 374. 5 
 
 398. 7 
 384. 2 
 204.8 
 
 181.5 
 155.4 
 130.1 
 
 271.4 
 149.9 
 420.0 
 
 Per cent of crop area in — 
 
 Wheat. 
 
 49.0 
 39.6 
 
 55.1 
 45.1 
 
 79 
 
 7 
 
 75. 
 
 5 
 
 69 
 
 6 
 
 47. 
 
 9 
 
 63. 
 
 s 
 
 61 
 
 4 
 
 56.2 
 
 38. 
 
 7 
 
 52. 
 
 1 
 
 3.1 
 2.5 
 
 16.9 
 
 5.4 
 13.4 
 
 3.8 
 8.4 
 10.6 
 
 40.5 
 16.2 
 25.9 
 
 28. 6 
 32. s 
 
 23. 1 
 
 12.1 
 6.7 
 
 10.4 
 16.3 
 
 5.1 
 .9 
 4.3 
 
 3.7 
 
 14.0 
 
 4.6 
 
 2.4 
 11.0 
 2.9 
 
 Bar- 
 ley. 
 
 7.5 
 4.3 
 
 Rye. 
 
 5.8 
 6.9 
 
 2.9 
 8.3 
 
 5.3 l 1.0 
 
 .7 
 1.3 
 
 1.9 
 1.2 
 .1 2.2 
 
 3.8 .8 
 2.0 .1 
 2. 6 i 8. 
 
 Hay 
 
 Sum- 
 
 
 
 and 
 
 mer 
 
 Sor- 
 
 Flax. 
 
 alfal- 
 
 fal- 
 
 ghum. 
 
 fa. 
 
 low. 
 
 
 
 10.3 
 
 4.0 
 
 
 3.4 
 
 21.4 
 
 5.4 
 
 
 4.2 
 
 12.2 
 
 
 
 
 8.1 
 
 3.4 
 
 
 1.3 
 
 11.2 
 
 1.2 
 
 
 2.4 
 
 2.0 
 
 
 6.1 
 
 
 3.5 
 
 
 4.6 
 
 
 10.3 
 
 
 1.6 
 
 
 5.6 
 
 
 
 
 2.8 
 
 
 
 
 7.0 
 
 
 
 
 5.2 
 
 
 2.3 
 
 
 12.4 
 
 
 .4 
 
 
 8.4 
 
 
 1.1 
 
 
 Mis- 
 cella- 
 neous 
 crops. 
 
 7.7 
 7.6 
 
 2.1 
 
 1.4 
 5.0 
 1.3 
 
 2.3 
 3.5 
 1.1 
 
 .7 
 2.6 
 1.8 
 
 26218°— 21- 
 
10 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 No summer-fallow land was found in the winter-wheat districts, 
 and in the spring-wheat areas only a small percentage of the crop 
 area was summer-fallowed. 
 
 The area devoted to flax production was also limited. 
 
 The miscellaneous crops consisted principally of potatoes, millet, 
 spelt, and clover and timothy seed. 
 
 CLIMATE. 
 
 Although wheat is grown in localities in the United States having 
 widely different climates, it is a cool-weather crop, and produces the 
 largest yield of best quality where cool, moderately wet weather 
 prevails during the growing season and dry, sunny weather during 
 the ripening period. Wheat is not generally a safe crop where the 
 mean annual precipitation is less than 15 inches. In the districts 
 of densest production (North Dakota and Kansas) the annual pre- 
 cipitation ranges from 18 to 32 inches. Where the rainfall exceeds 
 45 inches a year wheat does not thrive, principally because rust and 
 fungus diseases are more prevalent there than in less humid districts. 
 
 The distribution of the rainfall is as important as the total amount. 
 For instance, in Ford County, Kans., in 1918, the total rainfall was 
 normal, but the average yield of wheat for the county was only 3 
 bushels per acre. This low yield was due mainly to the small amount 
 of rainfall during the months of April, May, and June; in June it 
 was only one-fourth inch; and for the three months but 4.5 inches, 
 as compared with a normal rainfall of about 8 inches for these months. 
 
 Table IV shows the average yearly precipitation for all districts 
 visited, as compared with the total rainfall for the year 1919: 
 
 Table IV. — Mean annual rainfall for districts visited. 
 
 Region. 
 
 Weather station. 
 
 Annual average. 
 
 SPRING WHEAT. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County. 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County. 
 
 WINTER WHEAT. 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County. . . 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County... 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 Larimore... 
 New Salem 
 
 Melette. . .. 
 
 Moorhead . . 
 Wheaton... 
 
 Dodge City 
 
 Lamed 
 
 McPherson 
 
 Marshall. . . 
 
 Joplin 
 
 St. Charles. 
 
 Holdredge. 
 
 Crete 
 
 Lodgepole.. 
 
 From 1910 to 1918.. 
 From 1909 to 1918.. 
 
 From 1892 to 1918.. 
 
 From 1881 to 1918.. 
 From 1915 to 1918.. 
 
 From 1896 to 1918.. 
 From 1860 to 1918.. 
 From 1889 to 1918.. 
 
 From 1890 to 1918.. 
 From 1878 to 1914 « 
 From 1890 to 1918.. 
 
 From 1891 to 1918.. 
 From 1880 to 1918.. 
 From 1890 to 1918.. 
 
 Inches. 
 20.20 
 17.87 
 
 20.64 
 
 23.65 
 18.47 
 
 20.32 
 22.70 
 31.16 
 
 38.63 
 41.26 
 36.68 
 
 24.84 
 28.85 
 16.62 
 
 Inches. 
 25.32 
 13.68 
 
 23.75 
 21.18 
 
 13.70 
 19.88 
 31.46 
 
 36.12 
 
 35.11 
 
 25.83 
 33.42 
 18.95 
 
 a No record taken alter 1914. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 11 
 
 Over a series of years approximately one-half of the annual pre- 
 cipitation in all districts occurred during the four months, April, 
 May, June, and July. The lowest annual precipitation was re- 
 corded in Keith County, Nebr. (16.62 inches), and the highest in 
 Jasper County, Mo. (41.26 inches). 
 
 In Ford County, Kans., and Morton County, N. Dak., the rainfall 
 in 1919 was considerably below normal. In Ford County the dis- 
 tribution during the growing season was sufficient to insure a fairly 
 good yield. However, in Morton County the rainfall was not well 
 enough distributed to produce an average yield. 
 
 SOILS. 
 
 Wheat was grown in the regions visited on fairly deep limestone 
 soils, generally well supplied with humus. The lime content was 
 especially high in Ford County, Kans., Keith County, Nebr., and 
 Morton County, N. Dak., where the amount of rainfall is limited and 
 the soluble material has not been leached out. In general, little 
 wheat was grown on sandy soils, since this soil type is not so well 
 adapted to wheat growing because of its tendency to blow during 
 high winds. 
 
 On these soils no commercial fertilizer was used except in the 
 Missouri areas. 
 
 COMPARATIVE WHEAT YIELDS. 
 
 The yield of farm crops in any given region is influenced by a 
 number of things, such as soil fertility, weather, insect and fungus 
 diseases, crop management, etc. Therefore, the results of any 
 attempt to tabulate yields for a single year must be considered as 
 suggestive rather than definite and conclusive. Yet when yields 
 are tabulated over a series of years an average yield can be arrived at 
 which will be of value in measuring the possibilities of the area for a 
 given crop grown in that region. 
 
 In Table V the average wheat yields for the State, county, and 
 farms visited in 1919 are recorded. In some cases the figures on 
 yield were obtained from the Bureau of Crop Estimates, United 
 States Department of Agriculture; in others, from State boards of 
 agriculture. 
 
 The average yield of spring wheat in the United States in 1919 
 was 9 bushels per acre, in contrast with a yield of 8.4 bushels per 
 acre for the total spring wheat area surveyed. The average yield 
 for all winter wheat in 1919 was 14.7 bushels per acre, while the 
 average yield for the farms surveyed in this region was 14.9 bushels 
 per acre. 
 
 The abnormally low yield of wheat in Morton County, N. Dak., 
 was partially due to an insufficient amount of total rainfall which 
 was not well distributed over the growing period* 
 
12 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 In Grand Forks County, N. Dak., and in Clay and Traverse Coun- 
 ties, Minn., a period of moist, hot weather occurred just prior to 
 harvest time, resulting in wheat rust, which reduced wheat yields 
 appreciably in these counties. 
 
 It will be noted (Table V) that the largest number of farms in the 
 spring-wheat districts are included in the group having a yield of 
 from 5 to 10 bushels per acre, while the largest number in the winter 
 wheat districts come within the group having a yield of from 15 to 
 20 bushels. 
 
 The average 1919 yield per acre for the farms included in this study 
 was determined by dividing the total production by the total harvested 
 acreage. The costs presented in this bulletin are based on the actual 
 yields obtained on these farms. 
 
 Table V. — Annual yields, spring and ivinter wheat. 
 
 
 10-year 
 State 
 aver- 
 age. 
 
 9 or 10 
 year 
 county 
 aver- 
 age. 
 
 Aver- 
 age for 
 farms 
 visited, 
 
 1919. 
 
 Range in yield per acre. 
 
 Region . 
 
 Under 
 5 bush. 
 
 5 to 10 
 bush. 
 
 10 to 15 
 bush. 
 
 15 to 20 
 bush. 
 
 20 to 25 
 bush. 
 
 25 bush, 
 and 
 over. 
 
 SPRING WHEAT. 
 
 North Dakota 
 
 10.6 
 
 
 
 No. of 
 farms. 
 
 No. of 
 
 farms. 
 
 No. of 
 farms. 
 
 No. of 
 
 farms. 
 
 No. of 
 farms. 
 
 No of 
 farms. 
 
 
 12.9 
 9.2 
 
 9 8 
 4.4 
 
 1 
 
 25 
 
 16 
 14 
 
 20 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 South Dakota 
 
 11.3 
 
 
 
 
 
 Spink Countv 
 
 10.8 
 
 9.9 
 
 
 24 
 
 13 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 Minnesota 
 
 14.1 
 
 
 
 Clay County 
 
 13.5 
 11.8 
 
 S. 1 
 
 8.4 
 
 2 
 1 
 
 26 
 32 
 
 9 
 9 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total spring wheat 
 
 
 
 
 29 
 15 
 
 112 
 57 
 
 51 
 26 
 
 5 
 2 
 
 
 
 Per cent of total 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 "WINTER WHEAT. 
 
 13. S 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Ford Countv 
 
 12.6 
 12.9 
 14.7 
 
 13.3 
 13.9 
 12.7 
 
 3 
 1 
 
 7 
 4 
 8 
 
 6 
 16 
 
 17 
 
 10 
 10 
 10 
 
 6 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 McPherson County 
 
 
 
 
 14.3 
 
 
 
 
 15.7 
 15.8 
 15.2 
 
 16.3 
 19.2 
 19.6 
 
 
 3 
 
 7 
 
 12 
 17 
 12 
 
 7 
 12 
 22 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 St. Charles County 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 
 
 16.0 
 
 
 
 
 Pheips County 
 
 14.1 
 21.1 
 19.5 
 
 10.8 
 18.1 
 IS. 1 
 
 
 15 
 
 13 
 6 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 17 
 11 
 
 
 
 Saline County 
 
 
 12 
 
 5 
 
 
 Keith County 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 Total winter wheat 
 
 
 
 
 4 
 1 
 
 39 
 14 
 
 69 
 24 
 
 101 
 36 
 
 65 
 23 
 
 
 Percent of total 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 REQUIREMENTS OF PRODUCTION. 
 
 In arriving at the cost of wheat production the following elements 
 of cost have been considered : 
 
 Labor, which includes (1) all direct man and horse farm labor, and 
 (2) contract labor, including such items as marketing wheat at a fixed 
 charge per bushel and various labor operations in growing the wheat 
 crop, where done at a contract rate per acre. 
 
 Materials, including seed wheat (with cost of treating seed) ; barn- 
 yard manure and straw, fertilizer and twine. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 13 
 
 Thrashing, which includes (1) cash paid per bushel, (2) board for 
 the part of thrashing crew furnished by the thrasherman, and (3) any 
 thrashing fuel furnished by the farmer. 
 
 Use cost of land, or land rent, which includes (1) interest on wheat 
 land investment for owned farms, (2) the market value of the share 
 of wheat given at thrashing time to the landlord as rent, and (3) the 
 actual cash paid for cash-rented wheat land. 
 
 Other costs, including (1) farm taxes and insurance; (2) special 
 crop insurance, (3) use of tractor and other farm machinery; (4) loss 
 due to abandoned wheat acreage; and (5) overhead. 
 
 Credits, including (1) straw, (2) pasture, and (3) insurance received 
 for damages to the growing wheat crop. 
 
 SUMMARY OF COSTS, BY DISTRICTS. 
 
 In Tables VI and VII is presented a summary of average cost per 
 acre and per bushel for the areas surveyed. This enables a com- 
 parison of the total costs of production by districts, and the part 
 of the total costs that is chargeable to labor, materials, thrashing, use 
 of land, and other costs. 
 
 Table VI. — Summary of average cost per acre and per bushel of spring tvheat, 1919 (197 
 
 farms) . 
 
 
 North Dakota. 
 
 South 
 Dakota. 
 
 Minnesota. 
 
 All 
 spring 
 wheat. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent of 
 
 total 
 
 cost. 
 
 Item. 
 
 Grand 
 
 Forks 
 
 County. 
 
 Morton 
 
 County. 
 
 Spink 
 County. 
 
 Clay 
 County. 
 
 Trav- 
 erse 
 County. 
 
 
 39 
 
 10,060 
 
 98,335 
 
 9.8 
 
 39 
 
 5,840 
 
 25,835 
 
 4.4 
 
 39 
 
 9,500 
 
 93, 862 
 
 9.9 
 
 38 
 10,376 
 84,325 
 
 8.1 
 
 42 
 
 7,071 
 
 59, 690 
 
 8.4 
 
 197 
 
 42,847 
 
 362, 047 
 
 8.4 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Labor (land preparation and seeding) 
 
 18.0 
 
 
 81.24 
 
 2.77 
 
 .10 
 
 $1.69 
 3.34 
 
 $1.16 
 
 2.54 
 
 .01 
 
 $1.29 
 2.35 
 
 .01 
 
 $i.40 
 3.17 
 
 $1.32 
 
 2.76 
 
 .03 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Labor (harvesting, marketing) 
 
 14.4 
 
 
 1.29 
 .88 
 .01 
 
 2.20 
 
 1.18 
 
 .06 
 
 2.00 
 
 1.02 
 
 .06 
 
 2.26 
 
 1.36 
 
 .02 
 
 2.72 
 
 1.58 
 
 .03 
 
 2.04 
 
 1.18 
 
 .04 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Material costs 
 
 17.1 
 
 
 3.39 
 
 .57 
 
 .22 
 
 2.78 
 
 4.22 
 
 2.98 
 .02 
 .29 
 .43 
 
 2.15 
 
 2.78 
 
 .39 
 
 .17 
 
 2.68 
 
 7.58 
 
 3.45 
 
 .50 
 
 .40 
 
 1.18 
 
 6.16 
 
 3.38 
 
 .46 
 
 .20 
 
 1.13 
 
 5.98 
 
 3.21 
 
 .42 
 
 .26 
 
 1.78 
 
 5.44 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 7 8 
 
 
 23 9 
 
 Other costs 
 
 18.8 
 
 
 .29 
 .18 
 .07 
 
 1.50 
 .97 
 
 1.59 
 
 .21 
 .21 
 .19 
 
 1.98 
 .94 
 
 1.46 
 
 .32 
 .25 
 
 .26 
 1.36 
 
 .46 
 
 .54 
 
 .67 
 
 1.30 
 
 .42 
 .11. 
 .21 
 1.43 
 
 .35 
 
 .28 
 .30 
 
 1.47 
 .36 
 
 1.51 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Overhead 
 
 1.31 
 
 1.54 
 
 1.69 
 
 
 
 
 
 22.07 
 .19 
 
 19.33 
 .50 
 
 23.89 
 .19 
 
 23.49 
 .58 
 
 23.91 
 .30 
 
 22.75 
 .35 
 
 100 
 
 Credits 
 
 
 
 
 Net cost per acre 
 
 21.88 
 2.24 
 
 18.83 
 4.26 
 
 23. 70 
 2.40 
 
 22.91 
 2.82 
 
 23.61 
 2.80 
 
 22.40 
 2.65 
 
 
 Net cost per bushel 
 
 
 
 
 Without land rent: 
 
 Net cost per acre 
 
 17.66 
 1.81 
 
 16.68 
 3.77 
 
 16.12 
 1.63 
 
 16.75- 
 2.06 
 
 17.63 
 2.09 
 
 16.96 
 2.01 
 
 
 Net cost per bushel 
 
 
 
 
14 
 
 BULLETIN 043, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table VII. — Summary of average cost per acre and per bushel of winter wheat, 1919 (284 
 
 farms) . 
 
 
 Kansas. 
 
 
 Missouri. 
 
 Nebraska. 
 
 All 
 
 winter 
 wheat. 
 
 Per 
 cent 
 
 of 
 total 
 cost. 
 
 Item. 
 
 Ford 
 Coun- 
 ty- 
 
 Paw- 
 nee 
 
 Coun- 
 ty. 
 
 Mc- 
 pher- 
 son 
 Coun- 
 ty. 
 
 Saline 
 Coun- 
 ty. 
 
 Jasper 
 Coun- 
 ty. 
 
 St. 
 
 Chas. 
 
 Coun- 
 ty. 
 
 Phelps 
 Coun- 
 ty. 
 
 Saline 
 Coun- 
 ty. 
 
 Keith 
 Coun- 
 ty. 
 
 Number of records 
 
 32 
 9,817 
 
 130, 890 
 
 13.3 
 
 32 
 9,092 
 
 126,838 
 
 13.9 
 
 ' 35 
 4,652 
 
 59,034 
 
 12.7 
 
 29 
 2,362 
 
 38,422 
 
 16.3 
 
 30 
 2,949 
 
 56, 730 
 
 19.2 
 
 38 
 3,035 
 
 59, 520 
 
 19.6 
 
 30 
 4,404 
 
 47, 744 
 
 10.8 
 
 35 
 2,008 
 
 36,334 
 
 18.1 
 
 23 
 4,395 
 
 79,612 
 
 18.1 
 
 284 
 42,714 
 
 635, 124 
 
 14.9 
 
 
 Total production (bush- 
 els) 
 
 
 Average yield per acre 
 
 
 Labor (land prepara- 
 tion and seeding) 
 
 13. S 
 
 Man labor cost per 
 
 $0.93 
 
 2.74 
 
 .02 
 
 $0.75 
 1.85 
 
 $1. 62 
 3.58 
 .02 
 
 $1.50 
 3.08 
 .11 
 
 $2.21 
 4.30 
 .02 
 
 $1.82 
 3.70 
 
 $1.25 
 2.46 
 
 $2.13 
 
 4.29 
 
 .01 
 
 $0.83 
 .97 
 .18 
 
 $1.23 
 
 2.70 
 
 .03 
 
 
 Horse labor cost 
 
 Contract labor. : 
 
 
 Labor (harvesting, 
 marketing) 
 
 
 
 2J.6 
 
 Man labor cost 
 
 Horse labor cost 
 
 Contract labor 
 
 3. 75 
 
 2.20 
 
 .02 
 
 2.80 
 1.38 
 .02 
 
 3.89 
 1.61 
 
 4.78 
 1.83 
 
 .12 
 
 4.68 
 
 2.22 
 
 .20 
 
 4.89 
 1.96 
 
 3.61 
 1.67 
 
 5.77 
 2.53 
 
 4.61 
 1.28 
 1.32 
 
 3.94 
 1.79 
 .16 
 
 
 Material costs 
 
 
 
 
 10.4 
 
 Seed and seed treat- 
 
 1.79 
 .31 
 .06 
 
 2.19 
 .21 
 .10 
 
 2.36 
 .63 
 .39 
 
 2.73 
 .66 
 .06 
 
 2.52 
 .53 
 .44 
 
 2.58 
 .55 
 .40 
 .33 
 .01 
 
 2.13 
 .63 
 .16 
 
 2.99 
 
 .87 
 .27 
 
 1.72 
 .44 
 
 .02 
 
 2.18 
 .45 
 .17 
 .02 
 .14 
 .01 
 2.30 
 8.59 
 
 
 Binder twine 
 
 Manure and straw . . 
 Green manure 
 
 
 Fertilizer 
 
 
 
 
 .01 
 
 2.07 
 
 
 
 
 
 Grasshopper poison. 
 
 .02 
 2.58 
 6.14 
 
 
 
 .01 
 1.18 
 6.94 
 
 
 
 
 Thrashing 
 
 2.67 
 
 7.77 
 
 2.83 
 8.44 
 
 3.37 
 13.92 
 
 1.45 
 10.30 
 
 1.86 
 
 11.28 
 
 1.98 
 13.25 
 
 1.91 
 9.57 
 
 8.0 
 
 Use cost of land 
 
 Other costs 
 
 30.0 
 17.2 
 
 Taxes and insurance 
 Special crop insur- 
 ance 
 
 .13 
 
 1.06 
 .12 
 
 1.15 
 
 .24 
 
 .18 
 
 1.23 
 .26 
 
 1.32 
 
 .18 
 
 .21 
 
 .27 
 .33 
 
 1.98 
 
 .69 
 
 .43 
 
 .07 
 .20 
 
 1.51 
 
 .91 
 
 .07 
 
 2.19 
 
 .24 
 
 .10 
 .19 
 
 1.77 
 
 .06 
 
 2.48 
 
 .36 
 
 .06 
 .47 
 
 2.13 
 
 .07 
 2.17 
 
 .18 
 
 .63 
 
 .14 
 
 1.23 
 .32 
 
 .6a 
 
 .21 
 .37 
 
 1.93 
 
 .15 
 
 .12 
 
 1.15 
 1.39 
 
 1.68 
 
 .22 
 
 .74 
 .35 
 
 1.51 
 
 .26 
 .01 
 1.81 
 
 
 Use cost of tractor. . 
 
 Use cost of other 
 
 farm machinery. . 
 
 Loss on abandoned 
 
 
 Sack rent 
 
 
 
 1.75 
 
 1.44 
 
 2.03 
 
 1.57 
 
 2.50 
 
 1.59 
 
 
 
 
 Total cost per acre. 
 Credits 
 
 25.01 
 .71 
 
 24.35 
 1.29 
 
 30.88 
 .68 
 
 37.55 
 2.27 
 
 35.78 
 1,14 
 
 34.64 
 .51 
 
 24.11 
 .27 
 
 39.88 
 .34 
 
 2S.78 
 .26 
 
 28.62 
 .82 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 Net cost per acre 
 
 Net cost per bushel 
 
 24.30 
 1.82 
 
 23.06 
 1.65 
 
 30.20 
 2.38 
 
 35.28 
 2.17 
 
 34.64 
 1.80 
 
 34.13 
 1.74 
 
 23.84 
 2.20 
 
 39.54 
 2.19 
 
 28.52 
 1.57 
 
 27.8) 
 1.87 
 
 
 Without land rent: 
 Net cost per acre. .'. . 
 Net cost per bushel. 
 
 18.16 
 1.36 
 
 15.29 
 1.10 
 
 21.76 
 1.71 
 
 21.36 
 1.31 
 
 24.34 
 1.26 
 
 22.85 
 1.17 
 
 16.90 
 1.56 
 
 26.29 
 1.45 
 
 18.95 
 1.05 
 
 19.21 
 1.29 
 
 
 The gross costs arc partially offset by credits for pasture and any 
 straw utilized on the farm. The difference between the gross cost and 
 the sum of these credits is the net cost of producing -wheat. The cost 
 per bushel was obtained by dividing the total net cost by the total 
 yield. The average acre cost of each item of expense was computed 
 on a weighted basis by dividing the total cost of each item by the total 
 wheat acreage. This method results in a relatively low regional cost 
 per acre for items of expense that did not occur on the entire acreage. 
 As an illustration, the cost of binder twine in Morton County, N. Dak., 
 where but 1 per cent of the acreage was cut with a binder, amounted 
 to but 2 cents per acre when distributed over the total wheat acreage. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 15 
 
 Again, in Keith County, Nebr., loss than 1 per cent of the wheat acre- 
 age was manured at a prorated cost of 2 cents per acre. Such 
 averages, of course, have no direct significance to the grower, though 
 they may have weight hi determining a regional cost. 
 
 An analysis of the total cost for spring and winter wheat under the 
 five headings, "labor," "materials," "tin-ashing," "use cost of land," 
 and "other costs," shows that labor constitutes about 32 to 35 per 
 cent of the total cost of production; thrashing about 8 per cent; 
 materials from 10 to 17 per cent; land rent from 24 to 30 per cent; 
 and "other costs" from 17 to 19 per cent. 
 
 The two largest items of cost, "labor" and "land rent," constitute 
 about 56 and 64 per cent, respectively, of the total costs in the spring 
 and winter wheat areas. The variations in labor practices and costs 
 are shown in detail elsewhere in this bulletin. 
 
 The average use cost of land in each district represents a combi- 
 nation of tenures and is not indicative of the rent charge for any par- 
 ticular renting practice. The land rent charge, therefore, is a com- 
 posite figure, made up of the interest on land values on owned farms 
 and the cash or share rent paid on rented farms. These variations 
 in land values and variations in yields and in the acreage of wheat 
 produced on owned and rented land are reflected in the differences 
 in the average land rent charges for the various districts. Because 
 of the lower land values and the lower yield of wheat in the Spring- 
 Wheat Belt the charge for the use of land is considerably lower here 
 than in the Winter- Wheat Belt. 
 
 Nearly 40 per cent of the spring wheat and 00 per cent of the winter 
 wheat acreage in question was grown by renters. To these men the 
 charge for the use of land is an important item of cost. To the 
 operator who owns his land a charge for the use of land is less vital 
 from the standpoint of actual cash outlay. The owner, however, 
 has an investment in wheat land, which, if rented out, would return 
 to him an income in cash or equivalent thereto in the form of a share 
 of the wheat crop. Therefore, in determining the cost of producing 
 wheat on owned land, interest on investment in land has been con- 
 sidered an item of cost in order that cost of production on owned and 
 rented land may be comparable. The importance of the charge for use 
 of land may be seen by referring to the last two items in Tables VI and 
 VII, where the cost per acre and per bushel without land rent has been 
 shown. In the case of spring wheat the charge for use of land 
 amounted to 64 cents a bushel and in the case of winter wheat 58 
 cents a bushel. 
 
 In the winter wheat districts the three counties in Missouri had 
 the most uniform cost per acre. With the exception of Saline 
 County, Nebr., the average cost for the Missouri areas was consider- 
 ably higher than the cost for the other winter-wheat areas. The 
 
16 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 principal reasons for this are found in higher land values and a more 
 thorough preparation of the land for wheat in the three Missouri 
 districts and in the Saline County, Nebr., area. 
 
 Since yield has a much less important influence on the cost per 
 acre than on the cost per bushel, the acre cost should be the unit 
 used in comparing the cost of wheat production in the districts vis- 
 ited. The cost of twine, shocking, thrashing, and marketing vary 
 somewhat with yield; but, unless the yields are abnormal, this varia- 
 tion is so slight that the costs per acre are comparable within a region. 
 The yield per acre, however, as already pointed out, has a decided 
 effect on cost per bushel, as will be seen from an examination of 
 Tables VI and VII. The average cost of producing winter wheat 
 was $27.80 per acre and $1.87 per bushel, as compared with an aver- 
 age cost for spring wheat of $22.40 per acre and $2.65 per bushel. 
 It will be seen that the average cost per acre for all spring wheat was 
 $5.40 less than for all winter wheat, though the average cost per bushel 
 was $0.78 greater. This difference in cost per bushel is due to a lack 
 of relation between the cost of producing an acre of wheat and yield 
 obtained; the cost per acre of winter wheat being 24 per cent greater 
 than for spring wheat, whereas the yield per acre was 77 per cent 
 greater. 
 
 RANGE IN COST PER ACRE, RY COUNTIES. 
 
 In Table VIII the farms have been grouped according to cost per 
 acre. In the five spring-wheat counties the acre cost per farm 
 ranged from $12.98 to $47.84. Only 7 per cent of these farms, how- 
 ever, had a cost in excess of $30 per acre, and the number with a cost 
 of less than $20 per acre was of small importance in all but the two 
 counties visited in North Dakota. In the two North Dakota areas 
 over 78 per cent of the farms had a cost of $25 or less per acre. In 
 Grand Forks County comparatively low labor and rent costs were 
 found on a goodly number of farms. In Morton County the labor 
 costs were fairly high, which was partially offset by a low thrashing 
 cost and exceptionally low rent costs. 
 
 The wide range in acre costs within each area is explained in the 
 following manner: As a rule, those farms showing a cost of less than 
 $20 per acre had comparatively low labor costs, combined with a low 
 rent charge, the latter being due to a low valuation of land on owned 
 farms and low yields on rented farms; and since the value of the 
 share of wheat given to the landlord for the use of the land has been 
 charged as rent to the operator, the rent charge on rented farms 
 varied with the yield obtained. In this connection it should be noted 
 that a good many of the farms in each area having a cost of less than 
 $20 per acre were share-rented farms. Again, the farms in this cost 
 group did not have excessive costs from abandoned wheat acreage. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 17 
 
 The next two and important groups, $20 to $25 and $25 to $30 per 
 acre, contained farms on which there was either a gradual or irregu- 
 lar increase in all or a part of the various items of cost over those 
 farms in the preceding group. * These increases were most pronounced 
 in labor and rent costs, although a few farms came within these 
 groups because of abandoned acreage costs. 
 
 Table YTII. — Range in cost per acre, by counties, spring and winter wheat, 1919 (481 
 
 farms). 
 
 District. 
 
 SPRING WHEAT. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 Total, spring wheat 
 
 Per cent of total 
 
 "WINTER WHEAT. 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County 
 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County 
 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 SalineCounty 
 
 Keith Counts 7 
 
 Total, winter wheat 
 
 Per cent of total 
 
 Cost per acr<\ 
 
 Num- 
 ber of 
 records 
 
 39 
 
 197 
 LOO 
 
 284 
 100 
 
 Under 
 
 $20 
 (num- 
 ber of 
 farms). 
 
 to $25 
 (num- 
 ber of 
 farms). 
 
 22 
 
 $25 
 to $30 
 (num- 
 ber of 
 farms) 
 
 $30 
 to $35 
 (num- 
 ber of 
 farms). 
 
 $35 
 to $40 
 (num- 
 ber of 
 farms). 
 
 $40 and 
 over 
 (num- 
 ber of 
 farms). 
 
 The farms in the three highest cost groups had one or more exces- 
 sive items of cost. Thus in the Grand Forks area the farm having 
 a cost of $30 to $35 per acre was a rented farm with a yield of 12 
 bushels per acre based on the acres harvested, but about one-half 
 of the acreage seeded was abandoned before harvest. In the same 
 area the farm in the $35 to $40 class abandoned 150 out of 210 acres. 
 
 The two farms having the highest cost in Spink County came in the 
 $30 to $35 group. One of these farms had a very high rent cost 
 and the other a high labor and rent cost combined with a com- 
 paratively high cost for seed wheat. 
 
 The eight farms in Minnesota with costs of $30 to $35 per acre 
 had high labor and rent costs, and the one farm in Traverse County 
 with a cost of over $40 was a small farm highly capitalized. The 
 26218°— 21— 3 
 
18 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 labor, rent, equipment, and overhead costs were comparatively high, 
 with a resultant cost of $47.84 per acre. 
 
 In the winter-wheat areas the variation in cost per acre on farms 
 in the same county was due primarily to the same causes that affected 
 costs on the spring-wheat farms. Thus in Ford County three of the 
 four farms having a cost of $30 to $40 per acre were share-rented 
 farms on which good yields were obtained, making a high-rent charge 
 to the operator. The one farm with a cost of $30 to $35 per acre 
 in Pawnee County was a share-rented farm also with a high yield. 
 Of McPherson County's five farms appearing in the two highest cost 
 groups three had abandoned acreage and the other two were share- 
 rented farms with good yields. The two farms with lowest acre 
 costs in Saline County, Mo., had comparatively low-labor costs and 
 exceptionally high credits for straw and pasture. The farms having 
 a cost of $40 and over per acre in the three Missouri counties had no 
 item of expense for abandoned acreage, but were universally high in 
 labor costs, and in some instances had high thrashing and rent costs; 
 the latter owing to high land values or very good yields of wheat. 
 In the Nebraska areas the variation in cost per acre was attributable 
 to the reasons mentioned above, the principal causes of variation 
 closely following those mentioned for the Missouri areas. 
 
 In the three Missouri areas the prominence of the farms with 
 comparatively high acre costs is due to thorough land preparation, 
 good yields, and high land valuations. Likewise on the farms in 
 Saline County, Nebr., which are relatively small, much labor is 
 devoted to land preparation, good yields were obtained, causing a 
 fairly high thrashing charge per acre, and land valuations were 
 higher than in any other area visited except one. 
 
 Thus it is evident that the acre cost of growing wheat is in no 
 way constant, but may vary as the quantities and values of the 
 various items of cost vary. The amount and the cost of labor devoted 
 to raising an acre of wheat may be influenced by many things, some 
 of which the farmer can not control, and in consequence the acre 
 cost may change from year to year. This is borne out by a study of 
 individual farm costs in each area. The amount of labor devoted 
 to seed-bed preparation was not uniform in any given locality. 
 This lack of uniformity was due to different practices followed on 
 individual farms and even on different fields on the same farm. 
 Soil conditions, weather conditions, available labor, distance from 
 market, etc., all have much to do with the hours devoted to raising 
 an acre of wheat. 
 
 As an example of variation in practice it was not uncommon to 
 find farmers in certain winter-wheat areas who plowed a part of the 
 land, listed a part, and disk-drilled a part in cornstalk or grain stubble 
 land without further preparation. In some instances a part of the 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 19 
 
 wheat land was in such condition as a result of heavy rains that an 
 8-foot binder was able to cut but one-third to one-half of a full swath. 
 The influence of such conditions on labor requirements not only in 
 cutting but in shocking such wheat is apparent The abandonment 
 of a high percentage of the acreage has a decided effect on acre cost. 
 Rent or interest on land, the value of which ranged from $30 to over 
 $200 per acre in the spring-wheat areas, is also a big item in acre- 
 cost variation, just as is high or low yields on share-rented farms. 
 Other items of cost were less variable, but each contributed its part 
 to the range in acre costs as shown for these farms. 
 
 Could each wheat farmer foresee the cost per acre of production, 
 and furthermore forecast with any degree of accuracy the yield for 
 any given year, farming as well as cost of production studies would 
 be much simplified. But unfortunately, this is not the case, and 
 while such information for one year is of considerable value, it is only 
 after data of this nature have been obtained for a number of years 
 that plans for farm organization can be undertaken with best results. 
 These cost figures, therefore, should be treated as preliminary, repre- 
 sentative of but one year's work. They should be supplemented by 
 similar figures for years to come to make them applicable as fixed 
 standards for individual farmers. 
 
 (Further variations in the cost per acre and per bushel on farms 
 operated by landowners are shown in Table XXXVII, appendix, 
 where an itemized statement is recorded for each farm visited.) 
 
 VARIATION IN NET COST PER ACRE. 
 
 In figures 4 and 5 the spring-wheat and winter-wheat farms have 
 been grouped according to cost per acre, without regard to counties. 
 In the spring-wheat area 88 of the 197 farms came within the $20 
 to $25 class. Next in importance were the farms with costs ranging 
 from $25 to $30 per acre, followed closely by the group with cost 
 under $20 per acre. Few farms had costs of over $30. 
 
 Table IX. — Variation in net cost per acre, spring and winter wheat, 1919 {481 farms). 
 
 Net cost per acre. 
 
 Num- 
 ber of 
 farms. 
 
 Cumula- 
 tive 
 per cent 
 of farms. 
 
 Seeded. 
 
 Harvest- 
 ed. 
 
 Cumula- 
 tive per 
 
 cent har- 
 vested. 
 
 Produc- 
 tion. 
 
 Cumula- 
 tive pro- 
 duction. 
 
 Produc- 
 tion. 
 
 SPRING WHEAT. 
 
 Under $20 
 
 $20 to $25 
 
 $25 to $30 
 
 $30 to $35 
 
 $35 to $40 
 
 $40 and over 
 
 WINTER WHEAT. 
 
 Under $20 
 
 $20 to $25 
 
 $25 to $30 
 
 $30 to $35 
 
 $35 to $40 
 
 $40andover 
 
 Per cent. 
 23.4 
 68.1 
 93.4 
 99.0 
 99.5 
 100.0 
 
 7.8 
 26.1 
 46.9 
 69.7 
 87.0 
 100.0 
 
 A cres. 
 
 10,389 
 
 22,224 
 
 10, 066 
 
 1,278 
 
 210 
 
 51 
 
 5,468 
 11,773 
 10, 823 
 8,343 
 5,044 
 2,489 
 
 Acres. 
 
 10,156 
 
 21,962 
 
 9,440 
 
 1,178 
 
 60 
 
 51 
 
 5,193 
 11,485 
 10,537 
 8,206 
 4,924 
 2,369 
 
 Acres. 
 23.7 
 75.0 
 97.0 
 99.8 
 99.9 
 100.0 
 
 12.2 
 39.1 
 63.8 
 83.0 
 94.5 
 100.0 
 
 Bushels. 
 62,855 
 196, 224 
 89, 432 
 12,618 
 423 
 495 
 
 46,437 
 141,542 
 160,860 
 146, 151 
 92,508 
 47,626 
 
 Bushels. 
 62,855 
 259, 079 
 348,511 
 361,129 
 361,552 
 362, 047 
 
 46,437 
 187,979 
 348, 839 
 494,990 
 587,498 
 635, 124 
 
 Per cent. 
 17.4 
 71.6 
 96.3 
 99.8 
 99.9 
 100.0 
 
 7.3 
 29.6 
 54.9 
 77.9 
 92.5 
 100.0 
 
20 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 In the winter-wheat area the farms having costs from $30 to 
 per acre were predominant, though the variation in size of groups was 
 much less marked than that shown by the spring-wheat farms. The 
 
 Fig. 4. — Variation in net cost per acre, spring wheat, 1919. 
 
 importance of these various groups is brought out clearly in Table IX. 
 where the cumulative per cent of acreage harvested and cumulative 
 per cent of production are presented. 
 
 Fig. 5. — Variation in net cost per acre, winter wheat, 1919. 
 
 In the spring-wheat areas 68 per cent of the farms visited produced 
 wheat at costs of less than $25 per acre. These f arms had 75 per cent 
 of the acreage and 72 per cent of total production. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 21 
 
 In the winter-wheat areas the range in cost per acre was greater than 
 in the spring-wheat areas. Nearly 70 per cent of the farmers, rep- 
 resenting 83 per cent of the acreage and 78 per cent of total pro- 
 duction, had costs of $35 or less per acre 
 
 NET COST PER BUSHEL. 
 
 RELATION OF YIELD TO COST PER BUSHEL. 
 
 As heretofore shown, a wide range in cost per acre existed on the 
 farms visited. While, of course, it is advisable to produce a maximum 
 yield at a minimum cost per acre, the ultimate result of importance 
 is the cost of producing a bushel of wheat. If yield were to increase 
 with fixed relation to an increase in cost per acre, a definite basis would 
 be established for planning profitable farm organization. However, 
 one may handle a crop according to approved methods of production 
 only to have the crop destroyed by insects, fungus diseases, exces- 
 sive droughts or rains, etc., and while the acre cost of production may 
 be reasonable, the cost per bushel may be extremely high. The 
 experience of wheat growers has been that if they can withstand the 
 losses occasioned by crop failures they may hope to realize a com- 
 pensating income during the good years. Were it not for a reali- 
 zation of these things an exceedingly bad year might induce many 
 farmers to go out of the business. 
 
 In Tables X and XI the spring and winter wheat farms have been 
 grouped according to yield. A review of these tables shows the in- 
 fluence of yield in determining cost per bushel. In general, as the 
 yield per acre increased, the cost per bushel decreased. 
 
 Table X. — Relation of yield to cost per bushel, spring wheat, 1919 (197) farms. 
 
 
 
 Cumu- 
 
 
 
 
 
 Cumu- 
 
 
 
 Range of yield. 
 
 Num- 
 ber 
 of rec- 
 
 lative 
 
 per 
 cent of 
 
 Aver- 
 age 
 ■ yield. 
 
 Aver- 
 age 
 cost per 
 
 Range of yield. 
 
 Num- 
 ber 
 of rec- 
 
 lative 
 
 per 
 cent of 
 
 Aver- 
 age 
 yield. 
 
 Aver- 
 age 
 cost per 
 
 
 ords. 
 
 produc- 
 
 bushel. 
 
 
 cords. 
 
 produc- 
 
 bushel. 
 
 
 
 tion. 
 
 
 
 
 
 tion. 
 
 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 
 Buskih. 
 
 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 
 lto 1.9 
 
 3 
 
 0.2 
 
 1.3 
 
 $12.16 
 
 10 to 10.9 
 
 11 
 
 67.0 
 
 10.3 
 
 2.30 
 
 2to 2.9 
 
 5 
 
 .8 
 
 2.8 
 
 5.81 
 
 11 to 11.9 
 
 22 
 
 79.7 
 
 11.5 
 
 2.10 
 
 3 to 3.9 
 
 7 
 
 1.6 
 
 3.3 
 
 5.98 
 
 12 to 12.9 
 
 7 
 
 84.2 
 
 12.0 
 
 1.95 
 
 4 to 4.9 
 
 14 
 
 4.9 
 
 4.5 
 
 4.54 
 
 13 to 13.9 
 
 8 
 
 90.5 
 
 13.2 
 
 1.93 
 
 5 to 5.9 
 
 18 
 
 11.0 
 
 5.4 
 
 3.79 
 
 14 to 14.9 
 
 4 
 
 94.5 
 
 14.6 
 
 1.79 
 
 6 to 6.9 
 
 27 
 
 23.1 
 
 6.5 
 
 3.25 
 
 15 to 15.9 
 
 2 
 
 98.0 
 
 15.4 
 
 1.45 
 
 7 to 7.9 
 
 22 
 
 32.2 
 
 7.6 
 
 2.97 
 
 16 to 16.9 
 
 2 
 
 99.7 
 
 16.7 
 
 1.60 
 
 8 to 8.9 
 
 25 
 
 46.1 
 
 8.5 
 
 2.65 
 
 17 and over 
 
 1 
 
 100.0 
 
 20.8 
 
 1.15 
 
 9 to 9.9 
 
 19 
 
 55.0 
 
 9.5 
 
 2.58 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 The column in these tables showing cumulative per cent of pro- 
 duction indicates that over one-half of the wheat grown on the 
 spring-wheat farms included in this study was produced on farms 
 having yields of less than 10 bushels per acre, and that 45 per cent was 
 raised on farms having yields of from 10 to 20.8 bushels per acre. In 
 
22 
 
 BULLKTfN W3, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF ACRICULTURE. 
 
 the winter-wheat areas better yields prevailed than in the spring- 
 wheat areas. Here nearly 50 per cent of the wheat was grown on 
 farms having yields of from 2.2 to 16.9 bushels and the other 50 per 
 cent was grown on farms where yields of from 17 to 30 bushels per 
 acre were obtained. When one considers the range in yields obtained 
 on these farms, the great variations in costs per bushel are not 
 surprising. 
 
 Table XI. — Relation of yield to cost per bushel, winter wheat, 1919 {284 farms). 
 
 Range of yield. 
 
 Num- 
 ber 
 of rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Cumu- 
 lative 
 
 per 
 cent of 
 produc- 
 tion. 
 
 Aver- 
 age 
 yield. 
 
 Aver- 
 age 
 cost per 
 bushel. 
 
 Range of yield. 
 
 Num- 
 ber 
 of rec- 
 cords. 
 
 Cumu- 
 lative 
 per 
 cent of 
 produc- 
 tion. 
 
 Aver- 
 age 
 yield. 
 
 Aver- 
 age 
 cost per 
 bushel. 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 2 to 2.9 
 
 3 to 3.9 
 
 4to 4.9 
 
 5 to 5.9 
 
 6 to 6.9 
 
 7to 7.9 
 
 8 to 8.9 
 
 9 to 9.9 
 
 10 to 10.9 
 
 11 to 11.9 
 
 12 to 12.9 
 
 13 to 13.9 
 
 14 to 14.9. : 
 
 2 
 1 
 1 
 3 
 3 
 7 
 14 
 12 
 14 
 12 
 12 
 13 
 18 
 
 0.3 
 
 .4 
 
 .6 
 
 1.1 
 
 1.5 
 
 3.3 
 
 6.5 
 
 9.1 
 
 12.1 
 
 14.5 
 
 22.3 
 
 28.5 
 
 35.4 
 
 Bushels. 
 2.5 
 3.4 
 4.9 
 5.6 
 6.4 
 7.5 
 8.2 
 9.6 
 10.5 
 11.3 
 12.4 
 13.4 
 14.5 
 
 $6.55 
 4.35 
 3.60 
 3.37 
 3.42 
 2.89 
 2.47 
 2.39 
 2.26 
 2.17 
 1.97 
 2.06 
 1.97 
 
 Bushels. 
 
 15 to 15.9 
 
 16 to 16.9 
 
 17 to 17.9 
 
 18 to 18.9 
 
 19 to 19.9 
 
 20 to 20.9 
 
 21 to 21.9 
 
 22 to 22.9 
 
 23 to 23.9 
 
 24 to 24.9 
 
 25 to 25.9 
 
 28 to 28.9 
 
 21 
 
 18 
 
 24 
 
 27 
 
 11 
 
 28 
 
 15 
 
 12 
 
 6 
 
 4 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 43.3 
 49.4 
 59.9 
 70.0 
 73.6 
 82.3 
 89.6 
 94.3 
 96.4 
 98.2 
 99.2 
 99.5 
 100.0 
 
 Bushels. 
 15.4 
 16.4 
 17.5 
 18.5 
 19.5 
 20.2 
 21.4 
 22.2 
 23.4 
 24.2 
 25.2 
 28.8 
 30.0 
 
 1.90 
 1.82 
 1.61 
 1.80 
 1.76 
 1.55 
 1.56 
 1.49 
 1.65 
 1.29 
 1.47 
 1.49 
 1.46 
 
 VARIATION IN NET COST PER BUSHEL. 
 
 On the 197 spring-wheat farms the average cost was $2.65 per 
 bushel, and the cost on individual farms ranged from $1.15 to $14.38 
 per bushel. However, but one of the 197 farms had a cost as high as 
 $14.38, and only 15 farms, representing 2.5 per cent of the wheat pro- 
 duced, had costs exceeding $5 per bushel. In figure 6 the 197 
 farms have been arranged according to net cost per bushel, that the 
 relative importance of each cost group may be shown. 
 
 The variations in net cost per bushel are due, of course, to varia- 
 tions in costs expended per acre and in the yields obtained, both of 
 which factors have been previously discussed. However, it may be 
 of interest to note conditions that prevailed in 1919 on some of the 
 farms having extremely low or high costs. A review of the records 
 taken indicates that when the farms were classified, as shown in 
 figure 6, both those with comparatively low and those with compara- 
 tively high acre costs often appeared in the same cost per bushel 
 class. Yield is the most variable factor in determining the cost of 
 producing a bushel of wheat, and this factor is therefore largely 
 responsible for the grouping of the farms. Farms where a part of 
 the acreage was not worth cutting usually had a high acreage cost, 
 owing to expenses in preparing land and seeding wheat that was not 
 cut. Furthermore the yield from the acreage harvested was usually 
 low, thus further increasing the bushel cost. Of the farmers having 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 23 
 
 a cost of $5 or over per bushel, about one-half abandoned a part of 
 the seeded wheat acreage, and the Weld on this group of farms ranged 
 from slightly less than 1 bushel per acre to 7 bushels per acre, based 
 
 NET COST 
 PER BUSHEL 
 S I to 
 1 20 
 1.30 
 1 40 
 I SO 
 1 60 
 1 70 
 ISO 
 
 1 90 
 
 2 OO 
 2 IO 
 2.20 
 2.30 
 2 40 
 2.50 
 2 60 
 2.70 
 
 2 80 
 2.90 
 
 3 00 
 3 10 
 3 20 
 3 30 
 3.40 
 3.50 
 3 60 
 3 70 
 
 3 eo 
 3.90 
 4.00 
 
 4 IO 
 4 20 
 4 30 
 4 40 
 4 SO 
 4 60 
 4 70 
 4 80 
 
 4 90 
 5.00 
 
 5 IO 
 5.20 
 5.30 
 5.40 
 5. SO 
 5 60 
 
 5 70 
 5.80 
 5.90 
 
 6 OO 
 6.10 
 6.20 
 6.30 
 6.40 
 
 8.30 
 
 e 70 
 
 10 20 
 10. 40 
 12.10 
 
 14.40 
 
 NUMBER OF RECORDS 
 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 
 
 f 
 
 ~~ — " 
 
 ,, ____ 
 
 — 
 
 „, -.-. __ 
 
 
 
 1. ■ 
 
 __ 
 
 CUMULATIVE 
 PER CT Of 
 PRODUCTION 
 
 3 2 
 6 4 
 8 1 
 14 9 
 20 6 
 24 5 
 29 8 
 34 9 
 47 1 
 51 5 
 54 9 
 64.3 
 69 3 
 72.3 
 75.fi 
 77 7 
 79 1 
 60 1 
 82 8 
 85 1 
 
 87 6 
 
 88 5 
 
 89 2 
 
 90 9 
 
 91 7 
 
 91 7 
 
 92 4 
 
 93 3 
 
 93 8 
 
 94 7 
 
 95 9 
 
 96 4 
 
 96 8 
 
 97 1 
 97 5 
 
 98 1 
 98 3 
 
 98 7 
 
 99 2 
 
 99 5 
 99 6 
 
 99 7 
 99 8 
 99 9 
 100 O 
 
 Fig. 6.— Variation in net cost per bushel, winter wheat, 1919. 
 
 on the acreage harvested. The farms having a low cost per bushel 
 were farms on which comparatively good yields were obtained, 
 many yielding from 10 to 15 bushels, and in some instances as high 
 as 20 bushels per acre. 
 
24 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 The average cost for the 284 winter wheat farms was $1.87 per 
 bushel. The range in cost on individual farms was from $0.96 to 
 $8.24 per bushel (see fig. 7). Nearly 75 per cent of the wheat grown 
 
 NET COST 
 PER BUSHEL 
 
 s 
 
 * i oo 
 
 1 10 
 I 20 
 1 SO 
 t 40 
 1 50 
 1 60 
 1.70 
 1 80 
 
 1 90 
 
 2 OO 
 2 lO 
 2.20 
 2 30 
 2.40 
 2 SO 
 2.60 
 2.70 
 
 2 SO 
 2.90 
 
 3 OO 
 3 lO 
 3 20 
 3 30 
 3 40 
 3 50 
 3 60 
 3 70 
 3 BO 
 3 90 
 
 5 10 
 5 20 
 
 2 4 6 
 
 NUMBER OF RECORDS 
 
 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 
 
 CUMULATIVE 
 PER CT OF 
 PRODUCTION 
 
 5 1 
 
 6 5 
 12.0 
 18.5 
 27 5 
 35 2 
 45 t 
 53 6 
 63 9 
 73 7 
 78 4 
 82 2 
 85 5 
 88.5 
 
 91 8 
 
 92 9 
 95.9 
 
 96 4 
 
 97 O 
 97 3 
 
 97 7 
 
 98 1 
 98 3 
 98 5 
 
 98 7 
 
 99 1 
 99 2 
 99 3 
 99 5 
 
 99 8 
 99 9 
 
 Fig. 7. — Variation in net cost per bushel, spring wheat, 1919. 
 
 on these farms in 1919 was produced at a cost of $2 and less per bushel 
 and was grown on 165 of the 284 farms visited. As in the spring- 
 wheat districts, good yields were obtained on the farms having low 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 25 
 
 bushel costs. A number of such farms reported yields as high as 
 15 to 25 bushels per acre. The farms on which the cost per bushel 
 was exceptionally high reported yields ranging from less than 3 bushels 
 to 8 and 10 bushels per acre. A number of the farmers with the 
 higher costs abandoned a part of their wheat acreage because it was 
 totally destroyed or in such condition that it was not worth the 
 expense of harvesting. 
 
 ANALYSIS OF ITEMS OF COST. 
 
 The labor costs and other items of expense entering into the cost 
 of wheat production have been expressed in terms of hours of labor 
 and quantities of seed, twine, etc., wherever possible. This has been 
 done because requirements expressed in these terms are more valuable 
 for purposes of comparison than when expressed in the less stable 
 terms of dollars and cents. These cost factors have been treated 
 under the general headings, " Labor, " "Material" "Thrashing," 
 "Use cost of land," and "Other costs." 
 
 LABOR. 
 
 AVERAGE HOURS OF MAN AND HORSE LABOR PER ACRE. 
 
 Table XII shows the average number of hours per acre devoted to 
 wheat production in the various regions studied. 
 
 The figures shown are averages for only those farms operated with 
 horses, all farms on which the tractor or motor truck was used having 
 been omitted in this tabulation. 
 
 The average hours per acre of man and horse labor for each dis- 
 trict are representative, with the exception of any variation caused 
 by different practices followed in providing labor for thrashing. In 
 the spring-wheat areas the farmers furnished the thrashing crews 
 in Morton, Clay, and Traverse Counties, and the total man and horse 
 hours include all labor for hauling and pitching bundles in these 
 counties. But in Grand Forks and Spink Counties the owner of the 
 thrashing machine furnished the men and teams for thrashing, and 
 this labor, which would amount to about l{ man and 2^ horse hours 
 per acre, is not included in the averages shown in Table XII. 
 
 In the Kansas areas and Saline County, Mo., the crew was furnished 
 by both farmers and thrashermen. Had the farmer furnished the 
 entire crew the average hours of production would have been increased 
 by abouL 1 man-hour per acre. 
 
 In all other winter-wheat areas, excepting Saline County, Mo., the 
 thrashing crews, and therefore the thrashing labor, are included in 
 the averages for these areas. 
 
 In the spring-wheat areas the average man-hours varied from nearly 
 six hours per acre in Grand Forks County, N. Dak., to about nine hours 
 26218°— 21 4 
 
26 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 per acre in Morton County, N. Dak. The hours per acre of horse 
 labor in these two counties were 19.2 and 25.7, respectively. In the 
 winter-wheat areas a greater variation was found, man labor varying 
 from 7.3 hours per acre in Pawnee County, Kans., to 17.5 hours in 
 Jasper County, Mo., and horse labor from 19.7 to 39.5 hours, respec- 
 tively. When the total labor was divided as to land preparation and 
 seeding, and harvesting and marketing, it was found that m nearly 
 every case the bulk of total horse labor came in the fall and spring 
 when the land was prepared and the crop seeded. In the spring- 
 wheat areas there was usually little difference in man-hours as thus 
 divided. Generally any difference that occurred indicated that 
 more man labor was required in land preparation and seeding than 
 in harvesting and marketing. In the winter-wheat areas wider 
 variations occurred in the two divisions, and usually the man-hours 
 for harvesting and marketing were higher than for land preparation 
 and seeding. 
 
 Table XII. — Average hours of man and horse labor, by counties, spring and winter 
 
 wheat, 1919 (360 farms). 
 
 « I Farms using tractors or trucks not included.] 
 
 SPRING WHEAT. 
 
 Preparation 
 
 and seeding 
 
 ( hours per 
 
 acre). 
 
 Man. Horse. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 (irand Forks County. 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 WINTER WHEA1 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford Count y 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County 
 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County 
 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 3.6 
 5, 1 
 
 4. 2 
 4.1 
 
 2.8 
 2.6 
 
 4. 5 
 
 5. 1 
 S. 1 
 8.2 
 
 3.7 
 6.7 
 2.7 
 
 11.6 
 19. 6 
 
 15.1 
 
 17.3 
 
 12.0 
 11.7 
 
 IS. s 
 
 is.;, 
 26. K 
 25.1 
 
 13.0 
 24. 7 
 9.3 
 
 Harvesting and 
 
 marketing 
 , (hours per 
 acre). 
 
 Man. Horse. 
 
 2.2 
 
 3. s 
 
 4.0 
 
 4.7 
 
 4. S 
 4.7 
 
 4.S 
 
 s, 1 
 9.4 
 
 5. 
 
 s. 1 
 6.9 
 
 4.6 
 6.1 
 
 7.3 
 
 S. 4 
 
 s. s 
 S.0 
 8.1 
 
 11.1 
 12.7 
 11.5 
 
 8.6 
 12.4 
 10.1 
 
 Man. Horse. 
 
 5.8 
 9.2 
 
 6.1 
 
 S. 2 
 8.8 
 
 7.3 
 9.3 
 
 13.2 
 17.5 
 
 17.1 
 
 9.2 
 14.8 
 9.6 
 
 19.2 
 
 25. 7 
 
 22.4 
 25.7 
 
 20.8 
 19.7 
 26.9 
 
 29.6 
 39.5 
 
 21.6 
 37.1 
 19.4 
 
 VARIATION IN LABOR REQUIREMENTS. 
 
 From Tables XIII and XIV it is apparent that there was a wide 
 variation among individual farms in the amount of labor devoted to 
 growing an acre of wheat. In these tables the farm records included 
 in Table XII were grouped according to total man hours per acre. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 27 
 
 In the spring-wheat areas all but eight of the 159 farms were well 
 represented in four groups, or in those classes having man labor 
 requirements of from 4 to 12 hours per acre. In Grand Forks and 
 Spink Counties, nearly all of the farms came within the two groups, 
 "4 to 6 " and " 6 to 8 " hours per acre. In Morton County the largest 
 group of farms required from 8 to 10 hours of man labor per acre, and 
 in both Minnesota areas the majority of all farms showed require- 
 ments of from 6 to 10 hours per acre. Of the total wheat acreage 
 grown on the spring-wheat farms more than one-third was grown on 
 farms having man labor requirements of from 6 to 8 hours; also a 
 large acreage was represented by each group of farms commencing 
 with 4 to 6 hours per acre, and including the 10 to 12 hour group. 
 
 Table XIII. — Variation in labor requirements per acre, spring wheat, 19 1 9 1 159 farms). 
 [Farms using tractors or trucks not included.] 
 
 Range 
 of 
 
 North Dakota. 
 
 South 
 Dakota. 
 
 Minnesota. 
 
 
 
 Average 
 
 hours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 hours 
 per 
 acre. 
 
 Grand 
 
 Forks 
 
 County. 
 
 Morton 
 County. 
 
 Spink 
 County. 
 
 Clay 
 County. 
 
 Traverse 
 County. 
 
 Total. 
 
 
 Man. Horse. 
 
 
 Fat ms. 
 
 1 
 
 15 
 
 14 
 
 3 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 410 
 3,987 
 2,829 
 
 719 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 1 
 34 
 54 
 39 
 21 
 4 
 2 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 410 
 8,330 
 10, S89 
 7,064 
 3,578 
 385 
 180 
 
 3.6 
 5.1 
 
 13 4 
 
 4to6... 
 
 2 
 6 
 12 
 7 
 2 
 1 
 
 473 
 
 716 
 
 1,581 
 
 1,055 
 
 225 
 
 80 
 
 15 
 13 
 1 
 2 
 
 3,350 
 
 2, 880 
 
 75 
 
 360 
 
 2 
 10 
 10 
 
 8 
 
 520 
 2,494 
 2,267 
 1,200 
 
 
 
 
 6to8... 
 StolO.. 
 10 to 12.. 
 
 11 
 13 
 
 1,970 
 
 2,422 
 
 aa3 
 
 6. 9 20! 6 
 
 8. 7 25. 5 
 
 12tol4 
 
 
 
 
 2 160 
 
 
 14tol6.. 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 100 
 
 14 6 35 
 
 I6I0IS.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 18to20.. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 51 
 
 1 
 
 51 
 
 19 1 45 8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total. 
 
 33 
 
 7,945 
 
 30 
 
 4,130 
 
 31 6,665 
 
 31 
 
 6,581 
 
 34 5,566 
 
 159 
 
 30,887 
 
 7.4 
 
 22.1 
 
 Table XIV. — Variation in labor requirement per acre, winter wheat, 1919 < 201 farms). 
 [Farms using tractors or trucks not included.] 
 
 Range of man- 
 hours per acre. 
 
 Kansas. 
 
 Missouri. 
 
 Ford 
 County. 
 
 Pawnee 
 County. 
 
 Mcl'herson 
 County. 
 
 Saline 
 County. 
 
 Jasper 
 County. 
 
 St. Charles 
 County. 
 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 ^4crr- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 .( (IV- 
 
 agt. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 A cre- 
 age. 
 
 4to6 
 
 3 
 12 
 
 8 
 2 
 
 880 
 3,940 
 2,362 
 
 450 
 
 3 
 13 
 4 
 3 
 
 605 
 3,750 
 1,295 
 
 615 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 6to8 
 
 7 
 8 
 6 
 1 
 
 614 
 965 
 741 
 
 80 
 
 i 1 70 
 5 520 
 
 
 
 
 
 StolO 
 
 
 
 
 
 10tol2 
 
 1 
 2 
 4 
 4 
 2 
 
 40 
 245 
 
 295 
 175 
 
 170 
 
 
 
 
 
 12tol4 
 
 
 
 3 
 5 
 7 
 4 
 2 
 1 
 3 
 
 °47 
 
 14tol6 
 
 
 
 
 6 
 5 
 6 
 3 
 
 711 
 511 
 
 457 
 240 
 
 514 
 
 16tol8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 481 
 
 18to20 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 229 
 
 20 to 22 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 88 
 
 22to24... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 55 
 
 24 to 26.... 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 65 
 
 
 
 164 
 
 26to28 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 56 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total 
 
 25 7, 632 
 
 23 
 
 6,265 
 
 22 
 
 2,400 
 
 20 
 
 1,580 
 
 22 
 
 1,975 
 
 25 
 
 1,778 
 
28 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table XIY. — Variation in labor requirements per acre, spring wheat, 1919 {201 farms)- 
 
 Contmued. 
 
 Range of man-hours 
 
 Nebraska. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Average hours 
 per acre. 
 
 
 Phelps County. 
 
 Saline County. 
 
 Keith County. 
 
 Man. 
 
 Horse. 
 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 
 
 
 
 4 to 6 
 
 1 
 4 
 16 
 5 
 2 
 
 120 
 523 
 2,361 
 495 
 245 
 
 
 
 
 
 7 
 
 41 
 
 41 
 
 22 
 
 17 
 
 24 
 
 22 
 
 14 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 1,605 
 
 9,402 
 
 7,503 
 
 2,867 
 
 1.280 
 
 2,007 
 
 1,360 
 
 976 
 
 402 
 
 55 
 
 229 
 
 56 
 
 5.4 
 6.9 
 9.0 
 10.8 
 12.8 
 15.2 
 16.7 
 18.7 
 20.5 
 23.8 
 24.6 
 27.4 
 
 15.9 
 
 fi to8 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 505 
 
 19.1 
 
 8 to 10 
 
 
 
 22.9 
 
 10tol2 
 
 3 
 8 
 8 
 6 
 2 
 1 
 
 171 
 403 
 447 
 193 
 120 
 74 
 
 2 
 1 
 1 
 
 355 
 60 
 40 
 
 26.2 
 
 12tol4 
 
 30.7 
 
 14 to lfi 
 
 36.1 
 
 16 to 18 
 
 
 
 37.0 
 
 I8to20 . 
 
 
 
 
 
 41.5 
 
 20 to 22 
 
 
 
 
 
 44.9 
 
 22 to 24 
 
 
 
 
 
 47.0 
 
 21 to 26 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 44.2 
 
 26 to 28 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 61.6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Total 
 
 28 
 
 3,744 
 
 28 
 
 1,408 
 
 8 
 
 960 
 
 201 
 
 27,742 
 
 10.0 
 
 24.8 
 
 
 
 In the winter-wheat areas each labor group from 6 to 20 hours per 
 acre was well represented by farms in one or more of the counties 
 visited. None of these farms reported less than 4 man-hours per 
 acre, and the average for the 4 to 6 hour group was 5.4 hours. Like- 
 wise, few of the farms reported more than 20 hours per acre, although 
 two farms with small acreages were in the 26 to 28 hour class. In 
 the winter-wheat area the majority of farmers in the three Kansas 
 counties and Phelps County, Nebr., reported comparatively low 
 hours of labor per acre. The farmers in Saline County, Nebr., and 
 Jasper and St. Charles Counties, Mo., reported comparatively high 
 hours of labor, while those in Saline County, Mo., were fairly well 
 distributed in all groups from 8 to 20 hours per acre. In Keith 
 County, Nebr., but eight of the total farms were included in this tab- 
 ulation because of the extensive use of tractors and employment of 
 contract labor. 
 
 SUMMARY OF LABOR PRACTICES. 
 
 As an indication of variations in amount of labor expended per 
 acre, a summary of labor practices is given in Tables XV to XIX 
 inclusive. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 29 
 
 Table XV. — Summary of labor practices in the Dakota*, spring uheal, 1919. 
 
 
 Grand Forks Count v. 
 N. Dak. 
 
 Morton County, N 
 
 .Dak. 
 
 Spink County, S. 
 
 Dak. 
 
 Practice. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 1 
 
 Average 
 
 hours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 1 
 
 A verage 
 
 hours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Reo- Acre- 
 ords. age. 1 
 
 A verage 
 
 hours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 
 Per 
 
 cert. 
 72 
 100 
 
 s 
 67 
 
 Per 
 
 cent. 
 
 8 
 
 91 
 
 5 
 
 26 
 
 Man. 
 9.4 
 1.7 
 1.4 
 1.0 
 
 Horse. 
 
 21.8 
 
 9.0 
 
 4.2 
 
 Per 
 
 cent. 
 
 67 
 
 85 
 
 13 
 
 77 
 
 5 
 
 90 
 
 38 
 
 10 
 
 33 
 
 90 
 
 95 
 
 100 
 
 Per 
 
 cent. 
 8 
 68 
 11 
 31 
 11 
 82 
 36 
 10 
 34 
 90 
 94 
 100 
 
 Man. 
 10.9 
 2.4 
 1.1 
 1.3 
 .4 
 .8 
 
 .0 
 
 .6 
 .1 
 .3 
 .1 
 .6 
 
 Horse. 
 
 20.1 
 12.0 
 
 5. 5 
 
 3.2 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.9 
 
 .2 
 
 2.4 
 
 Per 
 cert. 
 72 
 98 
 1.-. 
 7s 
 
 •J 
 98 
 42 
 
 5 
 
 IS 
 68 
 7S 
 100 
 
 5 
 82 
 
 8 
 2.'. 
 
 2 
 85 
 22 
 85 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 
 7 
 60 
 It 
 25 
 
 .3 
 94 
 37 
 18 
 25 
 68 
 71 
 97 
 
 3 
 
 68 
 10 
 20 
 
 2 
 79 
 27 
 81 
 
 [Man. 
 
 11.2 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.0 
 
 .8 
 
 . 5 
 
 .3 
 
 .2 
 
 .4 
 
 .1 
 
 .2 
 
 .1 
 
 .6 
 
 1.2 
 
 .7 
 
 1.1 
 
 2.7 
 
 2.4 
 
 .9 
 
 .1 
 
 1.0 
 
 Horse. 
 
 27.5 
 
 Plow 
 
 10.8 
 
 
 
 Disk 2 
 
 3.8 
 
 
 
 
 69 
 21 
 21 
 38 
 77 
 82 
 100 
 
 65 
 16 
 8 
 37 
 74 
 71 
 100 
 
 .4 
 .2 
 .4 
 .1 
 .3 
 .1 
 .5 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.0 
 
 1.9 
 
 .2 
 
 2.0 
 
 1.7 
 
 Harro \v aft er drill ( spike ) . 
 Roll 
 
 1.2 
 1.9 
 
 
 .2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2.6 
 
 
 
 Cut 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 .6 
 
 2.5 
 
 is 
 
 10 
 
 .7 
 
 2.7 
 
 2.8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 90 
 
 90 
 
 "2.' 5' 
 
 4.3 
 
 4.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.3 
 
 Shock 
 
 100 
 33 
 100 
 
 100 
 36 
 100 
 
 .7 
 .1 
 (<) 
 
 
 18 
 8 
 5 
 13 
 97 
 87 
 
 90 
 
 13 
 
 9 
 3 
 3 
 
 8 
 « 97 
 "92 
 
 93 
 
 7 
 
 .7 
 .2 
 1.3 
 1.6 
 .4 
 .2 
 
 .7 
 
 .2 
 
 2.6 
 1.9 
 
 .4 
 
 1.5 
 
 .5 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.9 
 
 Stack . . . 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 25 
 
 SO 
 
 Sll 
 
 56 
 
 19 
 50 
 
 50 
 
 50 
 
 .3 
 
 .6 
 
 .8 
 .7 
 
 
 
 67 
 69 
 67 
 
 632 
 35 
 65 
 
 . 5 
 
 .7 
 .5 
 
 .9 
 2.1 
 1.4 
 
 1.1 
 
 Haul to market (from 
 
 1.6 
 
 Haul to market (from 
 
 1.5 
 
 
 
 1 Thrashing and hauling percentages arc based upon bushels. 
 
 a Disking was done 1.3 times in Grand Forks County, 1.2 times in Morton County, and 1.1 times in 
 Spink County. 
 
 3 Harrowing was done 1.5 times in Grand Forks County, 1.8 times in Morton County, and 1.1 times in 
 Spink County. 
 
 4 Contract. 
 
 a Some grain was thrashed into bins. 
 
 Table XVI. — Summary of labor practices 
 
 in Minnesota, spring wheat, 1919. 
 
 
 Clay County. 
 
 Traverse County. 
 
 Practice. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Acre- 
 age. 1 
 
 A verage hours 
 per acre. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 A ore- 
 are. 1 
 
 Average hours 
 per acre. 
 
 
 Per cent. 
 77 
 85 
 26 
 69 
 10 
 85 
 10 
 
 5 
 10 
 51 
 
 5 
 
 8 
 44 
 79 
 44 
 100 
 97 
 
 5 
 100 
 46 
 100 
 
 Percent. 
 
 9 
 
 48 
 41 
 26 
 
 5 
 59 
 13 
 
 3 
 
 28 
 38 
 
 3 
 
 4 
 
 50 
 
 82 
 
 36 
 
 100 
 
 88 
 
 12 
 
 100 
 
 38 
 
 100 
 
 Man. 
 
 10.2 
 
 2.2 
 
 1.1 
 
 1.1 
 
 .6 
 
 .4 
 
 .2 
 
 .8 
 
 .5 
 
 .2 
 
 .4 
 
 .s 
 
 .1 
 
 .2 
 .1 
 .6 
 .7 
 
 1.7 
 .9 
 .2 
 
 1.4 
 
 Horse. 
 31.4 
 11.2 
 
 4.5 
 
 l.s 
 
 3.2 
 
 Percent. 
 
 76 
 93 
 12 
 43 
 
 5 
 95 
 
 5 
 
 Percent. 
 11 
 82 
 11 
 14 
 
 3 
 93 
 
 7 
 
 Man . 
 
 11.0 
 
 2.2 
 
 1.7 
 
 1.5 
 
 .6 
 
 .5 
 
 .2 
 
 Horse. 
 29.8 
 
 Plow 
 
 11.3 
 
 
 
 Disk « 
 
 6.0 
 
 
 
 
 2.1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.0 
 
 52 
 
 57 
 
 .3 | 1.2 
 
 
 
 Roll 
 
 3.1 
 .2 
 
 2.4 
 
 2.9 
 
 2.5 
 
 2 
 17 
 64 
 79 
 
 100 
 
 95 
 
 7 
 
 100 
 52 
 86 
 14 
 14 
 90 
 90 
 24 
 
 1 
 
 16 
 61 
 
 75 
 
 100 
 
 92 
 
 8 
 
 100 
 
 47 
 
 '.il 
 
 10 
 
 9 
 
 86 
 86 
 14 
 
 .5 
 
 .1 
 .3 
 .1 
 .6 
 .7 
 
 1.1 
 .9 
 .2 
 
 1.3 
 
 2.8 
 .9 
 .4 
 
 1.0 
 .7 
 
 2.0 
 
 
 .2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2.4 
 
 Cut 
 
 2.9 
 
 
 
 Shock 
 
 
 
 
 
 2.6 
 
 
 3.8 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 74 
 74 
 
 63 
 63 
 37 
 
 .3 
 .8 
 .4 
 
 .6 
 1.7 
 .8 
 
 . 7 
 
 Haul to market (from granary) 
 
 Haul to market (from machine) 
 
 2.0 
 1.3 
 
 1 Thrashing and hauling percentage are based upon bushels. 
 
 J Disking was done 1.2 times in Clav County and 1.3 times in Traverse County. 
 
 8 Harrowing was done 1.6 times in Clav County and 1.7 times in Traverse County. 
 
30 BULLETIN 943, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table XVII. — Summary of labor practices in Kansas, winter reheat, 1919. 
 
 i Thrashing and hauling percentages are based upon bushels. 
 
 2 Disking was done 1.5 times in Ford County, 1.8 times in Pawnee County, and 1.2 times in McPherson 
 County. 
 
 3 Harrowing was done 1.1 times in Ford County, 1.2 times in Pawnee County, and 2.1 times in McPherson 
 County. 
 
 < Contract. 
 
 " Some grain thrashed into the bins. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 31 
 
 Table XVIII. — Summary of labor practices in Missouri, winter wheat, 1919. 
 
 
 
 Saline County. 
 
 
 Jasper 
 
 County. 
 
 St 
 
 Charl 
 
 es ( onnty. 
 
 Practice. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Acre- 
 age.' 
 
 Average 
 
 hours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Acre- 
 age.' 
 
 Average 
 
 hours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Acre- 
 age.! 
 
 Average 
 
 iours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Haul and fill gullies 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 
 Man. 
 
 Horse. 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 
 Man 
 
 Horse. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent. 
 
 32 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 
 Man. 
 1.4 
 
 Horse. 
 2.3 
 
 Cut stalks 
 
 3 
 24 
 14 
 79 
 10 
 
 3 
 69 
 
 7 
 10 
 
 7 
 93 
 
 5 
 2 
 
 8 
 55 
 13 
 
 3 
 43 
 
 4 
 
 8 
 
 7 
 
 86 
 
 0.7 
 8.9 
 1.8 
 3.2 
 1.2 
 
 . 7 
 1.3 
 1.2 
 
 .9 
 1.3 
 1.1 
 
 1.4 
 12.0 
 
 7.0 
 11.8 
 
 2.1 
 5.3 
 
 1.6 
 7.2 
 4.2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 60 
 3 
 93 
 17 
 
 4 
 
 2 
 
 *4 
 
 12. 
 
 14.1 
 1.2 
 3.6 
 2.3 
 
 23.0 
 4.8 
 12.5 
 
 68 
 
 7 
 
 11.0 
 
 19 2 
 
 Disk before plow 
 
 
 Plow 
 
 82 
 32 
 
 84 
 
 32 
 
 8 
 
 5 
 
 54 
 23 
 
 21 
 16 
 6 
 5 
 
 4.8 
 1.7 
 
 1.7 
 1.9 
 .8 
 .8 
 
 15 7 
 
 Plow (tractor ) 
 
 
 Plow land with cultiva- 
 tor 
 
 3.5 
 
 Disk 2 
 
 77 
 3 
 13 
 
 51 
 5 
 10 
 
 1.4 
 
 .7 
 .8 
 
 5.4 
 3.2 
 
 6.8 
 
 Disk (tractor) 
 
 
 Floating 
 
 3.7 
 
 
 
 Harrow-spike (horse) 3 .. 
 
 97 
 3 
 3 
 
 13 
 
 99 
 3 
 3 
 
 16 
 
 1.4 
 .3 
 
 .4 
 .8 
 
 5. 6 
 
 "T<v 
 
 2.6 
 
 97 
 5 
 
 M 
 5 
 
 1.6 
 .3 
 
 .'). X 
 
 Harrow after drill 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Roll 
 
 14 
 
 9 
 
 .8 
 
 2.0 
 
 37 
 13 
 
 27 
 
 .9 
 .3 
 
 2.8 
 
 Ditch 
 
 .6 
 
 
 3 
 41 
 55 
 72 
 
 100 
 
 97 
 
 7 
 
 100 
 76 
 10 
 90 
 10 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 86 
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 39 
 
 55 
 
 76 
 
 100 
 
 91 
 
 9 
 
 100 
 
 77 
 
 7 
 
 94 
 
 6 
 
 14 
 
 14 
 
 86 
 
 1.0 
 
 .1 
 
 .2 
 
 .2 
 
 .9 
 
 1.3 
 
 1.7 
 
 2.3 
 
 ■i'.i 
 
 4.9 
 
 2.6 
 
 .4 
 
 1.1 
 
 1.1 
 
 2.0 
 .2 
 
 2.9 
 5.2 
 
 97 
 37 
 100 
 3 
 100 
 100 
 
 99 
 34 
 100 
 6 
 100 
 100 
 
 .3 
 .2 
 .2 
 .2 
 .9 
 .9 
 
 .5 
 
 .4 
 
 2.8 
 3.8 
 
 
 
 24 
 66 
 32 
 
 100 
 92 
 11 
 
 100 
 87 
 
 19 
 
 62 
 24 
 100 
 
 87 
 
 13 
 
 100 
 
 87 
 
 .1 
 
 .2 
 
 .2 
 
 1.0 
 
 1.0 
 
 1.2 
 
 2.1 
 
 .4 
 
 .2 
 
 
 
 Treat seed 
 
 
 Cut 
 
 2.9 
 3.8 
 
 Cut (tractor) 
 
 
 Shock 
 
 "'i'o' 
 
 6.0 
 
 .4 
 
 2.2 
 
 2.3 
 
 100 
 83 
 23 
 80 
 23 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 37 
 
 100 
 
 87 
 20 
 81 
 19 
 79 
 
 79 
 
 21 
 
 2.0 
 
 .2 
 
 3.4 
 
 3.3 
 
 1.7 
 .9 
 
 2.2 
 
 1.6 
 
 3.9 
 4.0 
 
 
 
 
 Stack 
 
 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 3.4 
 
 4.1 
 
 
 
 
 1.2 
 4.3 
 3.1 
 
 66 
 71 
 76 
 
 31 
 38 
 62 
 
 .9 
 1.9 
 
 2.0 
 
 .6 
 
 Haul to market (from 
 
 3.6 
 
 Haul to market (from 
 
 2.9 
 
 
 
 1 Thrashing and hauling percentages are based upon bushels. 
 
 2 Disking was done 1.3 times in Saline County, 1.2 times in Jasper County, and 1.4 times in St. Charles 
 County. 
 
 3 Harrowing was done 1.6 times in Saline County, 2.4 times in Jasper County, and 1.8 times in St. Charles 
 County. 
 
 1 Less than one-half of 1 per cent. 
 
32 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table XIX. — Summary of labor -practices in Nebraska, tvinter tvheat, 1919. 
 
 
 l'helps County. 
 
 Saline County. 
 
 Keith County. 
 
 Practice. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Acre- 
 age, i 
 
 Average 
 
 hours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Acre- 
 age, i 
 
 Average 
 
 hours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Rec- 
 ords. 
 
 Acre- 
 age, i 
 
 Average 
 
 hours per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Harrow stalks 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 53 
 20 
 70 
 100 
 7 
 
 3 
 
 Per 
 
 cent. 
 
 18 
 5 
 7 
 
 61 
 7 
 
 1 
 
 Man. 
 0.4 
 
 .6 
 9.1 
 2.3 
 
 .9 
 
 1.9 
 
 Horse 
 
 1.8 
 
 1.7 
 
 21.3 
 
 9.5 
 
 7.6 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 
 Man. 
 
 Horse 
 
 Per 
 cent. 
 
 Per 
 
 cent. 
 
 Man. 
 
 Horse. 
 
 Cut stalks 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 •" 
 
 
 80 
 89 
 17 
 
 17 
 74 
 24 
 
 8.5 
 2.9 
 1.3 
 
 23.8 
 11.2 
 
 22 
 26 
 
 48 
 
 4 
 39 
 
 4 
 48 
 30 
 26 
 
 4 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 57 
 
 1 
 12 
 
 1 
 23 
 
 40 
 
 14 
 
 1 
 
 12.7 
 
 3.6 
 
 .9 
 
 1.4 
 .4 
 
 .4 
 2.3 
 .8 
 .5 
 .4 
 
 25.4 
 13.7 
 
 Plow 
 
 
 Plow land with culti- 
 vator 
 
 1 4 
 
 Break corn stalks 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 6 
 
 Break corn stalks (trac- 
 tor) 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Disk 2 
 
 33 
 
 16 
 
 .8 
 
 3.6 
 
 69 
 
 56 
 
 1.4 
 
 5.8 
 
 9.7 
 
 Disk (tractor) 
 
 Harrow (spike) 3 
 
 Harrow (spike ) (tractor) . 
 
 100 
 
 65 
 
 .6 
 
 2.5 
 
 100 
 
 99 
 
 .7 
 
 2.8 
 
 1.9 
 
 Harrow after drill 
 
 
 
 
 
 3 
 
 6 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 .4 
 .8 
 
 1.6 
 3.4 
 
 
 Roll 
 
 3 
 
 30 
 17 
 30 
 10 
 97 
 3 
 93 
 7 
 3 
 
 .2 
 
 24 
 21 
 23 
 
 8 
 97 
 
 3 
 90 
 
 9 
 
 1 
 
 .4 
 
 .1 
 
 . 1 
 .1 
 .1 
 1.1 
 .6 
 .7 
 1.2 
 3.5 
 
 1.6 
 
 .1 
 .2 
 
 3.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 Apply grass-hopper poi- 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 9 
 
 54 
 
 3 
 
 100 
 
 6 
 
 54 
 
 3 
 
 100 
 
 .2 
 .2 
 .1 
 .9 
 
 .4 
 3.6 
 
 13 
 52 
 35 
 70 
 30 
 39 
 30 
 35 
 4 
 65 
 26 
 22 
 52 
 52 
 78 
 
 78 
 
 35 
 
 22 
 60 
 31 
 46 
 54 
 32 
 45 
 15 
 
 8 
 71 
 36 
 
 9 
 
 70 
 30 
 69 
 
 69 
 
 31 
 
 .1 
 .1 
 .1 
 1.2 
 
 .7 
 
 .8 
 
 .9 
 
 2.3 
 
 2.2 
 
 1.3 
 
 .3 
 
 2.8 
 
 2.6 
 
 1.3 
 
 .8 
 
 2.2 
 
 .6 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 Drill seed 
 
 3 3 
 
 Drill seed (tractor) 
 
 
 Cut 
 
 3.5 
 5.0 
 
 100 
 3 
 
 93 
 
 7 
 
 .9 
 1.2 
 
 3.9 
 
 3 3 
 
 
 
 Head and stack 
 
 3.9 
 
 Head and stack (tractor) 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.6 
 
 Shock 
 
 99 
 37 
 37 
 63 
 40 
 83 
 
 83 
 
 60 
 
 99 
 38 
 28 
 73 
 27 
 59 
 
 59 
 
 41 
 
 1.0 
 .2 
 2.6 
 1.9 
 .9 
 .3 
 
 1.0 
 
 .8 
 
 2.9 
 
 2.5 
 
 .5 
 2.0 
 1.6 
 
 100 
 46 
 
 6 
 94 
 
 6 
 89 
 
 89 
 
 46 
 
 96 
 42 
 
 2 
 98 
 
 2 
 66 
 
 66 
 
 34 
 
 1.6 
 .2 
 4.2 
 3.5 
 1.4 
 .8 
 
 1.5 
 
 1.4 
 
 4.8 
 5.0 
 
 1.2 
 
 3.0 
 
 2.5 
 
 
 
 
 Stack 
 
 2 7 
 
 Shock thrash 
 
 3.3 
 
 
 
 
 1.3 
 
 Haul to market (from 
 granary) 
 
 Haul to market (from 
 machine) 
 
 4.6 
 .8 
 
 
 
 1 Thrashing and hauling percentage are based upon bushels. 
 
 2 Disking was done 1.0 time in Phelps County, 1.4 times in Saline County, and 2.1 times in Keith County. 
 8 Harrowing was done 1.9 times in Phelps County, 1.9 times in Saline County, and 1.3 times in Keith 
 
 County. 
 
 Plowing is an operation that requires a large amount of power 
 and labor as compared with other farm operations. In the spring- 
 wheat area 86 per cent of the total wheat acreage was plowed, and 
 of this 20 per cent was plowed with tractor power. The remaining 
 14 per cent of the wheat acreage was corn stubble and potato land 
 which was not plowed but usually disk-harrowed instead. Clay 
 County, Minn., was foremost in the use of the tractor for plowing, 
 41 per cent of the acreage being tractor-plowed in this area. In the 
 various winter-wheat areas visited a wide variation existed in the 
 percentage of total wheat acreage plowed. In Pawnee and Ford 
 Counties, Kans., but 21 and 23 per cent, respectively, of the wheat 
 land was plowed, while in the other districts from 60 to 98 per cent 
 was plowed. The tractor was extensively used in St. Charles County, 
 Mo., where 24 per cent of the land was plowed by tractor power. 
 In Ford, Pawnee, and McPherson Counties the lister was substituted 
 
Bui. 943, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Plate I. 
 
 
 V 
 
 3S*. 
 
 y? 
 
 3 
 
Bui. 943, U. S. Dept. of Agriculture. 
 
 Plate II. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 33 
 
 for the plow on a part of the wheat acreage. (See fig. 8.) In Ford 
 County 31 per cent of the wheat area was listed; in Pawnee County 
 50 per cent; and in McPherson County 19 per cent of the land was 
 broken in this manner. After listing a "ridge buster," or "sled," 
 as it is commonly called, was used for the purpose of tearing down 
 the ridges or rows left by the lister. In some of the areas a part of 
 the corn stubble land was prepared for seeding by running over it 
 with a two-horse disk cultivator. In St. Charles County, Mo., 
 21 per cent of the wheat acreage was gone over with the disk culti- 
 vator. The disk harrow was extensively used in some areas for all 
 preparation prior to drilling. On some farms a part of the grain 
 stubble and corn land received no preparation, but was seeded with 
 
 Fig. 8.— Preparation of land for wheat with the one-row lister. 
 
 a disk drill, which served the purposes of preparing the land and 
 seeding in one operation. (See fig. 9.) 
 
 The spike-tooth harrow was used extensively in both spring and 
 winter wheat areas. In the spring-wheat areas 76 per cent of the 
 entire acreage was spike-harrowed before seeding, and 30 per cent 
 of this acreage was harrowed again after seeding. The spike-tooth 
 harrow was also commonly used in the winter-wheat areas, but none 
 of this work was reported after seeding. 
 
 In the spring-wheat districts 83 per cent of the acreage was cut 
 with a binder and 17 per cent was headed. (See PL I.) Of the 
 total acreage harvested, 6 per cent was cut with tractor power. All 
 work with the header was reported from Morton County, N. Dak., 
 and Spink County, S. Dak. In these two areas 88 and 20 per cent, 
 respectively, of the total acreage was headed. In the winter-wheat 
 
34 BULLETIN 943, IT. -S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 districts 66 per cent of the total wheat acreage was harvested with 
 the binder and 34 per cent was headed. Tractor power was used 
 in harvesting grain in all areas excepting Jasper County, Mo. Of 
 the winter-wheat acreage 13 per cent was cut with tractor power. 
 Heading was found to be most common in Ford and Pawnee Counties, 
 Kans. About 64 per cent of the Ford County acreage and 78 per 
 cent of the Pawnee County acreage was harvested with the header 
 (see PI. II). 
 
 In both spring and winter wheat regions most of the bundle grain 
 was shock thrashed. The headed grain was stacked before thrash- 
 ing. The grain was either hauled direct from the thrashing machine 
 to local elevators and railroad cars or stored on the farm. In some 
 localities srain elevators were soon filled, railroad cars were not 
 
 Fig. 9. — Disking stubble land preparatory to drilling wheat without further preparation. 
 
 available at thrashing time, and adequate storage facilities were not 
 available on the farm, so that a part of the wheat was often dumped 
 in piles on the ground until marketing and storage facilities became 
 available. 
 
 In every case all labor and expenses incident to storing and hauling 
 grain to market have been included in the cost of production. 
 
 LABOR RATES. 
 
 Man-labor rate. — The man-labor rates, as shown in Table XX, 
 are based on prevailing month and day wages paid for farm labor 
 at the time the work was done, including board, when furnished. 
 The labor of the farmer and any members of his family was charged 
 at the same rate. The labor prior to harvesting was mainly per- 
 formed by the farmer, with the aid of month hands. During the 
 harvest period, however, because of the scarcity of harvest hands 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 35 
 
 and the transient character of labor employed, practically all labor 
 was hired on a day basis at a much higher wage. For this reason 
 different rates have been used for seed-bed preparation and seeding 
 and for harvesting and marketing. The wage paid was mainly 
 governed by the competition for farm labor at the time the work 
 was done; it will be noted that there is considerable variation in 
 the rates used in the several districts visited. 
 
 Horse-labor rate. — The horse-labor rates, as shown in Table XX, are 
 based partially on the prevailing charge for team work in the regions 
 visited, and partially on the cost of horse labor as obtained from 
 detailed cost records which were available for some of the States in 
 which this investigation was made. It will be noted that the horse- 
 labor rate in Ford County, Kans., was higher than in other districts 
 visited; tins was due to partial crop failures in 1918 and 1919, which 
 resulted in a relatively high cost of grain and roughage. 
 
 Table XX. — yfan and horse labor rates per hour, spring and winter wheat, 1919 {481 
 
 farms). 
 
 State and county. 
 
 Seed-bed preparation 
 and seeding. 
 
 Harvesting and 
 marketing. 
 
 Man rate. Horse rate. 
 
 Man rate. Horse rate. 
 
 SPRING-WHEAT AREAS. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 WINTER-WHEAT AREAS 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County 
 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County 
 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 $0.35 
 .35 
 
 .35 
 .35 
 
 .35 
 .30 
 .35 
 
 .30 
 .30 
 .25 
 
 .35 
 .35 
 .35 
 
 mi 60 
 .60 
 
 .60 
 
 .75 
 
 .60 
 .50 
 .55 
 
 .65 
 .70 
 .80 
 
 $0.20 
 .20 
 
 .25 
 .18 
 .20 
 
 • IS 
 
 • is 
 .18 
 
 .20 
 .20 
 .20 
 
 AVERAGE LABOR COST PER ACRE. 
 
 The labor cost, as shown in Table XXI, includes all man-and- 
 horse labor expended by the farmer and any contract labor hired. 
 All work hi which the farmer's men and horses had no part has 
 been recorded as contract labor. This includes a small amount of 
 plowing for which the farmer paid a stipulated sum per acre for 
 man and horses or tractor and plows; a small amount of cleaning 
 seed wheat; a nominal amount of cutting wheat with the gram 
 binder; and some marketing grain, which was usually hauled with 
 a truck at a fixed charge per bushel per mile hauled. The relatively 
 
36 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 high charge for contract labor in Keith County, Nebr., was largely 
 due to the great amount of grain hauled to market by contract 
 labor, this being 66 per cent of all that was produced. 
 
 In some districts considerable work was done with tractors. 
 Unless contract work, the man hours for operating the tractor were 
 included under labor costs; but obviously no cost for horse labor 
 would occur. The maintenance and upkeep cost of the tractor have 
 been charged under machinery costs and not as hours of tractor 
 labor. 
 
 The great variations in average labor costs, by counties, as shown 
 in Table XXI, are due to the variation in man and horse labor rates 
 used in calculating labor costs, and to the variations in amounts of 
 labor devoted to raising an acre of wheat. As previously shown, 
 considerable variation existed in the average labor rates determined 
 for various counties. However, it does not necessarily follow that 
 those counties having the higher labor rates had the higher total 
 labor costs per acre. 
 
 Table XXI. — Average cost per acre of labor, by counties, spring and winter wheat, 1910 
 
 ( '+S1 farms) . 
 
 Region. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks Counts- 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 All spring wheat . . 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County . . 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County . . 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 All winter wheat . . 
 
 Direct 
 man-and- 
 
 horse 
 labor cost 
 
 $6.18 
 8.41 
 
 7.26 
 8.87 
 
 9.62 
 6.78 
 10.70 
 
 11.19 
 13.41 
 12.37 
 
 8.99 
 14.72 
 7.69 
 
 Contract 
 labor cost. 
 
 .01 
 1.50 
 
 Total 
 cost. 
 
 S6.29 
 
 8.47 
 
 6.79 
 
 7.29 
 8.90 
 
 9.66 
 6.80 
 10.72 
 
 11.42 
 13.63 
 12.37 
 
 8.99 
 
 14.73 
 9.19 
 
 MATERIALS. 
 
 SEED. 
 
 The most common variety of seed wheat for the spring-wheat 
 districts was the Marquis, and for the winter-wheat districts the 
 Turkey Red. An average of approximately 3.5 per cent of the 
 winter-wheat acreage was reseeded, while no reseeding was required 
 for spring wheat. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 37 
 
 The rate of application is the average for one seeding only, but the 
 cost per acre includes the value of the seed used on the reseeded 
 acreage. For this reason, and also because the acre cost for seed 
 is a weighted average, the average amount applied per acre multi- 
 plied by the average price per bushel will not equal the cost per 
 acre. 
 
 The value of seed wheat per bushel is an average. Some men bought 
 high-grade recleaned seed and some used their own supply for 
 planting. The figures given include the value of any materials used 
 for seed treatment. All farm-grown seed was charged at its farm 
 sale value at planting time. 
 
 The average rate of seeding and the average price per bushel were 
 somewhat less for the winter wheat than for the spring wheat, with 
 a correspondingly lower cost per acre for winter wheat. (See Table 
 XXI.) 
 
 BINDER TWINE. 
 
 Because of the light straw, the average binder-twine requirements 
 per acre were appreciably less in the spring- wheat than in the winter- 
 wheat districts. 
 
 In three spring-wheat and in four whiter-wheat districts the entire 
 acreage was cut with a binder. Principally because of the short 
 straw hi Morton County, N. Dak., 90 per cent of the acreage 
 was cut with a header. The average price paid for twine varied 
 from 22 cents per pound in Clay County, Minn., to 29 cents in 
 Grand Forks County, N. Dak., and the average for all winter wheat 
 was 1 cent per pound higher than for all spring wheat. (See Table 
 XXIII.) 
 
 Table XXII. — Seed requirements per acre, spring and winter wheat, 1919 (481 farms). 
 
 State and county. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks Comity. 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 All spring wheat. 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County. 
 Missouri : 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County. 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 Per cent 
 of acreage 
 re-seeded. 
 
 All winter wheat. 
 
 4.4 
 9.8 
 1.1 
 
 .2 
 
 1. 1 
 
 Rate of 
 applica- 
 tion. 
 
 Bushel*. 
 1.39 
 1.23 
 
 1.36 
 1.41 
 
 .77 
 .95 
 1.06 
 
 1.30 
 1.23 
 1.14 
 
 1.04 
 1.44 
 .92 
 
 Price per 
 bushel. 
 
 $2.44 
 2.41 
 
 2.44 
 2.41 
 
 2.40 
 
 2.23 
 2.12 
 1.98 
 
 2.10 
 2.05 
 2.21 
 
 2.06 
 2.09 
 2.05 
 
 Average 
 
 cost per 
 
 acre. 
 
 $3.39 
 2.98 
 
 2.78 
 
 3.45 
 3.38 
 
 3.21 
 
 1.79 
 2.19 
 2.36 
 
 2.73 
 2.52 
 2.58 
 
 2.13 
 
 2.99 
 1.72 
 
 2.18 
 
38 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table XXIII. — Binder twine requirements, spring and winter wheat, 1919 (481 farms). 
 
 State and county. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 All spring wheat . . 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County.. 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper Countv 
 
 St. Charles Comity.. 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 All winter wheat.. 
 
 Per cent 
 of 
 
 acreage 
 cut with 
 
 binder. 
 
 Amount 
 
 used per 
 
 acre. 
 
 100 
 
 10 
 
 100 
 100 
 
 36 
 22 
 
 98 
 
 100 
 100 
 100 
 
 99 
 
 100 
 77 
 
 Pounds. 
 1.91 
 1.32 
 
 1.98 
 
 2.21 
 . 2.00 
 
 3.49 
 3.23 
 2.80 
 
 2.85 
 2.32 
 2.26 
 
 2.68 
 3.69 
 2.31 
 
 Cost per 
 pound. 
 
 $0.29 
 .25 
 
 .25 
 
 Cost per 
 acre. 
 
 .50 
 
 .51 
 
 MANURE AND STRAW. 
 
 When manure is applied to a particular crop, other crops following 
 in the rotation get part of the henefit. This cost then should he 
 distributed among the different crops grown. When applied directly 
 to wheat, 50 per cent of the estimated value was charged; when 
 applied to the crop immediately preceding, 30 per cent was charged; 
 and when two other crops preceded, 20 per cent was charged to the 
 wheat. 
 
 The largest number of farmers reporting the use of manure (80 
 per cent) was for Saline County, Nebr., while the smallest number 
 was for Keith County, Nebr. In Ford County, Kans., and Keith 
 County, Nebr., only 1 per cent of the total wheat acreage was 
 manured. Farmers in these counties regard manure and straw of 
 more value for top dressing to conserve moisture and prevent " blow- 
 ing" of the land than as a fertilizer. In these two counties not 
 enough moisture is available to make manure valuable as a fertilizer. 
 
 For the spring-wheat districts 8 per cent of the total wheat acreage 
 received an application of manure and straw, while for the winter 
 wheat only 5 per cent of the total acreage was covered. (See Table 
 XXIV.) 
 
 GREEN MANURE. 
 
 In St. Charles County, Mo., it is a common practice to plow under 
 a certain number of acres of new clover seeding each year. Corn 
 is usually grown on this land for one or two years, followed by wheat 
 for one or two years more. It will be readily seen that this practice 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 39 
 
 results in material benefit to the crops which follow. From each 
 farmer an estimate was obtained relative to the amount of clover 
 seed used and the time required to sow this seed on the average 
 amount of new seeding plowed under each year; also the crops 
 following on this land were noted. With these data available a 
 charge for the value of the clover seed used and the time required 
 to sow it was computed, which amounted to $2.80 per acre. This 
 cost was prorated to the crops receiving benefit. In the case of 
 wheat this charge amounted to $0.33 per acre. 
 
 Table XXIV.- — Straw and manure applied per acre, sprirtg and winter wheat, 1919 
 
 (481 farms). 
 
 State and county. 
 
 Per cent 
 of farmers 
 
 Per cent 
 of total 
 
 reporting. "££ 
 
 covered. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County 
 
 Morton County . 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 All spring wheat. . 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County. . 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline Comity 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County.. 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 All winter wheat.. 
 
 72 
 
 Rate of 
 applica- 
 tion per 
 acre. 
 
 Tom. 
 10. 28 
 6.84 
 
 9.91 
 
 13.67 
 11.41 
 
 10. 53 
 
 8.90 
 9.52 
 6.40 
 
 6.50 
 9.43 
 9.24 
 
 8.23 
 T.st 
 4.95 
 
 7.9s 
 
 Cost per 
 
 acre 
 actually 
 covered. 
 
 $5.09 
 5.66 
 
 6.65 
 
 10.84 
 6.44 
 
 10.77 
 5.41 
 5.38 
 
 5.44 
 7.96 
 6.94 
 
 2.57 
 2.45 
 3.96 
 
 COMMERCIAL FERTILIZER. 
 
 Commercial fertilizer was not used in any of the areas visited 
 except Missouri, and in this State to no appreciable extent except 
 in Jasper County. In this county 97 per cent of the men interviewed 
 used commercial fertilizer on their entire wheat acreage, and 3 per 
 cent used no fertilizer on this crop. The quantity applied averaged 
 100 pounds per acre and the average cost was $42 per ton. 
 
 In St. Charles and Saline Counties commercial fertilizer on wheat 
 was not reported except on one farm in each county, where a very 
 small acreage was fertilized, more as an experiment than as a regular 
 practice. 
 
 GRASSHOPPER CONTROL. 
 
 In Ford County, Kans., much wheat was destroyed by grasshop- 
 pers. To control these pests a mixture in the proportion of about 
 20 pounds of bran, 1 pound of arsenic or Paris green, ^ gallon of 
 
40 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 molasses, and 2 oranges or lemons was used. Some of the poison 
 was furnished gratis by the county, so only such poison as was pur- 
 chased by the farmer is given on the records. Twelve men in Ford 
 County, Kans., and 13 in Phelps County, Nebr., reported the use of 
 grasshopper poison; on these farms this charge was of little impor- 
 tance, and, prorated over the entire acreage surveyed, amounted to 
 but 2 cents per acre in Ford County and 1 cent in Phelps County. 
 
 Table XXV.- — Thrashing practices and costs, spring and winter wheat, 1919 (481 farms). 
 
 State and county. 
 
 Prevailing thrashing practices. 
 
 Thrashing 
 'done from— 
 
 SPRING WHEAT. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County. 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 WINTER WHEAT. 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Shock. 
 Stack. 
 
 Part of crew ' furnished by — 
 
 Thrasherman. 
 
 Shock. 
 
 Shock. 
 Shock. 
 
 /Stack. 
 
 \Shock. 
 
 /Stack. 
 
 Shock. 
 
 McPherson County {shock 
 
 Missouri: 
 
 Pawnee County < 
 
 /Shock. 
 \Shock. 
 
 Shock. 
 
 Shock. 
 
 Saline County 
 
 .Tasper County 
 
 St. Charles County 
 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County {f£g; 
 
 Saline County Shock. 
 
 K -th County fc 
 
 All. 
 
 All 
 
 Field pitchers . 
 
 All 
 
 Field pitchers. 
 All 
 
 Field pitchers. 
 
 All. 
 
 Farmer. 
 
 Ml. 
 All. 
 
 Bundle haulers. 
 
 Bundle haulers. 
 Bundle haulers. 
 All 
 
 All. 
 All. 
 
 All. 
 All. 
 All.. 
 All. 
 All. 
 
 Per cent 
 of pro- 
 duction. 
 
 mo 
 
 1(H) 
 
 57 
 43 
 75 
 25 
 25 
 75 
 
 63 
 37 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 100 
 
 92 
 
 Average 
 rate per 
 bushel. 
 
 cost per 
 acre for 
 
 the 
 region. 
 
 $2.78 
 .43 
 
 1.18 
 1.13 
 
 2.58 
 2.67 
 2.83 
 
 3.37 
 
 1.45 
 1.86 
 
 1.18 
 1.98 
 1.91 
 
 i In every case the thrasherman furnished the crew for operating the separator and engine and the farmer 
 furnished the men and horses for taking care of the thrashed grain. 
 
 THRASHING PRACTICES AND COSTS. 
 
 The main thing which determined the rate per bushel paid for 
 thrashing was the proportion in which the thrashing crew was 
 furnished by the farmer and the thrasherman. (See Table XXV.) 
 In some regions the wheat yields varied so greatly that thrashing 
 was paid for on an hour basis rather than a bushel basis, and of 
 course farms with low yields had a comparatively high thrashing 
 rate per bushel. 
 
 In three of the spring-wheat districts the farmers usually furnished 
 all of the thrashing crew, and the average thrashing rate varied from 
 10 cents per bushel in Morton County, N. Dak., to 13 cents in both 
 of the other two counties. In Grand Forks County, N. Dak., and 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 41 
 
 Spink County, S. Dak., the thrasherman usually furnished the thrash- 
 ing crew, and the average rate for thrashing was 27 cents per bushel 
 in both counties. 
 
 In the Kansas areas the farmers furnished the bundle haulers 
 and teams and the thrasherman furnished field pitchers, where 
 shock thrashing was done; where the grain was thrashed from the 
 stack, the grain pitchers were furnished by the thrasherman. In 
 any case, the crew furnished by the thrasherman did not vary to 
 any marked extent, and the rate per bushel was fairly uniform, 
 being slightly higher for stack thrashing. 
 
 In Saline Count}^, Mo., 63 per cent of the production was thrashed 
 with the farmer's crew and 37 per cent with the thrasherman's crew. 
 The rates were 16 cents and 29 cents a bushel. In the other winter- 
 wheat areas the thrashing crews were furnished by the farmers in 
 nearly every case and the rates averaged from 8 cents to 11 cents a 
 bushel. 
 
 The average cost per acre varied in each region according to yield 
 and rate per bushel. The average acre cost for all winter wheat 
 was 52 cents greater than the average for all spring wheat, but the 
 average bushel cost was 4 cents less for winter wheat. 
 
 USE-COST OF LAND OR LAND RENT. 
 
 An estimate of the value of the land on which wheat was grown 
 was obtained from each farmer visited. The current interest rate 
 on first mortgages was also determined for each district. The result 
 obtained by multiplying the investment in wheat land by the 
 interest rate was used as the charge for use of land on owned farms. 
 If the land was rented on a cash basis the actual cash rent paid per 
 acre was used. If the land was share-rented the value of any items 
 furnished by the landlord, such as seed, twine, thrashing, crop 
 insurance, etc., was charged as a cost to the operator; these items 
 were then deducted from the value at thrashing time of the share 
 of wheat given to the landlord, the difference appearing as the 
 operator's cost for the use of land. The one-half share rent system 
 predominated in the Spring-Wheat Belt, and the one-third share 
 rent system was most common in the Winter- Wheat Belt. Approxi- 
 mately 30 per cent of the spring-wheat acreage was rented on a 
 one-half share basis and 62 per cent of the wheat land was owned 
 by the operator. About 47 per cent of the winter-wheat acreage 
 was one-third share-rented and 42 per cent of the wheat land was 
 owned by the operator. 
 
 On owned farms the market value of the wheat land influenced 
 the land-rent charge. On share-rented land the yield per acre, 
 the share given as rent, and the part of the expenses paid by the 
 landlord are the dominating factors. 
 
42 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE. 
 
 In the spring-wheat areas the interest on investment exceeded 
 the value of share-rent paid, while in the winter-wheat districts the 
 reverse was true. 
 
 Table XXVI. — Use-cost of land per acre, spring and winter wheat, 1919 (481 farms). 
 
 
 Owned land. 
 
 Rented land. 
 
 State and county. 
 
 Value 
 per 
 acre. 
 
 In- 
 terest 
 on in- 
 vest- 
 ment. 
 
 One- 
 half 
 share. 
 
 One- 
 third 
 share. 
 
 Two- 
 fifths 
 share. 
 
 One- 
 fourth 
 share. 
 
 Cash. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 $80 
 
 36 
 
 134 
 
 137 
 
 108 
 
 $4. 79 
 2.16 
 
 8.06 
 
 8.20 
 6.50 
 
 $3.43 
 2.65 
 
 7.50 
 
 3.80 
 4.24 
 
 $4.56 
 2.87 
 
 3.30 
 
 3.31 
 5.55 
 
 
 
 $4.92 
 
 
 
 $1.57 
 3.35 
 
 1.25 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 3.53 
 
 
 
 
 3.00 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 100 
 
 6.00 
 
 4.90 
 
 3.58 
 
 
 2.02 
 
 3.52 
 
 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 55 
 87 
 134 
 
 241 
 135 
 173 
 
 123 
 213 
 92 
 
 3.28 
 5.23 
 8.06 
 
 14.44 
 8.09 
 10. 38 
 
 7.37 
 12. 80 
 5.53 
 
 9.96 
 9.49 
 
 13.60 
 
 9.12 
 9.09 
 8.34 
 
 13.49 
 11.98 
 13.77 
 
 6.70 
 12.27 
 11.67 
 
 $11.26 
 12.27 
 
 18.08 
 
 3. 87 
 
 
 
 6.00 
 
 
 7.05 
 
 Missouri: 
 
 7.82 
 
 
 
 
 20.26 
 
 
 9.90 
 
 Nebraska: 
 
 
 
 15.06 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 122 
 
 7.33 
 
 ll(.'.H) 
 
 9.50 
 
 14.13 
 
 3.87 
 
 8.33 
 
 
 
 Because of the lower land values and lower yield of wheat in the 
 Spring- Wheat Belt, the charge for the use of land is considerably 
 lower there than in the Winter- Wheat Belt. (See Table XXVI.) 
 
 OTHER COSTS. 
 
 TAXES AND INSURANCE. 
 
 An estimate was obtained from each man interviewed concerning 
 his real estate, live stock, and equipment investment. On owned 
 land the per cent that the investment in wheat land is of this total 
 investment represents the proportion of the total farm taxes and 
 insurance that has been charged to the wheat land. On rented 
 farms, land taxes and building insurance were paid by the landlord. 
 Any other taxes and insurance were paid by the renter and have 
 been charged against live stock and equipment, wheat receiving its 
 proportionate share through the equipment charge. 
 
 The average tax and insurance charge on owned land varied from' 
 25 cents per acre in Morton County, N. Dak., to 95 cents in Saline 
 County, Nebr. 
 
 The special crop insurance includes fire insurance on stacked and 
 stored grain and hail insurance on the growing crop. In Morton 
 
COST OK PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 43 
 
 and Grand Forks Counties there is a State hail insurance tax of 
 3 cents on each tillable acre owned. Furthermore, there is an 
 additional tax on all acreage insured, the amount of the assessment 
 to be adjusted at the end of the year in the same manner as mutual 
 fire insurance companies. 
 
 Table XXVII. — Tare.* and insurance, spring and winter wheat, 1919 {481 farms). 
 
 State and county. 
 
 Taxes and insur- 
 ance on owned 
 land. 
 
 Per cent 
 
 of farmers 
 
 owning 
 
 land. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 All spring wheat . . 
 
 Kansas'. 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County.. 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County . . 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 All winter wheat.. 
 
 112 
 
 Cost per 
 acre. 
 
 Per cent 
 of farmers 
 reporting . 
 
 Special crop insur- 
 ance. 
 
 100 
 100 
 
 29 
 
 60 
 
 Average 
 cost per 
 acre in- 
 sured. 
 
 $0.18 
 .21 
 
 .81 
 .43 
 
 .39 
 
 1.21 
 1.32 
 .42 
 
 .29 
 .15 
 .19 
 
 .74 
 . 75 
 1.43 
 
 1.00 
 
 The largest acre charge for special crop insurance was made in 
 Ford and Pawnee Counties, Kans., and in Keith Comity, Nebr. In 
 these comities a relatively large hail insurance was carried on the 
 growing crop. (See Table XXVII.) 
 
 USE-COST OF TRACTOR. 
 
 The annual use-cost of a tractor includes repairs, fuel, oil, interest, 
 taxes and insurance, and depreciation. This yearly cost divided 
 by the total number of days the tractor was used during the year 
 gave the average daily cost of ruiming the tractor. The daily cost 
 multiplied by the number of days the tractor was used on wheat 
 production gave the total tractor use-cost chargeable to wheat. 
 All man labor costs involved in ruiming the tractor have been included 
 under man-labor requirements and do not appear as a tractor charge. 
 Table XXVIII shows the principal work on wheat performed by the 
 tractor and the normal man-labor requirements and costs per acre 
 for these operations. The use of the tractor was more common in 
 
44 
 
 BULLETIN 043, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 the winter wheat than in the spring wheat areas. The highest cost 
 per acre for tractor use occurred in Keith County, Nebr., where 
 over 50 per cent of the men interviewed used the tractor. In this 
 area 30 per cent of the farmers used the tractor for harvesting wheat 
 with the binder and 4 per cent used the tractor for heading wheat. 
 (See fig. 11.) 
 
 USE-COST OF OTHER FARM MACHINERY. 
 
 The items making up the total charge for use of "other farm 
 machinery" include taxes and insurance, interest on investment, 
 depreciation, and the annual maintenance repairs for this machinery. 
 The total annual farm charge for the use of machinery has been 
 divided between the crop and live-stock enterprises on the farm in 
 proportion to the number of horse hours of work required in their 
 production. In a few instances farm machinery was hired for use 
 in producing the wheat crop and when this was the case the actual 
 cash paid out was considered. 
 
 Table XXVIII. — Use cost of tractor and other farm machinery spring and winter wheat, 
 
 1919 (481 farms). 
 
 
 Plowing (trac- 
 tor work). 
 
 Disking (trac- 
 tor work). 
 
 Harrowing 
 (tractor work). 
 
 Cutting ( 1 rac- 
 tor work). 
 
 An- 
 nual 
 use- 
 
 State and county. 
 
 ««* 
 
 c.S 
 
 Ph 
 
 CD 
 ft 
 CD 
 
 rr *- 
 
 u ° 
 
 O 
 
 w 
 
 CD 
 
 ft 
 
 CD 
 u. 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 CD 
 CD-W 
 
 U (-. 
 fe ft 
 P-, 
 
 CD 
 ft 
 CD 
 
 C 
 
 w . 
 
 u 
 
 CD 
 ft 
 
 CD 
 t~ 
 
 CD 
 
 ■4J C3 
 
 O 
 O 
 
 CD 
 CD-u 
 
 Sift 
 
 Ph 
 
 CD 
 ft 
 CD 
 
 a * 
 
 o 
 
 W 
 
 CD 
 
 ft 
 
 CD 
 
 H 
 
 o 
 
 +j 03 
 
 o 
 
 o 
 
 CD 
 M 
 
 c.S 
 
 CD-W 
 CD fc- 
 
 fe p. 
 
 Ph 
 
 u 
 
 CD 
 ft 
 
 oj 
 
 §3 
 
 o 
 
 w 
 
 u 
 CD 
 ft 
 
 CD 
 M 
 
 o 
 
 O 
 
 cost ol 
 other 
 larm 
 ma- 
 chin- 
 ery. 
 
 SPRING WHEAT. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 7.7 
 12. s 
 
 15.0 
 
 25.6 
 H.9 
 
 9.0 
 
 12.5 
 20.0 
 
 10.0 
 Hi. 7 
 31.6 
 
 6.7 
 17.1 
 
 47.8 
 
 1.1 
 
 1.1 
 
 1.0 
 
 l.i 
 
 1.2 
 
 .9 
 1.1 
 1.1 
 
 1.2 
 2.0 
 1.6 
 
 . 7 
 1.3 
 .9 
 
 $1.36 
 1.30 
 
 1.34 
 
 1.37 
 1.31 
 
 1.36 
 1.59 
 1.28 
 
 1.30 
 1.46 
 1.50 
 
 .97 
 1.43 
 1.34 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 $1.50 
 
 
 5.1 
 
 2.5 
 
 10.3 
 4.8 
 
 3.1 
 3.1 
 
 0.7 
 
 .6 
 .6 
 
 .3 
 
 .8 
 
 SO. 45 
 
 .50 
 
 .52 
 .53 
 
 .65 
 .65 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.98 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 20.5 
 
 4.8 
 
 0.3 
 .2 
 
 SO. 41 
 .26 
 
 7.5 
 
 5.1 
 7.1 
 
 9.4 
 15.6 
 17.1 
 
 0.4 
 
 .2 
 .5 
 
 . 5 
 .6 
 
 7 
 
 $0.47 
 
 .50 
 .43 
 
 .49 
 .50 
 .56 
 
 .41 
 
 1.36 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 1.30 
 
 Traverse Countv 
 
 WINTER WHEAT. 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 1.43 
 1.15 
 
 Pawnee Countv 
 
 6.2 
 
 .2 
 
 .21 
 
 1.32 
 1.91 
 
 Missouri: 
 
 6.9 
 3.3 
 7.9 
 
 1.2 
 
 .7 
 
 .8 
 
 .60 
 .60 
 .73 
 
 
 
 
 6. 9 . 7 
 
 1.51 
 
 
 3.3 
 5.3 
 
 .3 
 .3 
 
 .25 
 .30 
 
 1.77 
 
 St. Charles County 
 
 Nebraska: 
 
 10.5 .6 
 
 6. 7 1 . 4 
 
 2. 9 . 6 
 
 30.4 | .3 
 
 .45 
 
 .48 
 .50 
 .48 
 
 2.13 
 1.23 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 L.93 
 
 
 30.4 
 
 .8 
 
 .48 
 
 4.3 
 
 .4 
 
 .35 
 
 1.68 
 
 
 
 
 
 LOSS ON ABANDONED WHEAT ACREAGE. 
 
 On some farms visited a part of the acreage seeded to wheat was 
 not harvested because the crop was destrayed or in such condition 
 that it was not worth cutting. All costs for labor, seed, manure, 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 45 
 
 use of land, unless recropped, taxes and insurance, etc., expended 
 on this acreage make up the charge "Loss on abandoned wheat 
 acreage." When pastured, credit has been given for the value of 
 the pasture. The total cost of all abandoned acreage in a region, 
 divided by the acreage harvested, is the average abandoned acreage 
 cost per harvested acre. (See Table XXIX.) 
 
 In Scuth Dakota, Minnesota, St. Charles County, Mo., and Keith 
 County, Nebr., no abandoned acreage was reported, while in the 
 other areas from 0.5 to 8.2 per cent of the wheat acreage was not 
 harvested. 
 
 SACK RENT. 
 
 During thrashing in Saline and St. Charles counties, Mo., a part 
 of the wheat was sacked and stored on the farm until thrashing 
 was over, or hauled direct to local elevators. In many instances 
 the farmers did not own sufficient sacks and rented additional ones. 
 The rent for the use of these amounted to about 4 cents per sack, 
 and the acre charge for sack rent averaged about 7 cents an acre 
 for each county. 
 
 Table XXIX. 
 
 -Loss due to abandoned wheat acreage, spring and winter wheat — 1919 
 (481 farms). 
 
 State and countv. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County. 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 All spring wheat.. 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County. . . . 
 
 McPherson County. 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County. 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 All winter wheat . 
 
 Per cent 
 of farms 
 reporting 
 aband- 
 oned 
 acreage. 
 
 Acres 
 seeded. 
 
 10,959 
 6,312 
 
 9,500 
 
 10,376 
 7,071 
 
 Acres 
 har- 
 vested . 
 
 Per cent 
 of total 
 acreage 
 aband- 
 oned. 
 
 10,060 
 5,840 
 
 9,500 
 
 10,376 
 7,071 
 
 42,847 
 
 10, 164 
 9,282 
 4,990 
 
 2,523 
 2,960 
 3,035 
 
 4,573 
 2,018 
 4,395 
 
 9,817 
 9,092 
 4,652 
 
 2,362 
 2,949 
 3,035 
 
 4,404 
 2,008 
 4,395 
 
 43,940 | 42,714 
 
 8.20 
 
 7.48 
 
 3.10 
 
 3.41 
 2.05 
 6.77 
 
 6.38 
 .37 
 
 3.70 
 .50 
 
 2.79 
 
 Average 
 cost per 
 
 acre 
 aband- 
 oned. 
 
 $10. 87 
 11.64 
 
 6.83 
 8.53 
 9.52 
 
 13.26 
 16.43 
 
 8.46 
 29.73 
 
 OVERHEAD. 
 
 In addition to items of expense such as labor, seed, twine, thrash- 
 ing, etc., which are directly chargeable to wheat, there are certain 
 items of general farm expense that are not only an essential part of 
 the wheat account, but also a part of the cost of every other crop and 
 
46 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE. 
 
 each kind of live stock produced. This list contains such items as 
 interest and taxes on barn lots, fence rows, roads, etc., building and 
 fence repairs and maintenance, arid miscellaneous cash expenses. 
 It is generally considered that these items of farm expense can be 
 handled best by allowing this miscellaneous cost to represent a 
 certain per cent of the combined material and labor costs of each 
 enterprise. Detailed cost-accounting records as kept on representa- 
 tive wheat farms in several of the areas visited show that this charge 
 amounts to approximately 12 per cent of the value of labor, materials, 
 and thrashing. Since the type of farming in the districts studied is 
 so similar, this rate has been used for all farms. 
 
 CREDITS. 
 
 The item« which have been considered as a credit to the wheat crop 
 are straw, pasture, and special insurance received for damage to the 
 crop through fire or hail. The straw was considered of very little 
 money value and often only that portion needed for bedding was 
 saved ; the remainder was left to rot or was burned in stacks in the 
 field. 
 
 In the winter-wheat areas some farmers pastured the young wheat 
 during the fall and spring months. This was especially true in 
 Kansas and Missouri. In Saline County, Mo., the high credit foi 
 pasture was largely due to a considerable area being so badly lodged 
 that it was not cut, but was pastured with hogs. 
 
 In only a few instances was insurance reported as having been 
 received for losses owing to fire or hail. (See Table XXX.) 
 
 Table XXX. — Credit per acre, spring and winter wheat — 1919 (481 farms). 
 
 State and county. 
 
 Straw. 
 
 Pasture. 
 
 Special 
 crop in- 
 surance 
 received. 
 
 Total. 
 
 North Dakota: 
 
 Grand Forks County 
 
 Morton County 
 
 South Dakota: 
 
 Spink County 
 
 Minnesota: 
 
 Clay County 
 
 Traverse County 
 
 All spring wheat . . 
 
 Kansas: 
 
 Ford County 
 
 Pawnee County 
 
 McPherson County. . 
 Missouri: 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Jasper County 
 
 St. Charles County.. 
 Nebraska: 
 
 Phelps County 
 
 Saline County 
 
 Keith County 
 
 All winter wheat- . 
 
 $0. 19 
 
 
 
 $0.19 
 
 .44 
 
 
 $0.06 
 
 .50 
 
 .19 
 
 
 .19 
 
 .58 
 
 
 
 .58 
 
 .30 
 
 
 
 .30 
 
 
 
 
 
 .34 
 
 
 .01 
 
 .35 
 
 
 
 
 .30 
 
 $0. 38 
 .98 
 .26 
 
 1.79 
 .41 
 .02 
 
 . 06 
 
 .71 
 1.29 
 .68 
 
 2.27 
 1.14 
 .51 
 
 .27 
 .34 
 .26 
 
 .82 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 47 
 
 ARRAY OF FARMS ACCORDING TO COST PER BUSHEL, BY COUNTIES. 
 
 In some counties the variation in cost per bushel was much greater 
 than in others. This is brought out in Table XXXI for spring-wheat 
 farms and in Table XXXII for winter-wheat farms. 
 
 Of the 29 spring-wheat farms having a cost of .$2 or less, nearly 83 
 per cent were located in Grand Forks County, X. Dak., and Spink 
 County, S. Dak. 
 
 Table XXXI. — Array of farms according to cost per bushel, by counties, spring whea's, 
 
 1919 {197 farms). 
 
 Cost group. 
 
 North Dakota. 
 
 South 
 Dakota. 
 
 Minnesota. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Cumu- 
 lative 
 per cent 
 of all 
 farms. 
 
 Grand 
 
 Forks 
 
 County. 
 
 Morton 
 County. 
 
 Spink 
 County. 
 
 Clay 
 
 County. 
 
 Traverse 
 
 County. 
 
 Per bushel. 
 81.10 
 1.20 
 1.30 
 1.40 
 1.50 
 1.60 
 1.70 
 1.80 
 1.90 
 2.00 
 2.10 
 2.20 
 2.30 
 2.40 
 2.50 
 2.60 
 2.70 
 2.80 
 2.90 
 3.00 
 3.10 
 3.20 
 3.30 
 3.40 
 3.50 
 3.60 
 3.70 
 3.80 
 3.90 
 4.00 
 4.10 
 4.20 
 4.30 
 4.40 
 4.50 
 4.60 
 4.70 
 4.80 
 4.90 
 5.00 
 5.30 
 5.60 
 5.70 
 6.00 
 6.10 
 6.40 
 8.30 
 8.70 
 10.20 
 10.40 
 12.10 
 14.40 
 
 Total.... 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Farms. 
 1 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Forms, 
 
 Farms. 
 
 1 
 
 0.5 
 
 .5 
 
 1.0 
 1.0 
 1.5 
 3.0 
 4.5 
 6. 5 
 10.6 
 14.7 
 18.8 
 23.9 
 29.5 
 34.6 
 38.2 
 44.8 
 50.9 
 55.0 
 58.1 
 61.7 
 63.2 
 64.7 
 67.8 
 70.3 
 73.4 
 74.4 
 75.9 
 77.9 
 80. 5 
 80.5 
 81.5 
 83.5 
 84.5 
 86.0 
 87. 5 
 89.0 
 90.5 
 90.5 
 91.5 
 92.5 
 93.5 
 94.5 
 95.0 
 96.0 
 96.5 
 97.0 
 97.5 
 98.0 
 98.5 
 99.0 
 99.5 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 2 
 
 4 
 
 3 
 
 3 
 
 " 5 
 
 4 
 1 
 1 
 4 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 3 
 3 
 4 
 8 
 8 
 8 
 10 
 11 
 10 
 7 
 a 13 
 12 
 8 
 6 
 7 
 3 
 3 
 6 
 5 
 6 
 2 
 3 
 4 
 5 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 3 
 2 
 3 
 1 
 2 
 2 
 a 3 
 2 
 3 
 3 
 1 
 1 
 2 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 3 
 7 
 "1 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 2 
 
 3 
 
 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 
 2 
 2 
 3 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 3 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 3 
 
 
 
 i 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 l 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 3 
 1 
 
 
 2 
 4 
 2 
 3 
 3 
 3 
 3 
 
 
 2 
 a 1 . 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 2 
 
 ! 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 
 2 
 1 
 2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 39 
 
 39 
 
 39 
 
 38 | 
 
 1 
 
 42 ; 
 
 197 
 
 
 
 o Average cost group. 
 
48 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table XXXII. —Array of farms according to cost per bushel, by counties, winter wheat 
 
 1919 {284 farms). 
 
 1 
 
 Cost 
 group. 
 
 Kansas. 
 
 Missouri. 
 
 Nebraska. 
 
 Total. 
 
 Cumu- 
 lative 
 per c?nt 
 of all 
 
 farms. 
 
 Ford 
 
 County. 
 
 Pawnee 
 County. 
 
 Mc- 
 Pherson 
 County. 
 
 Saline 
 County. 
 
 Jasper 
 County. 
 
 St. 
 Charles 
 County. 
 
 Phelps 
 County. 
 
 Saline Keith 
 County. County. 
 
 Perbushel. 
 $1.00 
 1.10 
 1.20 
 1.30 
 1.40 
 1.50 
 1.60 
 1.70 
 1.80 
 1.90 
 2.00 
 2.10 
 2.20 
 2.30 
 2.40 
 2.50 
 2.60 
 2.70 
 2.80 
 2.90 
 3.00 
 3.10 
 3.20 
 3.30 
 3.40 
 3.50 
 3.60 
 3.70 
 3.80 
 3.90 
 4.00 
 4.10 
 4.20 
 4.30 
 5.10 
 5.20 
 8.20 
 
 Total. 
 
 Farms. 
 1 
 o 
 1 
 2 
 1 
 1 
 4 
 4 
 a 1 
 
 2 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 2 
 2 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Farms- 
 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Farms. 
 
 Farms- 
 
 Farms. 
 1 
 
 Farws. 
 2 
 3 
 5 
 8 
 10 
 20 
 18 
 23 
 21 
 a 30 
 25 
 22 
 15 
 10 
 12 
 12 
 5 
 11 
 5 
 3 
 2 
 4 
 2 
 2 
 1 
 2 
 3 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 0.7 
 1.8 
 3.6 
 
 6. -1 
 9.9 
 16.9 
 23. 2 
 31 3 
 38. 7 
 
 49. 3 
 58.1 
 65.8 
 71.1 
 74.6 
 78.8 
 83.0 
 84.8 
 88.7 
 90.5 
 91.6 
 92.3 
 93.7 
 94.4 
 95.1 
 95.4 
 96.1 
 97.2 
 97.5 
 97.8 
 98.1 
 98-1 
 
 98. 4 
 98. 4 
 98.8 
 99.2 
 99.6 
 
 100.0 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 2 
 4 
 2 
 «4 
 4 
 5 
 3 
 
 1 
 2 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 ■I 
 a 6 
 4 
 3 
 5 
 4 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 3 
 2 
 3 
 a 2 
 3 
 2 
 2 
 3 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 5 
 2 
 
 "3 . 
 G 
 6 
 
 1 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 3 
 
 3 
 3 
 
 (a) 
 1 
 4 
 4 
 1 
 1 
 3 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 2 
 . 4 
 8 
 M 
 2 
 3 
 1 
 3 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 1 
 1 
 5 
 1 
 3 
 3 
 2 
 o2 
 5 
 1 
 3 
 
 1 
 2 
 6 
 1 
 1 
 «1 
 3 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 2 
 
 1 
 
 3 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 2 
 1 
 1 
 
 i 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 1 
 
 
 1 
 
 .. 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 ::::::::.::::::: 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 32 
 
 32 
 
 35 
 
 29 
 
 30 
 
 38 
 
 30 
 
 3.5 
 
 23 
 
 284 
 
 
 
 a Average cost group. 
 
 Of the 15 farms having costs in excess of $5 per bushel, all but one 
 were in Morton County, N. Dak. This means that nearly 36 per 
 cent of the farmers visited in Morton County produced wheat at a 
 cost above that of all the farmers but one visited in the other four 
 counties. Going still further, it was found that less than 8 per cent 
 of the Morton County farmers produced wheat at a cost of $2.70 and 
 less per bushel, while approximately 82 per cent of the farmers 
 visited in Grand Forks County, 69 per cent in Spink County, and 
 47 per cent in Clay and Traverse Counties had costs of $2.70 and less 
 per bushel. 
 
 In the winter-wheat districts, 14 of the 24 farms with costs of $3 
 and over appeared in Mcpherson County, Kans., and Saline County, 
 Mo. Considering the winter-wheat areas as a whole, 58 per cent of 
 the winter-wheat farmers produced wheat at a cost of $2 and less. 
 Yet this percentage was much less in some counties and much greater 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 49 
 
 in others. The approximate per cent of farmers in each county who 
 grew their wheat at a cost of $2 and less is as follows: Ford County, 
 Kans., 59; Pawnee County, Kans., 81 ; McPherson County, Kans., 23; 
 Saline County, Mo., 45; Jasper County, Mo., 87; St. Charles County, 
 Mo., 84; Phelps County, Nebr., 30; Saline County, Nebr., 29; and 
 Keith County, Nebr., 96. As a class the winter-wheat farmers 
 visited in 1919 had a better wheat year than did the spring-wheat 
 farmers. In fact, about 80 per cent of the winter-wheat farmers had 
 costs ranging from SI. 30 to $2.50 per bushel, whereas but 38 per cent 
 of the spring-wheat farmers had costs within this range. 
 
 CUMULATIVE PER CENT OF ACREAGE GROWN AT VARIOUS COSTS 
 
 PER BUSHEL. 
 
 In Tables XXXIII and XXXIV the farms are grouped according 
 to costs per bushel so as to show the per cent of the total wheat 
 acreage that was grown at various costs, by counties. In the spring- 
 wheat areas between 52 and 57 per cent of the total wheat acreage of 
 the 197 farms was grown at a cost not exceeding $2.65 per bushel, or 
 the average for all farms. However, 79.3 per cent of the Grand 
 Forks acreage was grown at $2.60 and less per bushel, whereas but 
 6.5 per cent of the Morton County acreage came in this class. 
 
 In the winter-wheat districts between 50 and 54 per cent of the 
 total acreage was grown at a cost of $1.87 or less per bushel, the 
 average for all farms. This figure varied from 15.8 per cent in 
 Saline County, Nebr., to 84 per cent in Pawnee County, Kans. 
 
 Thus in some counties the average cost per bushel for the entire 
 acreage of spring wheat or winter wheat covers a high percentage of 
 acreage grown, while in other counties a very small part of the acre- 
 age was grown at the average cost. 
 
50 
 
 BULLETIN 943, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table XXXIII. — Cumulative per cent of total wlieat acreage grown at various costs per 
 bushel, by counties, spring wheat, 1919 (197 farms). 
 
 Cost 
 group. 
 
 
 Cumulative per cent of harvested acreage 
 
 
 Grand 
 
 Forks 
 
 County, 
 
 N. Dak. 
 
 Morton 
 
 Spink 
 
 Clay 
 
 Traverse 
 
 All 
 farms. 
 
 
 County, 
 N. Dak. 
 
 County, 
 S. Dak. 
 
 County, 
 
 Minn. 
 
 County, 
 Minn. 
 
 Per bushel. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 11.10 
 
 1.20 
 1.30 
 1.40 
 1.50 
 1.60 
 1.70 
 
 
 
 0.6 
 .0 
 .6 
 .6 
 .0 
 5.3 
 7.7 
 
 
 
 0.1 
 .1 
 1.0 
 1.0 
 1.7 
 3.6 
 4.7 
 
 
 
 
 
 3.7 
 3.7 
 6.5 
 10.0 
 12.6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 0.6 
 .6 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.80 
 1.90 
 
 18.1 
 26.9 
 
 .6 
 .6 
 
 21.5 
 27.8 
 
 
 
 9.1 
 13.0 
 
 0.8 
 
 1.7 
 
 2.00 
 
 32.8 
 
 1.7 
 
 32.6 
 
 .8 
 
 2.3 
 
 15.7 
 
 2.10 
 
 43.2 
 
 1.7 
 
 33.2 
 
 5.9 
 
 3.7 
 
 19.8 
 
 2.20 
 
 51. 4 
 
 1.7 
 
 39.5 
 
 7.1 
 
 7.8 
 
 24.1 
 
 2.30 
 
 63.4 
 
 6.5 
 
 42.1 
 
 27.1 
 
 17.4 
 
 34.6 
 
 2.40 
 
 64.9 
 
 6.5 
 
 51.6 
 
 28.4 
 
 26.7 
 
 38. 9 
 
 2.50 
 
 66.5 
 
 6.5 
 
 56. 9 
 
 31.5 
 
 31.9 
 
 42.0 
 
 2. GO 
 
 79. 3 
 
 6.5 
 
 63.1 
 
 48.7 
 
 40.8 
 
 52.0 
 
 "2.65 
 2.70 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 80. 3 
 
 6.5 
 
 69.3 
 
 59.4 
 
 45.0 
 
 50. 9 
 
 2.80 
 
 80.3 
 
 7.2 
 
 70.4 
 
 61.7 
 
 57.4 
 
 59.8 
 
 2.90 
 
 85.9 
 
 7. 2 
 
 72.5 
 
 64.6 
 
 65.1 
 
 63.5 
 
 3.00 
 
 88.5 
 
 10.9 
 
 75. 4 
 
 64.6 
 
 6S.7 
 
 65.8 
 
 3.10 
 
 88.5 
 
 10.9 
 
 77.6 
 
 64.6 
 
 74.7 
 
 67.3 
 
 3.20 
 
 88.5 
 
 10.9 
 
 , 77.6 
 
 64.6 
 
 81.8 
 
 68.5 
 
 3.30 
 
 90.4 
 
 24.1 
 
 83.1 
 
 64.6 
 
 82.7 
 
 72.1 
 
 3.40 
 
 93.4 
 
 32.2 
 
 86.5 
 
 66.4 
 
 82.7 
 
 75.1 
 
 3.50 
 
 93. 4 
 
 35. S 
 
 86.5 
 
 75.2 
 
 88.4 
 
 78.7 
 
 3.60 
 
 93.4 
 
 :o.3 
 
 86.5 
 
 75. 2 
 
 91.4 
 
 79.8 
 
 3.70 
 
 93.4 
 
 40. 3 
 
 88.3 
 
 77.9 
 
 91.4 
 
 80.8 
 
 3.80 
 
 93.4 
 
 41.5 
 
 S8.3 
 
 87.6 
 
 91.4 
 
 83.3 
 
 3.90 
 
 93.4 
 
 44.8 
 
 90.0 
 
 87.6 
 
 94.2 
 
 84.6 
 
 4.00 
 
 93.4 
 
 44.8 
 
 90.0 
 
 87.6 
 
 94.2 
 
 84.6 
 
 4.10 
 
 93.4 
 
 44.8 
 
 93.4 
 
 88.3 
 
 94.2 
 
 85.5 
 
 4.20 
 
 93. 4 
 
 48.0 
 
 93.4 
 
 88.8 
 
 99.3 
 
 86.9 
 
 4.30 
 
 93.4 
 
 49.7 
 
 93.4 
 
 90.5 
 
 99.3 
 
 87.6 
 
 4.40 
 
 93. 4 
 
 49.7 
 
 93.4 
 
 96.6 
 
 99.3 
 
 89.1 
 
 4.50 
 
 93. 4 
 
 49.7 
 
 100.0 
 
 97.9 
 
 99.3 
 
 90.9 
 
 4.60 
 
 94.9 
 
 54.0 
 
 
 97.9 
 
 99.3 
 
 91.9 
 
 4.70 
 
 9). 9 
 
 62.6 
 
 
 97.9 
 
 99.3 
 
 93.1 
 
 4.80 
 
 94.9 
 
 62.6 
 
 
 97.9 
 
 99.3 
 
 93.1 
 
 4.90 
 
 94.9 
 
 64.3 
 
 
 97.9 
 
 100.0 
 
 93.5 
 
 5.00 
 5 30 
 
 95.5 
 95.5 
 
 64.3 
 69.6 
 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 91.1 
 94.8 
 
 
 
 5.60 
 
 95. 5 
 
 73.8 
 
 
 
 
 95.4 
 
 5.70 
 
 95.5 
 
 76.7 
 
 
 
 
 95.8 
 
 6.00 
 
 95. 5 
 
 83.8 
 
 
 
 
 96.8 
 
 6.10 
 
 100.0 
 
 83.8 
 
 
 
 
 97.8 
 
 6.40 
 8.30 
 8.70 
 10 20 
 
 
 87.7 
 88.7 
 89. 4 
 90.8 
 
 
 
 
 98.3 
 98.4 
 98. 5 
 98.7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 10.40 
 12.10 
 14. 40 
 
 
 94.3 
 95. 7 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 99.2 
 99. 4 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 " Average cost per bushel for all spring wheat. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 51 
 
 Table XXXIV. — Cumulative per cent of total wlieat acreage grown at various costs per 
 bushel, by counties, winter wheat, 191!) | 2S4 farms). 
 
 Cost 
 
 group. 
 
 
 
 Cumulative 
 
 percent ofharvesl ed acreage. 
 
 
 
 Ford 
 
 County, 
 
 Kans. 
 
 Pawnee 
 
 County, 
 
 Kans. 
 
 MePher- 
 
 son 
 County, 
 Kans. 
 
 Saline 
 
 Count v. 
 
 Mo. 
 
 Jasper 
 
 County, 
 Mo. 
 
 St. 
 Charles 
 County, 
 
 Mo. 
 
 Phelps 
 
 County, 
 Nebr. 
 
 Saline 
 
 County, 
 Nebr. 
 
 Keith 
 
 County, 
 Nebr. 
 
 All 
 farms. 
 
 Per hush. 
 $1.00 
 1.10 
 1.20 
 1.30 
 1.40 
 1.50 
 1.60 
 1.70 
 1.80 
 
 a 1.87 
 
 1.90 
 
 2.00 
 2.10 
 2.20 
 2.30 
 2.40 
 2.50 
 2.60 
 2.70 
 2.80 
 2.90 
 3.00 
 3.10 
 3.20 
 3.30 
 3.40 
 3.50 
 3.60 
 3.70 
 3.80 
 3.90 
 4.00 
 4.10 
 4.20 
 4.30 
 5.10 
 5.20 
 8.20 
 
 Pi /•(■( ui. 
 3.3 
 7.5 
 8.5 
 16.6 
 20.4 
 24.3 
 34. 7 
 43.9 
 47.1 
 
 I't r a ;u. 
 
 /'< ret .it. 
 
 Percent. 
 
 Pi rccnt. 
 
 Perct ii . 
 
 1 'era :ii . 
 
 Pi r ci ill . 
 
 Percent. 
 
 10.2 
 
 10.2 
 11.7 
 22.1 
 30.1 
 5(1. 6 
 54.4 
 60.0 
 67.7 
 
 Percent. 
 
 1.8 
 
 3.9 
 
 5.0 
 
 9.1 
 
 14.1 
 
 20.9 
 
 27.6 
 
 37.3 
 
 45.0 
 
 5.2 
 0.7 
 10.8 
 23.1 
 29.7 
 41.3 
 63. ."> 
 77.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 :',. s 
 3.8 
 3. S 
 7.0 
 7.0 
 11.2 
 25.0 
 
 
 3.0 
 7.7 
 10.9 
 28.5 
 38.8 
 51.8 
 60.7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4.9 
 18.7 
 
 22.4 
 36.0 
 
 50. 6 
 
 
 2.5 
 2.5 
 5.2 
 6.7 
 9.1 
 
 
 
 
 2.7 
 2.7 
 9.2 
 
 1.4 
 
 2.8 
 
 47.1 
 
 55. 3 
 59.8 
 62.2 
 66.5 
 71.1 
 76.9 
 76.9 
 87.8 
 ST. 8 
 87. S 
 87.8 
 87.8 
 90.9 
 90. 9 
 90.9 
 90.9 
 90.9 
 90.9 
 90.9 
 90.9 
 90. 9 
 90. 9 
 90.9 
 93.4 
 96.5 
 
 84.2 
 84.2 
 86. 8 
 92.8 
 95.5 
 95.5 
 95.5 
 95.5 
 97.7 
 97.7 
 97.7 
 97.7 
 97.7 
 97.7 
 97.7 
 97.7 
 97.7 
 100.0 
 
 16.1 
 L9.8 
 
 26.0 
 34.7 
 44.8 
 50.9 
 68.9 
 73.2 
 81.6 
 81.6 
 81.6 
 84.7 
 89.9 
 92.5 
 93.0 
 93.0 
 94.3 
 94.3 
 94.3 
 96.1 
 100. 
 
 45.9 
 48. !• 
 51.2 
 54.8 
 67.9 
 67. 9 
 67.9 
 67.9 
 77.2 
 80.0 
 ST. t 
 89. ii 
 911.3 
 90.3 
 93.0 
 93. 
 93.0 
 93.0 
 96.2 
 96.2 
 96.2 
 96.2 
 98.3 
 98.3 
 98.3 
 
 72.1 
 92.5 
 95.0 
 100.0 
 
 68. 2 
 
 79.8 
 s'i. 8 
 92.4 
 92:4 
 100.0 
 
 24. 5 
 44.9 
 53. 9 
 53.9 
 57.3 
 67.0 
 77.1 
 80.0 
 82.7 
 87.5 
 89.3 
 89.3 
 89.3 
 89.3 
 89.3 
 93.9 
 96.6 
 100.0 
 
 15. S 
 27.0 
 47.3 
 60.9 
 66. 4 
 7s. 5 
 SI. 7 
 92.2 
 94.0 
 95. 
 97.5 
 97.5 
 97.5 
 97.5 
 97.5 
 97.5 
 97.5 
 100.0 
 
 78.8 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 99.6 
 100. 
 
 54.2 
 63.6 
 68.8 
 72.9 
 76.9 
 80.7 
 85.2 
 86.5 
 91.3 
 92.0 
 92.7 
 93.1 
 93.8 
 94.8 
 95.0 
 95.5 
 95.9 
 96.9 
 97.1 
 97.3 
 97.7 
 97.7 
 97.8 
 97.8 
 98.4 
 99.1 
 99.2 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 100. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a Average cost per bushel for all winter wheat. 
 CUMULATIVE PER CENT OF TOTAL PRODUCTION. 
 
 Tables XXXV and XXXVI show the cumulative per cent of total 
 production with reference to cost per bushel. 
 
 In the spring-wheat areas about 67 per cent of the total bushels har- 
 vested was grown on farms havings costs not in excess of the general 
 average of $2.65 per bushel. This percentage varied in different 
 counties. In Grand Forks County, 87 per cent of the production was 
 grown at a cost of $2.60 or less, but in Morton County only 13.3 per 
 cent was produced as cheaply as $2.60 per bushel. 
 
 In the winter- wheat districts approximately 60 per cent of the total 
 production was raised at the average cost or less per bushel. As in 
 the spring-wheat districts, the cumulative per cent of production 
 grown at various costs per bushel showed considerable variation 
 among the various districts visited. 
 
52 
 
 BULLETIN 943, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OE AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table XXXV. — Cumulative per cent of total production, by counties, spring wheat, 1919 
 
 (197 farms). 
 
 Cost 
 group. 
 
 Cumulative per cent c f production. 
 
 Grand 
 Forks 
 County, 
 N. Dak. 
 
 Morton 
 
 Spink 
 
 Clay 
 
 Traverse 
 
 All 
 farms. 
 
 
 County, 
 N. Dak. 
 
 County, 
 S. Dak. 
 
 County, 
 
 Minn. 
 
 County, 
 Minn. 
 
 Per bushel. 
 
 /'u' cent. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Per cert. 
 
 I\r cent. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 $1.10 
 1.20 
 1.30 
 1.40 
 1.50 
 1.60 
 
 
 
 1.3 
 1.3 
 
 1.3 
 1.3 
 1.3 
 
 8.6 
 
 
 
 0.3 
 .3 
 1.9 
 1.9 
 3.2 
 6.4 
 
 
 
 
 
 5.9 
 5.9 
 10.7 
 15.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.2 
 
 
 
 1 70 
 
 17.9 
 
 1.2 
 
 12.1 
 
 
 
 8.1 
 
 1.80 
 
 24.6 
 
 1.2 
 
 31.4 
 
 
 
 14.9 
 
 1.90 
 
 35. 4 
 
 1.2 
 
 39.2 
 
 1.6 
 
 2.3 
 
 20.6 
 
 2.00 
 
 12.9 
 
 2.9 
 
 45. 1 
 
 1.6 
 
 3.3 
 
 24.5 
 
 2.10 
 
 54. 7 
 
 2.9 
 
 45.9 
 
 8.8 
 
 4.9 
 
 29.8 
 
 2.20 
 
 62.4 
 
 2.9 
 
 52.6 
 
 10.6 
 
 • 10.3 
 
 34.9 
 
 2.30 
 
 74.4 
 
 13.3 
 
 55.3 
 
 35.6 
 
 20.4 
 
 47.1 
 
 2.40 
 
 76.1 
 
 13.3 
 
 62.5 
 
 37.3 
 
 30.9 
 
 51.5 
 
 2.50 
 
 77.6 
 
 13.3 
 
 67.2 
 
 40.7 
 
 37.0 
 
 54.9 
 
 2.60 
 
 86.9 
 
 13.3 
 
 72.3 
 
 57.8 
 
 46.4 
 
 64.3 
 
 a 2. 65 
 2.70 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 88.1 
 
 13.3 
 
 77.6 
 
 69.5 
 
 50.1 
 
 69.3 
 
 2.80 
 
 88.1 
 
 14.1 
 
 78. 5 
 
 71.9 
 
 63.1 
 
 72.3 
 
 2.90 
 
 91.8 
 
 14.1 
 
 79.7 
 
 74.7 
 
 71.1 
 
 75.6 
 
 3.00 
 
 93.8 
 
 19.0 
 
 82.1 
 
 74.7 
 
 74.6 
 
 77.7 
 
 3.10 
 
 93.8 
 
 19.0 
 
 84.3 
 
 74.7 
 
 79.7 
 
 79.1 
 
 3.20 
 
 93.8 
 
 19.0 
 
 84.3 
 
 74.7 
 
 85.9 
 
 80.1 
 
 3.30 
 
 94.9 
 
 33.2 
 
 89.2 
 
 74.7 
 
 86.8 
 
 82.8 
 
 3.40 
 
 96.7 
 
 43.4 
 
 91.8 
 
 76.6 
 
 86.8 
 
 85.1 
 
 3.50 
 
 96.7 
 
 47.3 
 
 91.8 
 
 82.8 
 
 91.5 
 
 87.6 
 
 3.60 
 
 96.7 
 
 53.4 
 
 91.8 
 
 82.8 
 
 94.0 
 
 88.5 
 
 3.70 
 
 96.7 
 
 53.4 
 
 92.9 
 
 84.7 
 
 94.0 
 
 89.2 
 
 3.80 
 
 96.7 
 
 54.4 
 
 92.9 
 
 91.5 
 
 94.0 
 
 90.9 
 
 3.90 
 
 96.7 
 
 58.5 
 
 93.9 
 
 91.5 
 
 95.5 
 
 91.7 
 
 4.00 
 
 96.7 
 
 58.5 
 
 93.9 
 
 91.5 
 
 95.5 
 
 91.7 
 
 4.10 
 
 96.7 
 
 58.5 
 
 96.2 
 
 92.0 
 
 95.5 
 
 92.4 
 
 4.20 
 
 96.7 
 
 61.9 
 
 96.2 
 
 92.4 
 
 99.2 
 
 93.3 
 
 4.30 
 
 96.7 
 
 63.8 
 
 96.2 
 
 93.9 
 
 99.2 
 
 93.8 
 
 4.40 
 
 96.7 
 
 63.8 
 
 96.2 
 
 97.7 
 
 99.2 
 
 94.7 
 
 4.50 
 
 96.7 
 
 63.8 
 
 100.0 
 
 98.6 
 
 99.2 
 
 95.9 
 
 4.60 
 
 97.5 
 
 67.7 
 
 
 98.6 
 
 99.2 
 
 96.4 
 
 4.70 
 
 97.5 
 
 73.9 
 
 
 98.6 
 
 99.2 
 
 96.8 
 
 4 80 
 
 97.5 
 
 73.9 
 
 
 98.6 
 
 99.2 
 
 96.8 
 
 4.90 
 
 97.5 
 
 75.7 
 
 
 98.6 
 
 100.0 
 
 97.1 
 
 5.00 
 5.30 
 5.60 
 5.70 
 6.00 
 6.10 
 6.40 
 8.30 
 8.70 
 10.20 
 10.40 
 12.10 
 14.40 
 
 97 9 
 
 75.7 
 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 97.5 
 
 97 9 
 
 81.5 
 
 
 
 
 97.9 
 
 97 9 
 
 84.4 
 
 
 
 
 98.1 
 
 97 9 
 
 87.6 
 
 
 
 
 98.3 
 
 97 9 
 
 92.7 
 
 
 
 
 98.7 
 
 100 
 
 92.7 
 
 
 
 
 99.2 
 
 
 95.3 
 96.1 
 96.6 
 97.4 
 98.6 
 99.1 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 99.4 
 99.5 
 99.6 
 99.7 
 99.8 
 99.9 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 a Average cost per bushel for all spring wheat. 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 53 
 
 Table XXXVI. — Cumulative per cent of total production, by counties, winter wheat, 
 
 191 'J i 284 farms). 
 
 Cost 
 
 group. 
 
 Cumulative percent of total production. 
 
 Ford 
 
 County, 
 
 Kans. 
 
 Pawnee 
 
 County, 
 
 Kans. 
 
 McPher- 
 
 son 
 
 County, 
 
 Kans. 
 
 Saline 
 
 County, 
 
 Mo. 
 
 Jasper 
 
 County, 
 
 Mo. 
 
 St. 
 Charles 
 County, 
 
 Mo.' 
 
 Phelps 
 
 County, 
 
 Nebr. 
 
 Saline 
 County, 
 
 Nebr. 
 
 Keith 
 
 County, 
 Nebr". 
 
 All 
 farms. 
 
 Per bush. 
 SI. 00 
 1.10 
 1.20 
 1.30 
 1.40 
 1.50 
 1.60 
 1.70 
 1.80 
 1.87a 
 1.90 
 2.00 
 2.10 
 2.20 
 2.30 
 2.40 
 2.50 
 2.60 
 2.70 
 2.80 
 2.90 
 3.00 
 3.10 
 3.20 
 3.30 
 3.40 
 3.50 
 3.60 
 3.70 
 3.80 
 3.90 
 4.00 
 4.10 
 4.20 
 4.30 
 5.10 
 5.20 
 8.20 
 
 Percent. 
 4.2 
 11.3 
 12.8 
 24.9 
 31.1 
 37.2 
 52. 1 
 61.0 
 61.6 
 
 Perct at. 
 
 Percent. 
 
 Percent. 
 
 Percent. 
 
 Percent. 
 
 Percent. 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 Percent. 
 11.3 
 11.3 
 13.4 
 25. 1 
 34.5 
 55.6 
 58.6 
 64.9 
 72.8 
 
 Per cent. 
 
 2.3 
 
 5.1 
 
 6.5 
 
 12.0 
 
 18.5 
 
 27.5 
 
 35.2 
 
 45.1 
 
 53.6 
 
 6.9 
 7.8 
 12.9 
 28.5 
 35.9 
 18.5 
 69.2 
 82.7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1.6 
 4.6 
 4.6 
 9.0 
 9.0 
 15.2 
 31.4 
 
 
 3.6 
 9.1 
 12.5 
 33.6 
 43.6 
 56.8 
 65.7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 5.2 
 20. 4 
 24.1 
 38.3 
 53.3 
 
 
 3.0 
 3.0 
 6.4 
 8.3 
 11.0 
 
 
 
 
 4.3 
 
 4.3 
 11.4 
 
 1.8 
 3.8 
 
 64.6 
 74.5 
 77.3 
 78.9 
 82.9 
 86.3 
 90.4 
 90.4 
 96.8 
 96.8 
 96.8 
 96.8 
 96.8 
 98.1 
 98. 1 
 98.1 
 98. r 
 98.1 
 98.1 
 98.1 
 98. 1 
 98. 1 
 98.1 
 98.1 
 98.7 
 99.4 
 
 89.7 
 89.7 
 91.7 
 96.3 
 97.9 
 97.9 
 97.9 
 97.9 
 99.2 
 99.2 
 99.2 
 99.2 
 99.2 
 99.2 
 99.2 
 99.2 
 99.2 
 100.0 
 
 22. 1 
 25.7 
 31.8 
 41.2 
 52. 1 
 58.2 
 76.1 
 80.8 
 88.0 
 88.0 
 88.0 
 90.4 
 91. 1 
 95.5 
 96.0 
 96.0 
 96.9 
 96.9 
 96.9 
 97.9 
 100.0 
 
 51.9 
 58.2 
 60.6 
 65.4 
 75.5 
 75.5 
 75.5 
 75.5 
 84.3 
 86.2 
 92.6 
 93.6 
 94.5 
 91.:. 
 96.7 
 96.7 
 96.7 
 96.7 
 98.2 
 98.2 
 98.2 
 98.2 
 99.2 
 
 74.0 
 92.9 
 95.4 
 100.0 
 
 73.8 
 85.0 
 93 
 95.0 
 95.0 
 100.0 
 
 30.4 
 51. 1 
 64.5 
 64.5 
 68.0 
 76.4 
 84.8 
 
 Mi. 7 
 89.1 
 93. 1 
 94.4 
 94.4 
 94.4 
 94.4 
 94.4 
 97.0 
 98. 4 
 
 18.6 
 30.6 
 51.8 
 66.0 
 71.5 
 82.2 
 85.2 
 91. 5 
 95.9 
 96.7 
 98.6 
 98.6 
 98.6 
 98.6 
 98.6 
 98.6 
 98.6 
 100.0 
 
 83.5 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 99.8 
 
 63.9 
 73.7 
 78.4 
 82.2 
 85.5 
 88.5 
 91.8 
 92.9 
 95.9 
 96.4 
 97.0 
 97.3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 98. 1 
 
 
 
 
 98.3 
 
 
 
 
 
 98.5 
 
 
 
 
 98.7 
 
 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 99. 1 
 
 
 
 
 99.2 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 99.3 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 99.5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 99.5 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 99.6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 99.6 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 99.7 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 99.8 
 
 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 99.9 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 100.0 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 a Average cost per bushel for all winter wheat. 
 
54 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 INDIVIDUAL COSTS PER ACRE. 
 
 Table XXXVII shows costs per acre for each of the owned farms 
 covered by the survey. 
 
 Table XXXVII . — Individual costs per acre on owned land, spring and winter wheat, 1919 
 
 (327 farms). 
 
 Rec- 
 ord 
 num- 
 ber. 
 
 Acres 
 har- 
 vest- 
 ed. 
 
 Labor. 
 
 Factors of cost, per aero. 
 
 Mate- 
 rial. 
 
 Tli rash- 
 
 Miscel- 
 laneous. 
 
 Total 
 gross 
 cost, 
 with- 
 out 
 rent. 
 
 Credit. 
 
 Total 
 net 
 
 cost, 
 
 with- 
 out 
 
 rent. 
 
 Rent 
 (inter- 
 est on 
 invest- 
 ment). 
 
 Total net cost, 
 with rent. 
 
 Per 
 acre. 
 
 Per 
 
 bushel. 
 
 SPRING WHEAT. 
 Grand Forks County, N. Dak. 
 
 375 
 280 
 260 
 173 
 200 
 180 
 
 65 
 
 63 
 553 
 475 
 236 
 110 
 
 65 
 200 
 
 80 
 410 
 
 90 
 300 
 295 
 160 
 300 
 
 15 
 155 
 450 
 
 $6.25 
 7.43 
 3.63 
 6.59 
 5.42 
 8.88 
 4.84 
 9.37 
 7.02 
 5.66 
 8.07 
 6.53 
 7.54 
 5.5S 
 5.83 
 5.55 
 6.30 
 8.06 
 5.37 
 6.61 
 6.25 
 6.63 
 7.69 
 5.46 
 
 $3.59 
 4.63 
 3.60 
 4.67 
 3.47 
 4.66 
 3.94 
 3.94 
 4.27 
 3.80 
 4.26 
 3.99 
 4.10 
 4.15 
 3.19 
 2.81 
 3.28 
 4.01 
 4.47 
 3.76 
 4.22 
 4.19 
 4.63 
 1. 57 
 
 $2.72 
 3.21 
 2.88 
 3.58 
 3.67 
 3.19 
 2.12 
 4.00 
 2.25 
 3.18 
 3. IS 
 2.24 
 2.07 
 3.92 
 1.75 
 3.66 
 2.78 
 4.77 
 1.87 
 2.25 
 2.50 
 3.82 
 2.58 
 2.22 
 
 $3.22 
 5.12 
 3.92 
 3.95 
 3.29 
 4.66 
 3.08 
 4.86 
 3.50 
 3.40 
 4.76 
 3.35 
 4.46 
 5.22 
 3.34 
 4.40 
 3.97 
 5.20 
 3.44 
 3.73 
 4.44 
 3.53 
 5.40 
 
 10.18 
 
 $15. 78 
 20.39 
 14.03 
 18.79 
 15. 85 
 21.39 
 13.98 
 22.17 
 17.04 
 16.04 
 20.27 
 16.11 
 18. 17 
 18.87 
 14.11 
 16.42 
 16.33 
 22. 04 
 15.15 
 16. 35 
 17.41 
 18.17 
 20.30 
 22.43 
 
 0.36 
 .50 
 
 .46 
 .63 
 .09 
 
 .20 
 2. 33 
 
 .32 
 
 .89 
 
 $15. 78 
 20.03 
 13. 53 
 18.79 
 15.85 
 21.39 
 13.52 
 21.54 
 16.95 
 16.04 
 20.06 
 16.11 
 17.40 
 18.70 
 14.11 
 16.42 
 16. 33 
 21.87 
 14. 85 
 16.35 
 17.21 
 15.84 
 19.98 
 21. 54 
 
 5.40 
 6.00 
 3.60 
 2.40 
 4.50 
 5.40 
 4.50 
 4.20 
 6.00 
 4.50 
 5.40 
 4.20 
 3.30 
 5.40 
 5.40 
 5.40 
 5.10 
 5.10 
 7.50 
 3.00 
 3.60 
 3.60 
 6.00 
 
 $19. 38 
 25.43 
 19.53 
 22.39 
 18.25 
 25.89 
 18.92 
 26.04 
 21.15 
 22.04 
 24.56 
 21. 51* 
 21.60 
 22.00 
 19.51 
 21.82 
 21.73 
 26.97 
 19.95 
 23. 85 
 20.21 
 19.44 
 23.58 
 27.54 
 
 $1.26 
 1.52 
 1.63 
 1.64 
 1.66 
 1.71 
 1.72 
 1.75 
 1.76 
 1.87 
 1.88 
 1.89 
 1.92 
 1.95 
 2.08 
 2.14 
 2.24 
 2.31 
 2.67 
 2.98 
 3.37 
 3.89 
 4.57 
 6.12 
 
 Morton County, N. Dak. 
 
 1 
 
 35 
 
 $6.13 
 
 $2.84 
 
 $0.81 
 
 $3.11 
 
 $12. 89 
 
 $1.14 
 
 $11.75 
 
 $2. 40 
 
 $14.15 
 
 $1.64 
 
 8.6 
 
 2 
 
 63 
 
 6.33 
 
 2.05 
 
 .59 
 
 3.76 
 
 12. 73 
 
 .71 
 
 12.02 
 
 2.10 
 
 14.12 
 
 2.03 
 
 6.9 
 
 3 
 
 12 
 
 5.51 
 
 3.15 
 
 .66 
 
 3.12 
 
 12.44 
 
 1.50 
 
 10. 94 
 
 3.00 
 
 13.94 
 
 2.29 
 
 6.1 
 
 4 
 
 280 
 
 10. 58 
 
 3.83 
 
 .93 
 
 4.27 
 
 19.61 
 
 .18 
 
 19. 43 
 
 2.70 
 
 22.13 
 
 2.29 
 
 9.6 
 
 5 
 
 40 
 
 8.22 
 
 2.52 
 
 .50 
 
 3.36 
 
 14.60 
 
 2.50 
 
 12. 10 
 
 1.80 
 
 13. 90 
 
 2.78 
 
 5.0 
 
 6 
 
 65 
 
 11.41 
 
 3.68 
 
 .64 
 
 4.54 
 
 20.27 
 
 .77 
 
 19. 50 
 
 2.10 
 
 21. 60 
 
 2.99 
 
 7.2 
 
 7 
 
 150 
 
 7.23 
 
 2.71 
 
 .57 
 
 4.07 
 
 14.58 
 
 .53 
 
 14. 05 
 
 2.10 
 
 16.15 
 
 3.04 
 
 5.3 
 
 8 
 
 275 
 
 8.03 
 
 3.54 
 
 .83 
 
 6.45 
 
 18.85 
 
 .25 
 
 is. 60 
 
 2.10 
 
 20. 70 
 
 3.G6 
 
 6.8 
 
 9 
 
 500 
 
 4.13 
 
 3.14 
 
 .33 
 
 2.86 
 
 10.46 
 
 .20 
 
 10. 26 
 
 3.00 
 
 13. 26 
 
 3. 19 
 
 4.2 
 
 10 
 
 50 
 
 9.65 
 
 4.28 
 
 .60 
 
 9.95 
 
 24.48 
 
 
 24.48 
 
 2.10 
 
 26.58 
 
 3.32 
 
 8.0 
 
 11 
 
 210 
 
 8.99 
 
 3.11 
 
 .37 
 
 3.23 
 
 15.70 
 
 .31 
 
 15.39 
 
 1.50 
 
 16.89 
 
 3.50 
 
 4.8 
 
 12 
 
 260 
 
 11.68 
 
 3.18 
 
 .65 
 
 5.00 
 
 20.51 
 
 .77 
 
 19.74 
 
 1.80 
 
 21.54 
 
 3.57 
 
 6.0 
 
 13 
 
 30 
 
 9.63 
 
 2.92 
 
 .64 
 
 3.35 
 
 16.54 
 
 .30 
 
 16.24 
 
 1.20 
 
 17.44 
 
 3.71 
 
 4.7 
 
 14 
 
 25 
 
 11.64 
 
 3.14 
 
 .69 
 
 6.49 
 
 21.96 
 
 .28 
 
 21.68 
 
 1.80 
 
 23.48 
 
 3.86 
 
 6.1 
 
 15 
 
 120 
 
 10.28 
 
 4.19 
 
 .48 
 
 4.68 
 
 19.63 
 
 1.25 
 
 18.38 
 
 3.60 
 
 21.98 
 
 3.92 
 
 5.6 
 
 16 
 
 140 
 
 5.54 
 
 3.15 
 
 .30 
 
 4.02 
 
 13.01 
 
 .27 
 
 12.74 
 
 1.80 
 
 14. 54 
 
 4.11 
 
 3.5 
 
 17 
 
 40 
 
 9.38 
 
 3.43 
 
 .53 
 
 5.04 
 
 18.38 
 
 .60 
 
 17.78 
 
 2.40 
 
 20.18 
 
 4.12 
 
 4.9 
 
 18 
 
 100 
 
 8.95 
 
 3.38 
 
 .46 
 
 4.21 
 
 17.00 
 
 .50 
 
 16.50 
 
 1.50 
 
 18.00 
 
 4.23 
 
 4.3 
 
 19 
 
 100 
 
 9.34 
 
 3.13 
 
 .52 
 
 5.47 
 
 18.46 
 
 .75 
 
 17.71 
 
 3.60 
 
 21.31 
 
 4.30 
 
 5.0 
 
 20 
 
 150 
 
 8.59 
 
 4.24 
 
 .30 
 
 3.27 
 
 16.40 
 
 .50 
 
 15. 90 
 
 2.40 
 
 18.30 
 
 4.58 
 
 4.0 
 
 21 
 
 100 
 
 8.95 
 
 3.34 
 
 .36 
 
 4.67 
 
 17.32 
 
 .45 
 
 16.87 
 
 1.80 
 
 IS. 67 
 
 4.60 
 
 4.1 
 
 22 
 
 100 
 
 12.09 
 
 2.32 
 
 .50 
 
 5.25 
 
 20.16 
 
 .18 
 
 19.98 
 
 1.80 
 
 21.78 
 
 4.74 
 
 4.6 
 
 23 
 
 100 
 
 10.62 
 
 3.59 
 
 .53 
 
 7.41 
 
 22.15 
 
 1.08 
 
 21.07 
 
 2.10 
 
 23.17 
 
 4.88 
 
 4.8 
 
 24 
 
 150 
 
 8.79 
 
 3.01 
 
 .37 
 
 15.03 
 
 27.20 
 
 .80 
 
 26.40 
 
 1.50 
 
 27.90 
 
 5.28 
 
 5.3 
 
 25 
 
 160 
 
 13.14 
 
 3.14 
 
 .46 
 
 4.79 
 
 21.53 
 
 .19 
 
 21.34 
 
 1.50 
 
 22.81 
 
 5.33 
 
 4.3 
 
 26 
 
 60 
 
 7.98 
 
 2.52 
 
 .25 
 
 2.85 
 
 13.60 
 
 .20 
 
 13. 40 
 
 2.10 
 
 15.50 
 
 5.57 
 
 2.8 
 
 27 
 
 186 
 
 8.07 
 
 3.46 
 
 .25 
 
 4.81 
 
 16.59 
 
 .67 
 
 15.92 
 
 2.10 
 
 18.02 
 
 5.64 
 
 3.2 
 
 28 
 
 170 
 
 10.45 
 
 4.01 
 
 .52 
 
 12.36 
 
 27.34 
 
 1.47 
 
 25.87 
 
 2.10 
 
 27.97 
 
 5.68 
 
 4.9 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 55 
 
 Table XXXVII. — Individual costs per acre on owned land, spring and winter viheat, 1919 
 
 {827 farms) — Continued. 
 
 Acres 
 har- 
 vest- 
 ed. 
 
 
 
 Factors of cost, per acre. 
 
 
 
 Total net cost, 
 with rent. 
 
 Labor. 
 
 Mate- 
 rial. 
 
 Thrash- 
 ing. 
 
 Miscel- 
 laneous. 
 
 Total 
 gross 
 cost, 
 with- 
 out 
 rent . 
 
 Credit. 
 
 Total 
 net 
 
 cost, 
 with- 
 out 
 rent. 
 
 Rent 
 (inter- 
 est on 
 invest- 
 ment). 
 
 Per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Pel 
 
 bushel. 
 
 Yield 
 per 
 acre. 
 
 SPRING WHEAT— Coctinued. 
 Morton County, N. Dak.— Continued. 
 
 29 
 
 140 
 
 $9.31 
 
 $3.17 
 
 $0.27 
 
 $4.82 
 
 $17.57 
 
 $2.32 
 
 $15. 25 
 
 $2.40 
 
 $17.65 
 
 $5. 98 
 
 3.0 
 
 30 
 
 275 
 
 10. 75 
 
 2.26 
 
 .35 
 
 5.02 
 
 18.38 
 
 .45 
 
 17. 93 
 
 2.10 
 
 20. 03 
 
 6.03 
 
 3.3 
 
 31 
 
 100 
 
 8.78 
 
 4.20 
 
 .28 
 
 4.04 
 
 17.30 
 
 .33 
 
 16.97 
 
 3.00 
 
 19. 97 
 
 6.79 
 
 2.9 
 
 32 
 
 23 
 
 6.19 
 
 2.70 
 
 .18 
 
 4.56 
 
 13.63 
 
 .22 
 
 13. 41 
 
 1.50 
 
 11.91 
 
 7. I.", 
 
 2.0 
 
 33 
 
 60 
 
 8.79 
 
 3.23 
 
 .36 
 
 16.39 
 
 28.77 
 
 .83 
 
 27.94 
 
 1.80 
 
 29.74 
 
 8.30 
 
 3.6 
 
 34 
 
 80 
 
 14.62 
 
 4.40 
 
 .24 
 
 4.71 
 
 24.00 
 
 .32 
 
 23.68 
 
 1.50 
 
 25.18 
 
 10.17 
 
 2.5 
 
 35 
 
 205 
 
 7.44 
 
 3.28 
 
 .24 
 
 3.37 
 
 14. 33 
 
 .15 
 
 14. IS 
 
 1.50 
 
 15.68 
 
 10.44 
 
 1.5 
 
 36 
 
 80 
 
 8.55 
 
 2.43 
 
 .20 
 
 7.20 
 
 18.38 
 
 .75 
 
 17.63 
 
 3.00 
 
 l'ii. 63 
 
 12. 13 
 
 1.7 
 
 37 
 
 250 
 
 6.38 
 
 3.01 
 
 .10 
 
 3.01 
 
 12.50 
 
 .20 
 
 12. 30 
 
 1.50 
 
 13.80 
 
 14.38 
 
 1.0 
 
 Spink County, S. Dak. 
 
 1 
 
 60 
 
 $5.82 
 
 $3. 14 
 
 $5. 00 
 
 $4. 30 
 
 $18.26 
 
 $0.42 
 
 $17.84 
 
 $6. 00 
 
 $23. 84 
 
 11.15 
 
 20.8 
 
 2 
 
 120 
 
 5.97 
 
 4.03 
 
 3.53 
 
 3.33 
 
 16. 86 
 
 
 16.86 
 
 6.00 
 
 22. 86 
 
 1.39 
 
 16.4 
 
 3 
 
 60 
 
 8.96 
 
 3.89 
 
 1.11 
 
 4.77 
 
 18. 73 
 
 2.25 
 
 16. 4S 
 
 6.00 
 
 22. 4S 
 
 1.79 
 
 12.6 
 
 4 
 
 135 
 
 5.44 
 
 3.97 
 
 2.95 
 
 4.04 
 
 16.40 
 
 .30 
 
 16.10 
 
 6. 0!) 
 
 22.10 
 
 2.01 
 
 11.0 
 
 5 
 
 145 
 
 6.73 
 
 2.20 
 
 3.49 
 
 3.65 
 
 16.07 
 
 .25 
 
 15.82 
 
 8.10 
 
 23.92 
 
 2.03 
 
 11.8 
 
 6 
 
 180 
 
 8.11 
 
 3.13 
 
 3.58 
 
 4.31 
 
 19.13 
 
 .05 
 
 19. 08 
 
 7.50 
 
 26.58 
 
 2.03 
 
 13.1 
 
 7 
 
 60 
 
 10.52 
 
 3.69 
 
 1.35 
 
 4.14 
 
 19.70 
 
 
 19.70 
 
 7.50 
 
 27.20 
 
 2.15 
 
 12.7 
 
 8 
 
 100 
 
 4.17 
 
 2.99 
 
 2.08 
 
 4.09 
 
 13.33 
 
 
 13. 33 
 
 6.00 
 
 19.33 
 
 2.18 
 
 8.8 
 
 9 
 
 200 
 
 8.18 
 
 3.73 
 
 2.73 
 
 4.22 
 
 18.86 
 
 .25 
 
 18.61 
 
 7.50 
 
 26.11 
 
 2.25 
 
 11.6 
 
 10 
 
 85 
 
 6.97 
 
 3.10 
 
 3.18 
 
 4.89 
 
 18.14 
 
 .59 
 
 17. 55 
 
 9.60 
 
 27.15 
 
 2.30 
 
 11.8 
 
 11 
 
 163 
 
 7.46 
 
 3.80 
 
 3.04 
 
 3.74 
 
 18.04 
 
 .61 
 
 17.43 
 
 6.00 
 
 23.43 
 
 2.39 
 
 9.8 
 
 12 
 
 250 
 
 6.79 
 
 3.05 
 
 2.97 
 
 4.54 
 
 17.35 
 
 
 17. 35 
 
 9.00 
 
 26.35 
 
 2.48 
 
 10.6 
 
 13 
 
 85 
 
 4.78 
 
 3.46 
 
 1.91 
 
 4.18 
 
 14.33 
 
 
 14. 33 
 
 6.00 
 
 20.33 
 
 2. 63 
 
 7.7 
 
 14 
 
 300 
 
 5.56 
 
 3.43 
 
 2.59 
 
 4.17 
 
 15.75 
 
 .33 
 
 15.42 
 
 9.00 
 
 24.42 
 
 2.66 
 
 9.2 
 
 15 
 
 100 
 
 6.20 
 
 2.58 
 
 2.92 
 
 3.85 
 
 15.55 
 
 .50 
 
 15.05 
 
 6.00 
 
 21.05 
 
 2.68 
 
 7.8 
 
 16 
 
 190 
 
 6.68 
 
 4.19 
 
 1.01 
 
 3.17 
 
 15.68 
 
 .53 
 
 15.15 
 
 6.00 
 
 21.15 
 
 2.71 
 
 7.8 
 
 17 
 
 100 
 
 4.71 
 
 3.04 
 
 3.10 
 
 4.52 
 
 15.37 
 
 .25 
 
 1.5. 12 
 
 9.00 
 
 24.12 
 
 2.82 
 
 8.6 
 
 18 
 
 75 
 
 10.14 
 
 5.42 
 
 2.35 
 
 5.79 
 
 23.70 
 
 
 23. 70 
 
 9.00 
 
 32.70 
 
 3.03 
 
 10.8 
 
 19 
 
 210 
 
 7.64 
 
 4.08 
 
 2.55 
 
 4.41 
 
 is. i;s 
 
 
 18. 68 
 
 12.00 
 
 30.68 
 
 3.10 
 
 9.9 
 
 20 
 
 40 
 
 8.39 
 
 2.98 
 
 2.24 
 
 3.70 
 
 17.31 
 
 
 17.31 
 
 5.40 
 
 22. 71 
 
 3.13 
 
 7.2 
 
 21 
 
 100 
 
 7.44 
 
 3.01 
 
 2.36 
 
 3.91 
 
 16.72 
 
 .12 
 
 16. 60 
 
 6.00 
 
 22.60 
 
 3.30 
 
 6.8 
 
 22 
 
 525 
 
 8.26 
 
 3.61 
 
 4.69 
 
 3.74 
 
 20. 30 
 
 .05 
 
 20.25 
 
 9.00 
 
 29.25 
 
 3.35 
 
 7.8 
 
 23 
 
 320 
 
 6.07 
 
 3.04 
 
 2.28 
 
 5.50 
 
 16.89 
 
 .47 
 
 16. 42 
 
 9.60 
 
 26.02 
 
 3.42 
 
 7.6 
 
 24 
 
 160 
 
 5.59 
 
 3.31 
 
 1.97 
 
 6.68 
 
 17.55 
 
 
 17.55 
 
 6.00 
 
 23. 55 
 
 3. 90 
 
 6.0 
 
 25 
 
 120 
 
 8.40 
 
 3.26 
 
 1.08 
 
 3.54 
 
 16.28 
 
 .50 
 
 15.78 
 
 7.50 
 
 23.28 
 
 3.98 
 
 5.8 
 
 26 
 
 320 
 
 8.06 
 
 3.29 
 
 1.78 
 
 3.94 
 
 17.07 
 
 .25 
 
 16.82 
 
 10.50 
 
 27.32 
 
 4.11 
 
 6.6 
 
 27 
 
 300 
 
 11.94 
 
 3.48 
 
 1.16 
 
 4.20 
 
 20. 78 
 
 .33 
 
 20. 45 
 
 7.50 
 
 27. 95 
 
 4.49 
 
 6.2 
 
 28 
 
 330 
 
 5.76 
 
 3. 31 
 
 .'{. 28 
 
 3.50 
 
 15. 85 
 
 .25 
 
 15. 60 
 
 7.50 
 
 23.10 
 
 4.54 
 
 5.1 
 
 Clay County, Minn. 
 
 1 
 
 58 
 
 $6.89 
 
 14.45 
 
 10.90 
 
 $3.78 
 
 $16.08 
 
 $0.26 
 
 $15. 82 
 
 $7.50 
 
 $23. 32 
 
 $1.54 
 
 |.">. 1 
 
 2 
 
 80 
 
 9.86 
 
 5.18 
 
 3. 45 
 
 5. 76 
 
 24. 25 
 
 .31 
 
 23.94 
 
 7.50 
 
 31.41 
 
 1.90 
 
 16.6 
 
 3 
 
 160 
 
 9.46 
 
 5.50 
 
 1 . 76 
 
 4.80 
 
 21.52 
 
 .13 
 
 21.39 
 
 6.00 
 
 27.39 
 
 2.08 
 
 13.2 
 
 4 
 
 127 
 
 8.09 
 
 3.72 
 
 1.16 
 
 4.48 
 
 17.45 
 
 
 17. 45 
 
 9.00 
 
 26.45 
 
 2.19 
 
 12.1 
 
 5 
 
 85 
 
 5.84 
 
 3.66 
 
 1.10 
 
 4.32 
 
 14.92 
 
 .16 
 
 14.76 
 
 6.00 
 
 20. 76 
 
 2.42 
 
 8.6 
 
 6 
 
 35 
 
 5.32 
 
 3.81 
 
 .92 
 
 4.15 
 
 14.20 
 
 .11 
 
 14.09 
 
 12.00 
 
 26.09 
 
 2.47 
 
 10.6 
 
 7 
 
 900 
 
 5.68 
 
 4.25 
 
 .85 
 
 3.35 
 
 14.13 
 
 1.39 
 
 12.74 
 
 9.00 
 
 21.74 
 
 2.62 
 
 8.3 
 
 8 
 
 120 
 
 10.02 
 
 5.82 
 
 1.50 
 
 6.14 
 
 23.54 
 
 .21 
 
 23. 33 
 
 9.00 
 
 32.33 
 
 2.69 
 
 12.0 
 
 9 
 
 110 
 
 9.19 
 
 4.27 
 
 1.46 
 
 4.47 
 
 19.39 
 
 .45 
 
 18. 94 
 
 12. 00 
 
 30.94 
 
 2.71 
 
 11.4 
 
 10 
 
 930 
 
 4.64 
 
 4.64 
 
 1.20 
 
 6.41 
 
 16.89 
 
 .48 
 
 16.41 
 
 12.00 
 
 28.41 
 
 2.80 
 
 10.2 
 
 11 
 
 240 
 
 7.82 
 
 3.95 
 
 1.25 
 
 3.98 
 
 17.00 
 
 .42 
 
 16.58 
 
 6.60 
 
 23.18 
 
 2.81 
 
 8.2 
 
 12 
 
 300 
 
 9.36 
 
 3.74 
 
 .97 
 
 3.55 
 
 17. 62 
 
 .17 
 
 17. 45 
 
 6.00 
 
 23. 45 
 
 2.93 
 
 8.0 
 
 13 
 
 90 
 
 10.30 
 
 4.60 
 
 1.27 
 
 4.53 
 
 20.70 
 
 .56 
 
 20.14 
 
 6.00 
 
 26.14 
 
 3.36 
 
 7.8 
 
 14 
 
 100 
 
 12.81 
 
 4.91 
 
 1.74 
 
 6.34 
 
 25.80 
 
 .50 
 
 25. 30 
 
 6.00 
 
 31.30 
 
 3.43 
 
 9.1 
 
 15 
 
 280 
 
 6.13 
 
 4.36 
 
 .79 
 
 6.74 
 
 18.02 
 
 .23 
 
 17.79 
 
 6.60 
 
 24.39 
 
 3.48 
 
 7.0 
 
 16 
 
 160 
 
 4.36 
 
 4.99 
 
 .74 
 
 6.07 
 
 16.16 
 
 1.25 
 
 14.91 
 
 9.00 
 
 23.91 
 
 3.71 
 
 6.4 
 
 17 
 
 75 
 
 8.81 
 
 4.58 
 
 1.91 
 
 4.66 
 
 19.96 
 
 1.04 
 
 18.92 
 
 10. 50 
 
 29. 42 
 
 3.79 
 
 7.8 
 
 18 
 
 800 
 
 8.47 
 
 3.67 
 
 1.36 
 
 3.05 
 
 16.55 
 
 156 
 
 14.99 
 
 6.00 
 
 20.99 
 
 3.83 
 
 5.5 
 
56 
 
 BULLETIN 943, U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table XXXVII . — Individual costs per acre on owned land, spring and winter wheat, 1919 
 
 (827 farms) — Continued. 
 
 Rec- 
 ord 
 num- 
 ber. 
 
 Acres 
 har- 
 vest- 
 ed. 
 
 
 
 Fad 
 
 ors of cost, per acre. 
 
 
 
 Total net cost, 
 with rent. 
 
 Labor. 
 
 Mate- 
 rial. 
 
 Thrash- 
 ing. 
 
 Miscel- 
 laneous. 
 
 Total 
 gross 
 cost, 
 with- 
 out 
 rent. 
 
 Credit. 
 
 Total 
 net 
 cost, 
 with- 
 out 
 rent. 
 
 Rent 
 
 (inter- 
 est on 
 invest, 
 ment). 
 
 Per 
 acre. 
 
 Per 
 bushel. 
 
 SPRING WHEAT— Continued. 
 Clay County, Minn.— Continued. 
 
 19 
 
 70 
 
 $8.71 
 
 $5.41 
 
 $0.94 
 
 $3.95 
 
 $19. 01 
 
 
 $19. 01 
 
 $7.50 
 
 $26. 51 
 
 20 
 
 100 
 
 8.97 
 
 4.07 
 
 .93 
 
 3.82 
 
 17.79 
 
 $0.16 
 
 17. 63 
 
 6.00 
 
 23.63 
 
 21 
 
 180 
 
 11.34 
 
 4.24 
 
 2.41 
 
 6.76 
 
 24.75 
 
 1.11 
 
 23.64 
 
 7.50 
 
 31.14 
 
 22 
 
 250 
 
 10.50 
 
 3.90 
 
 2.43 
 
 3.85 
 
 20.68 
 
 .20 
 
 20.48 
 
 6.00 
 
 26.48 
 
 23 
 
 130 
 
 11.47 
 
 6.29 
 
 1.43 
 
 5.94 
 
 25.13 
 
 3.08 
 
 22. 05 
 
 7.50 
 
 29.55 
 
 24 
 
 220 
 
 7.08 
 
 3.82 
 
 .48 
 
 6.38 
 
 17.76 
 
 .68 
 
 17.08 
 
 9.00 
 
 26.08 
 
 25 
 
 30 
 
 7.73 
 
 4.48 
 
 1.56 
 
 3.72 
 
 17.49 
 
 
 17.49 
 
 9.00 
 
 26.49 
 
 26 
 
 to 
 
 8.12 
 
 4.07 
 
 1.25 
 
 5.31 
 
 18.75 
 
 .41 
 
 18.31 
 
 6.00 
 
 24.31 
 
 $4.08 
 
 6.5 
 
 4.30 
 
 5.5 
 
 4.32 
 
 7.2 
 
 4.41 
 
 6.C 
 
 4.49 
 
 6.6 
 
 5.02 
 
 5.2 
 
 5.30 
 
 5.C 
 
 6.68 
 
 3.6 
 
 Traverse County, Minn. 
 
 1 
 
 120 
 
 $8. 63 
 
 S3. 48 
 
 $1.48 
 
 C3.27 
 
 $16. 86 
 
 $0.34 
 
 $16. 52 
 
 $4.80 
 
 '$21.32 
 
 $1.91 
 
 11.2 
 
 2 
 
 97 
 
 8.46 
 
 3.33 
 
 1.29 
 
 4.69 
 
 17.77 
 
 .32 
 
 17.45 
 
 9.00 
 
 26.45 
 
 2.02 
 
 13.1 
 
 3 
 
 45 
 
 9.99 
 
 4.99 
 
 1.45 
 
 5.08 
 
 21.51 
 
 
 21.51 
 
 5.40 
 
 26.91 
 
 2.05 
 
 13.1 
 
 4 
 
 100 
 
 8.68 
 
 4.40 
 
 1.30 
 
 3.02 
 
 17.40 
 
 1.60 
 
 15.80 
 
 4.80 
 
 20. 60 
 
 2.10 
 
 9.8 
 
 5 
 
 70 
 
 10.77 
 
 4.02 
 
 1.41 
 
 4.23 
 
 20. 43 
 
 
 20. 43 
 
 6.00 
 
 26.43 
 
 2.22 
 
 11.9 
 
 6 
 
 160 
 
 8.13 
 
 4.76 
 
 1.44 
 
 4.34 
 
 18.67 
 
 .94 
 
 17.73 
 
 7.50 
 
 25.23 
 
 2.24 
 
 11.2 
 
 7 
 
 30 
 
 7.80 
 
 4.02 
 
 1.04 
 
 2.94 
 
 15.80 
 
 .27 
 
 15.53 
 
 6.00 
 
 21.53 
 
 2.27 
 
 9.5 
 
 8 
 
 500 
 
 7.99 
 
 3.71 
 
 .97 
 
 2.98 
 
 15. 65 
 
 .30 
 
 15. 35 
 
 4.80 
 
 20.15 
 
 2.28 
 
 8.8 
 
 9 
 
 70 
 
 7.99 
 
 4.29 
 
 1.60 
 
 3.S4 
 
 17. 72 
 
 .36 
 
 17.36 
 
 6.00 
 
 23. 36 
 
 2.31 
 
 10.1 
 
 10 
 
 275 
 
 5.11 
 
 4.01 
 
 .75 
 
 5.29 
 
 15.16 
 
 .45 
 
 14.71 
 
 6.00 
 
 20.71 
 
 2.40 
 
 8.6 
 
 11 
 
 33 
 
 10.59 
 
 4.04 
 
 2.45 
 
 4.35 
 
 21.43 
 
 .45 
 
 20.98 
 
 12.00 
 
 32.98 
 
 2.44 
 
 13.6 
 
 1? 
 
 90 
 
 8.86 
 
 3.92 
 
 .93 
 
 5.27 
 
 18.98 
 
 .20 
 
 18.78 
 
 7.50 
 
 26.28 
 
 2.44 
 
 10.8 
 
 13 
 
 100 
 
 12.29 
 
 4.38 
 
 1.57 
 
 5.04 
 
 23.28 
 
 .13 
 
 23.15 
 
 6.00 
 
 29.15 
 
 2.50 
 
 11.6 
 
 14 
 
 160 
 
 10.18 
 
 4.45 
 
 1.47 
 
 4.46 
 
 20. 56 
 
 .50 
 
 20.06 
 
 7.80 
 
 27.86 
 
 2.53 
 
 11.0 
 
 15 
 
 230 
 
 8.20 
 
 4.47 
 
 .90 
 
 2.84 
 
 16.41 
 
 .05 
 
 16.36 
 
 4. SO 
 
 21.16 
 
 2.61 
 
 8.1 
 
 16 
 
 300 
 
 5.90 
 
 3.18 
 
 .96 
 
 4.67 
 
 14.71 
 
 .67 
 
 14.04 
 
 6.00 
 
 20.04 
 
 2.73 
 
 7.4 
 
 17 
 
 50 
 
 8.09 
 
 4.14 
 
 .97 
 
 3.57 
 
 16.77 
 
 .66 
 
 16.11 
 
 7.50 
 
 23.61 
 
 2.75 
 
 8.6 
 
 18 
 
 340 
 
 10.90 
 
 3.48 
 
 1.48 
 
 3.97 
 
 19.89 
 
 .15 
 
 19.74 
 
 7.20 
 
 26.94 
 
 2.78 
 
 9.7 
 
 10 
 
 165 
 
 5.61 
 
 3.56 
 
 1.13 
 
 5.28 
 
 15.58 
 
 .30 
 
 15.28 
 
 7.50 
 
 22.78 
 
 2.78 
 
 8.2 
 
 ?0 
 
 70 
 
 9.86 
 
 4.12 
 
 .88 
 
 3.47 
 
 18.33 
 
 1.00 
 
 17.33 
 
 6.00 
 
 23.33 
 
 2.79 
 
 8.4 
 
 21 
 
 160 
 
 9.35 
 
 3.55 
 
 .98 
 
 4.11 
 
 17.99 
 
 
 17.99 
 
 6.00 
 
 23.99 
 
 2.79 
 
 8.6 
 
 ?.?, 
 
 90 
 
 11.23 
 
 4.63 
 
 1.07 
 
 4.21 
 
 21.14 
 
 .39 
 
 20.75 
 
 7.20 
 
 27.95 
 
 2.85 
 
 9.8 
 
 ?3 
 
 40 
 
 8.32 
 
 3.97 
 
 1.66 
 
 3.71 
 
 17.66 
 
 
 17.66 
 
 6.00 
 
 23.66 
 
 2.86 
 
 8.3 
 
 24 
 
 200 
 
 10.87 
 
 3.70 
 
 1.69 
 
 4.00 
 
 20.26 
 
 .25 
 
 20.01 
 
 4.80 
 
 24.81 
 
 2.93 
 
 8.5 
 
 ?5 
 
 200 
 
 8.78 
 
 4.42 
 
 1.13 
 
 3.69 
 
 IS. 02 
 
 .10 
 
 17.92 
 
 7.50 
 
 25.42 
 
 2.94 
 
 8.6 
 
 r. 
 
 155 
 
 8.77 
 
 4.53 
 
 1.70 
 
 3.50 
 
 IS. 50 
 
 
 18.50 
 
 9.00 
 
 27.50 
 
 2.99 
 
 9.2 
 
 ?7 
 
 225 
 
 9.57 
 
 3.35 
 
 .71 
 
 3.61 
 
 17.24 
 
 
 17.24 
 
 6.00 
 
 23.24 
 
 3.06 
 
 7.6 
 
 28 
 
 230 
 
 11.17 
 
 4.14 
 
 1.17 
 
 3.78 
 
 20.26 
 
 .22 
 
 20.04 
 
 6.00 
 
 26.04 
 
 3.18 
 
 8.2 
 
 29 
 
 40 
 
 10.83 
 
 3.29 
 
 2.65 
 
 4.03 
 
 20.80 
 
 .27 
 
 20. 53 
 
 6.00 
 
 26.53 
 
 3.22 
 
 8.2 
 
 30 
 
 60 
 
 12.68 
 
 4.04 
 
 1.43 
 
 4.91 
 
 23.06 
 
 .42 
 
 22.64 
 
 7.50 
 
 30.14 
 
 3.29 
 
 9.2 
 
 31 
 
 100 
 
 9.29 
 
 4.29 
 
 .93 
 
 4.13 
 
 18.64 
 
 1.00 
 
 17.64 
 
 9.00 
 
 26.64 
 
 3.46 
 
 7.7 
 
 32 
 
 300 
 
 8.25 
 
 4.45 
 
 .77 
 
 2.97 
 
 16.44 
 
 
 16.44 
 
 7.50 
 
 23.94 
 
 3.54 
 
 6.0 
 
 33 
 
 210 
 
 11.04 
 
 4.13 
 
 .80 
 
 4.29 
 
 20.26 
 
 
 20.26 
 
 4.80 
 
 25.06 
 
 3.58 
 
 7.0 
 
 34 
 
 90 
 
 8.03 
 
 4.50 
 
 1.14 
 
 3.16 
 
 16.83 
 
 .50 
 
 16.33 
 
 6.00 
 
 22.33 
 
 3.59 
 
 6.2 
 
 35 
 
 360 
 
 8.80 
 
 4.40 
 
 1.22 
 
 4.14 
 
 18.56 
 
 
 18.56 
 
 7.50 
 
 26.06 
 
 4.24 
 
 6.2 
 
 36 
 
 51 
 
 17.73 
 
 5.77 
 
 2.94 
 
 9.65 
 
 36.09 
 
 .25 
 
 35.84 
 
 12.00 
 
 47.84 
 
 4.93 
 
 9.7 
 
 WINTER WHEAT. 
 Ford County, Kans. 
 
 1 
 
 320 
 
 $9.29 
 
 $2.06 
 
 $0.42 
 
 $2. 48 
 
 $14.25 
 
 $0.84 
 
 $13.41 
 
 $3.60 
 
 $17. 01 
 
 $0. 98 
 
 17.4 
 
 2 
 
 90 
 
 10.30 
 
 1.85 
 
 4.48 
 
 5.08 
 
 21.71 
 
 2.90 
 
 18.81 
 
 3.00 
 
 21.81 
 
 .99 
 
 22. C 
 
 3 
 
 200 
 
 13.43 
 
 2.68 
 
 4.59 
 
 5.16 
 
 25.86 
 
 3.60 
 
 22.26 
 
 3.60 
 
 25.86 
 
 1.06 
 
 24.3 
 
 4 
 
 300 
 
 8.95 
 
 2.53 
 
 4.45 
 
 5.39 
 
 21/32 
 
 .54 
 
 20.78 
 
 ' 4.50 
 
 25.28 
 
 1.15 
 
 22.0 
 
 5 
 
 220 
 
 10.41 
 
 2.35 
 
 4.00 
 
 4.37 
 
 21.13 
 
 1.73 
 
 19. 40 
 
 3.60 
 
 23.00 
 
 1.15 
 
 20.0 
 
 6 
 
 100 
 
 9.79 
 
 2.88 
 
 3.49 
 
 5.85 
 
 22.01 
 
 1.20 
 
 20.81 
 
 3.00 
 
 23.81 
 
 1.24 
 
 19.2 
 
 7 
 
 335 
 
 9.9,4 
 
 2.24 
 
 3.10 
 
 4.60 
 
 19.88 
 
 .36 
 
 19.52 
 
 3.00 
 
 22.52 
 
 1.26 
 
 17.9 
 
 8 
 
 240 
 
 11.15 
 
 2.73 
 
 4.44 
 
 5.65 
 
 23.97 
 
 
 23.97 
 
 4.50 
 
 28.47 
 
 1.29 
 
 22.0 
 
 9 
 
 190 
 
 7.50 
 
 1.65 
 
 2.20 
 
 4.53 
 
 15.88 
 
 .31 
 
 15.57 
 
 3.00 
 
 18.57 
 
 1.29 
 
 14.4 
 
 10 
 
 190 
 
 8.87 
 
 1.72 
 
 3.92 
 
 3.37 
 
 17.88 
 
 .05 
 
 17.83 
 
 2.40 
 
 20.23 
 
 1.29 
 
 15.7 
 
 11 
 
 110 
 
 9.72 
 
 1.64 
 
 3.86 
 
 5.76 
 
 20.98 
 
 1.56 
 
 19.42 
 
 3.00 
 
 22.42 
 
 1.34 
 
 16.8 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 57 
 
 Table XXXVII. — Individual costs per acre on owned land, spring and winter wheat, 1919 
 
 (S?7 farms) — Continued. 
 
 Acres 
 har- 
 vest- 
 ed. 
 
 
 
 Factors of cost, per acre. 
 
 
 
 Total net cost, 
 with rent. 
 
 Labor. 
 
 Mate- 
 rial. 
 
 Thrash- 
 ing. 
 
 Miscel- 
 laneous. 
 
 Total 
 gross 
 cost, 
 with- 
 out 
 rent. 
 
 Credit. 
 
 Total 
 net 
 
 cost, 
 with- 
 out 
 rent. 
 
 Rent 
 (inter- 
 est on 
 
 invest- 
 ment). 
 
 Per 
 acre. 
 
 Pe" 
 
 bushel. 
 
 Yield 
 per 
 
 WINTER WHEAT— Continued. 
 Ford County, Kans.— Continued. 
 
 12 
 
 100 
 
 $9.41 
 
 $1.36 
 
 $2.85 
 
 $2. 44 
 
 $16. 06 
 
 SO. 34 
 
 $15.72 
 
 $2.40 
 
 S18. 12 
 
 $1.41 
 
 12.9 
 
 13 
 
 80 
 
 12.35 
 
 2.01 
 
 2.90 
 
 5.36 
 
 22.62 
 
 2.37 
 
 20.25 
 
 3.00 
 
 23.25 
 
 1.55 
 
 15.0 
 
 14 
 
 230 
 
 11.89 
 
 2.73 
 
 3.46 
 
 6.23 
 
 24.31 
 
 .09 
 
 24.22 
 
 3.00 
 
 27.22 
 
 1.60 
 
 17.0 
 
 15 
 
 175 
 
 11.41 
 
 1.73 
 
 2.65 
 
 4.53 
 
 20.32 
 
 .20 
 
 20.12 
 
 3.00 
 
 23.12 
 
 1.69 
 
 13.7 
 
 16 
 
 105 
 
 7.72 
 
 2.43 
 
 2.10 
 
 5. 11 
 
 17.36 
 
 .69 
 
 16.67 
 
 3. 00 
 
 19.67 
 
 1.90 
 
 10.4 
 
 17 
 
 140 
 
 8.48 
 
 1.50 
 
 2.42 
 
 4.23 
 
 16. 63 
 
 1.42 
 
 15.21 
 
 3.60 
 
 18.81 
 
 2.09 
 
 9.0 
 
 18 
 
 80 
 
 13.74 
 
 1.96 
 
 1.77 
 
 3.88 
 
 21.35 
 
 .78 
 
 20.57 
 
 3.60 
 
 24.17 
 
 2.15 
 
 11.2 
 
 19 
 
 200 
 
 13.71 
 
 3.29 
 
 1.67 
 
 4.70 
 
 23.37 
 
 .70 
 
 22.67 
 
 3.00 
 
 25.67 
 
 2.62 
 
 9.8 
 
 20 
 
 250 
 
 8.00 
 
 1.52 
 
 .63 
 
 3.24 
 
 13.39 
 
 1.60 
 
 11.79 
 
 3.00 
 
 14.79 
 
 4.35 
 
 3.4 
 
 21 
 
 200 
 
 6.61 
 
 2.80 
 
 .82 
 
 2.70 
 
 12.93 
 
 
 12.93 
 
 3.00 
 
 15.93 
 
 4.90 
 
 3.2 
 
 22 
 
 145 
 
 8.78 
 
 1.70 
 
 .38 
 
 3.96 
 
 14.82 
 
 .31 
 
 14.51 
 
 2.40 
 
 16.91 
 
 8.04 
 
 2.1 
 
 23 
 
 70 
 
 6.30 
 
 1.98 
 
 .76 
 
 7.92 
 
 16. 96 
 
 .36 
 
 16.60 
 
 3.00 
 
 19.60 
 
 13.72 
 
 1.4 
 
 Pawnee County, Kans. 
 
 1 
 
 75 
 
 $6.91 
 
 $2.88 
 
 $3.01 
 
 $4. 40 
 
 $17. 20 
 
 $2.72 
 
 $14. 48 
 
 $6.00 
 
 $20. 48 
 
 $1.05 
 
 19.5 
 
 2 
 
 470 
 
 6.46 
 
 2.51 
 
 3.33 
 
 4.26 
 
 16.56 
 
 1.36 
 
 15.20 
 
 4. SO 
 
 20.00 
 
 1.08 
 
 18.5 
 
 3 
 
 120 
 
 6.Q.7 
 
 1.91 
 
 3.47 
 
 4.41 
 
 i;>. Mi 
 
 .40 
 
 15.46 
 
 6.00 
 
 21.46 
 
 1.12 
 
 19.2 
 
 4 
 
 87 
 
 8.94 
 
 1.78 
 
 3.84 
 
 4.24 
 
 is. so 
 
 .06 
 
 18. 74 
 
 4.50 
 
 23.24 
 
 1.16 
 
 20.0 
 
 5 
 
 135 
 
 6.99 
 
 3.86 
 
 1.33 
 
 4.57 
 
 16.75 
 
 10.70 
 
 6.05 
 
 4.50 
 
 10.55 
 
 1.20 
 
 8.8 
 
 6 
 
 140 
 
 4.26 
 
 2.91 
 
 3.46 
 
 5.24 
 
 15. 87 
 
 .86 
 
 15.01 
 
 4.50 
 
 19.51 
 
 1.37 
 
 14.3 
 
 7 
 
 310 
 
 7.92 
 
 1.73 
 
 3.76 
 
 6.89 
 
 20.30 
 
 1.02 
 
 19.28 
 
 6.00 
 
 25.28 
 
 1.44 
 
 17.5 
 
 8 
 
 25 
 
 5.99 
 
 1.55 
 
 3.40 
 
 4. 95 
 
 15. S9 
 
 .68 
 
 15.21 
 
 4.50 
 
 19.71 
 
 1.52 
 
 13.0 
 
 9 
 
 160 
 
 8.86 
 
 2.03 
 
 3.32 
 
 3.17 
 
 17.38 
 
 1.97 
 
 15.41 
 
 6.00 
 
 21.41 
 
 1.56 
 
 13.8 
 
 10 
 
 no 
 
 6.16 
 
 2.49 
 
 2.74 
 
 4.68 
 
 16.07 
 
 .45 
 
 16.62 
 
 6.Q0 
 
 21.62 
 
 1.59 
 
 13.6 
 
 11 
 
 400 
 
 5.89 
 
 3.41 
 
 2.50 
 
 4.08 
 
 15.88 
 
 .10 
 
 15.78 
 
 4. SO 
 
 20.58 
 
 1.66 
 
 12.4 
 
 12 
 
 240 
 
 6.96 
 
 2.00 
 
 2.69 
 
 7.27 
 
 18.92 
 
 1.30 
 
 17.62 
 
 4.80 
 
 22.42 
 
 1.67 
 
 13.5 
 
 13 
 
 80 
 
 10.84 
 
 2.67 
 
 3.55 
 
 7.29 
 
 24.35 
 
 1.40 
 
 22.95 
 
 6.00 
 
 28.95 
 
 1.70 
 
 17.0 
 
 14 
 
 140 
 
 7.28 
 
 3.00 
 
 2.36 
 
 6.13 
 
 18.77 
 
 1.42 
 
 17. 35 
 
 5.40 
 
 22.75 
 
 1.75 
 
 13.0 
 
 15 
 
 80 
 
 6.92 
 
 2.20 
 
 2.25 
 
 6.16 
 
 17.53 
 
 1.33 
 
 16.20 
 
 4.50 
 
 20.70 
 
 1.88 
 
 11.0 
 
 16 
 
 305 
 
 5.75 
 
 2.21 
 
 1.91 
 
 5.59 
 
 15.46 
 
 .80 
 
 14.66 
 
 6.00 
 
 20.66 
 
 2.16 
 
 9.5 
 
 17 
 
 250 
 
 5.83 
 
 2.05 
 
 1.56 
 
 4.11 
 
 13.55 
 
 .09 
 
 13.46 
 
 4.80 
 
 18.26 
 
 2.28 
 
 8.0 
 
 McPherson County, Kans. 
 
 1 
 
 45 
 
 $12.90 
 
 $4.02 
 
 $2.99 
 
 $4.09 
 
 $24.00 
 
 $1.71 
 
 $22. 29 
 
 $7.20 
 
 $29.49 
 
 $1.68 
 
 17.8 
 
 2 
 
 33 
 
 11.49 
 
 2.58 
 
 3.71 
 
 5.78 
 
 23.56 
 
 .61 
 
 22.95 
 
 9.00 
 
 31.95 
 
 1.75 
 
 18.3 
 
 3 
 
 60 
 
 13.39 
 
 3.43 
 
 3.78 
 
 7.13 
 
 27.73 
 
 
 27.73 
 
 9.00 
 
 36.73 
 
 1.88 
 
 18.9 
 
 4 
 
 20 
 
 7.94 
 
 2.70 
 
 3.31 
 
 9.72 
 
 23.67 
 
 3.10 
 
 20.57 
 
 9.00 
 
 29.57 
 
 1.90 
 
 15.0 
 
 5 
 
 120 
 
 11.02 
 
 4.06 
 
 2.96 
 
 4.98 
 
 23.02 
 
 .50 
 
 22.52 
 
 9.00 
 
 31.52 
 
 2.25 
 
 14.0 
 
 6 
 
 120 
 
 10.92 
 
 3.62 
 
 2.96 
 
 4.45 
 
 21.95 
 
 .74 
 
 21. 21 
 
 6.00 
 
 27.21 
 
 2.27 
 
 12.0 
 
 7 
 
 60 
 
 9.94 
 
 2.97 
 
 2.07 
 
 4.24 
 
 19.22 
 
 1.50 
 
 17.72 
 
 7.50 
 
 25.22 
 
 2.47 
 
 10.2 
 
 8 
 
 80 
 
 10.88 
 
 3.60 
 
 2.22 
 
 5.24 
 
 21.94 
 
 .09 
 
 21.85 
 
 6.00 
 
 27.85 
 
 2.54 
 
 10.0 
 
 9 
 
 320 
 
 13.53 
 
 3.81 
 
 2.98 
 
 5.61 
 
 25.93 
 
 .67 
 
 25.26 
 
 9.00 
 
 34.26 
 
 2.64 
 
 13.0 
 
 10 
 
 80 
 
 11.22 
 
 2.75 
 
 1.83 
 
 5. 09 
 
 20.89 
 
 .79 
 
 20.10 
 
 7.50 
 
 27.60 
 
 2.91 
 
 9.5 
 
 11 
 
 140 
 
 9.57 
 
 3.25 
 
 2.13 
 
 6.37 
 
 21.32 
 
 .36 
 
 20.96 
 
 9.00 
 
 29.96 
 
 3.09 
 
 9.7 
 
 12 
 
 50 
 
 13.35 
 
 2.56 
 
 2.08 
 
 4.36 
 
 22.35 
 
 .34 
 
 22.01 
 
 7.50 
 
 29.51 
 
 3.14 
 
 9.4 
 
 13 
 
 180 
 
 9.94 
 
 2.63 
 
 1.78 
 
 6.20 
 
 20.55 
 
 .50 
 
 20.05 
 
 7.50 
 
 27.55 
 
 3.94 
 
 7.0 
 
 Saline County, Mo. 
 
 1 
 
 90 
 
 $8.35 
 
 $3. 01 
 
 $3.39 
 
 $5.95 
 
 $20. 70 
 
 $14. 89 
 
 $5.81 
 
 $18. 00 
 
 $23.81 
 
 $1.21 
 
 19.7 
 
 2 
 
 40 
 
 9.58 
 
 3.67 
 
 3.14 
 
 6. 71 
 
 23.10 
 
 2.79 
 
 20.31 
 
 13. 50 
 
 33.81 
 
 1.50 
 
 22.5 
 
 3 
 
 100 
 
 15.87 
 
 3.86 
 
 3.67 
 
 7.54 
 
 30.94 
 
 1.00 
 
 29.94 
 
 10.80 
 
 40.74 
 
 1.70 
 
 24.0 
 
 4 
 
 40 
 
 7.80 
 
 3.12 
 
 5.04 
 
 3.90 
 
 19.86 
 
 1.07 
 
 is. 79 
 
 15. 00 
 
 33.79 
 
 1.88 
 
 18.0 
 
 5 
 
 100 
 
 13.43 
 
 3.48 
 
 2.73 
 
 4.29 
 
 23.93 
 
 1.45 
 
 22. 48 
 
 12.00 
 
 34.48 
 
 1.92 
 
 18.0 
 
 6 
 
 85 
 
 16.50 
 
 3.49 
 
 3.49 
 
 5.22 
 
 28. 70 
 
 
 28.76 
 
 12.00 
 
 40.70 
 
 1.94 
 
 21.0 
 
 7 
 
 70 
 
 5.53 
 
 3.41 
 
 5.84 
 
 7. 09 
 
 21.87 
 
 1.42 
 
 20. 45 
 
 15.00 
 
 35.45 
 
 1.97 
 
 18.0 
 
 8 
 
 65 
 
 17.84 
 
 4.31 
 
 6.54 
 
 6.48 
 
 35. 17 
 
 1.06 
 
 34. 11 
 
 15.00 
 
 49.11 
 
 2.16 
 
 22.8 
 
 9 
 
 40 
 
 13.18 
 
 3.14 
 
 2.48 
 
 7.44. 
 
 26. 24 
 
 
 26.24 
 
 9.00 
 
 35.24 
 
 2.31 
 
 15.3 
 
58 
 
 BULLETIN 943, IT. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE. 
 
 Table XXXVII. — Individual costs per acre on owned land, spring and winter wheat, 1919 
 
 {327 farms) — Continued . 
 
 Rec- 
 ord 
 num- 
 ber. 
 
 Acres 
 har- 
 vest- 
 ed. 
 
 
 
 Factors of cost, per acre . 
 
 
 
 Total net cost, 
 with rent. 
 
 Labor. 
 
 Mate- 
 rial. 
 
 Thrash- 
 ing. 
 
 Miscel- 
 laneous. 
 
 Total 
 gross 
 cost, 
 with- 
 out 
 rent. 
 
 Credit. 
 
 Total 
 net 
 
 cost, 
 
 with- 
 out 
 
 rent. 
 
 Rent 
 (inter- 
 est on 
 invest- 
 ment). 
 
 Per 
 acre. 
 
 Per 
 bushel. 
 
 WINTER WHEAT— Continued. 
 Saline County, Mo.— Continued. 
 
 10 
 
 .$200 
 
 $8.5S 
 
 $2.57 
 
 $1.92 
 
 $3.66 
 
 $16. 73 
 
 $S.43 
 
 $8.30 
 
 $16. 50 
 
 $24. SO 
 
 $2.32 
 
 10.7 
 
 11 
 
 70 
 
 11.03 
 
 3.16 
 
 2.14 
 
 5.49 
 
 21.82 
 
 
 21.82 
 
 15.00 
 
 33.82 
 
 2.34 
 
 15.7 
 
 12 
 
 65 
 
 5.98 
 
 3.32 
 
 3.28 
 
 5.15 
 
 17.73 
 
 .97 
 
 16.76 
 
 15.00 
 
 31. 76 
 
 2. £0 
 
 11.3 
 
 13 
 
 15 
 
 13.73 
 
 3.54 
 
 3.82 
 
 4.30 
 
 25.39 
 
 .32 
 
 25.07 
 
 9.00 
 
 34.07 
 
 2.84 
 
 12.0 
 
 14 
 
 75 
 
 14.02 
 
 3.29 
 
 1.96 
 
 4.72 
 
 23.99 
 
 .83 
 
 23.16 
 
 15.00 
 
 ;;s. 16 
 
 2.86 
 
 13.3 
 
 15 
 
 175 
 
 10.90 
 
 3.76 
 
 4.29 
 
 4.06 
 
 23.01 
 
 .14 
 
 22.87 
 
 18.00 
 
 40.87 
 
 2. 02 
 
 14.0 
 
 16 
 
 37 
 
 8.29 
 
 3.46 
 
 1.97 
 
 6.59 
 
 20.31 
 
 4.05 
 
 16.26 
 
 15. 00 
 
 31.25 
 
 3.04 
 
 10.3 
 
 17 
 
 30 
 
 13. 96 
 
 3.19 
 
 2.18 
 
 9.64 
 
 2S.97 
 
 4.20 
 
 24.77 
 
 12. 00 
 
 36.77 
 
 3.11 
 
 11.8 
 
 18 
 
 65 
 
 20.32 
 
 3.75 
 
 1.90 
 
 5.22 
 
 31.19 
 
 .46 
 
 30.73 
 
 12.00 
 
 42.73 
 
 3.29 
 
 13.0 
 
 19 
 
 40 
 
 14.99 
 
 3.54 
 
 1.78 
 
 19.83 
 
 40.14 
 
 1.87 
 
 38.27 
 
 12.0) 
 
 50. 27 
 
 3.35 
 
 15.0 
 
 20 
 
 20 
 
 14.63 
 
 3.26 
 
 1.80 
 
 4.10 
 
 23. 7J 
 
 .30 
 
 23. 49 
 
 13. 50 
 
 33. 99 
 
 4.25 
 
 8.7 
 
 21 
 
 40 
 
 15.13 
 
 3.44 
 
 1.50 
 
 9.81 
 
 29.88 
 
 1.06 
 
 25.82 
 
 12.00 
 
 37.82 
 
 5.20 
 
 7.3 
 
 Jaspeb County, Mo. 
 
 1 
 
 52 
 
 $i3. 42 
 
 $5. 33 
 
 $1.67 
 
 $4.49 
 
 $24. 91 
 
 $0.78 
 
 $24. 13 
 
 $8. 10 
 
 $32. 23 
 
 $1.29 
 
 25.0 
 
 2 
 
 145 
 
 10. 50 
 
 6.18 
 
 1.34 
 
 6.69 
 
 24.71 
 
 4.03 
 
 20.68 
 
 7.80 
 
 28.48 
 
 1.41 
 
 20.2 
 
 3 
 
 34 
 
 14.26 
 
 5.00 
 
 1.52 
 
 4.41 
 
 25.19 
 
 .82 
 
 24.37 
 
 6.00 
 
 30.37 
 
 1.43 
 
 21.2 
 
 4 
 
 68 
 
 12.21 
 
 4.65 
 
 1.53 
 
 4.93 
 
 23.32 
 
 .81 
 
 22.51 
 
 6.00 
 
 28.51 
 
 1.52 
 
 18.8 
 
 5 
 
 130 
 
 12.93 
 
 3.96 
 
 1.64 
 
 6.42 
 
 24.95 
 
 .25 
 
 24.70 
 
 8.40 
 
 33.10 
 
 1.54 
 
 21.5 
 
 6 
 
 85 
 
 9.93 
 
 4.65 
 
 1.78 
 
 5.86 
 
 22.22 
 
 .52 
 
 21.70 
 
 9.00 
 
 30.70 
 
 1.54 
 
 20.0 
 
 7 
 
 17 
 
 18.29 
 
 7.65 
 
 2.03 
 
 7.11 
 
 35.08 
 
 5. 29 
 
 29.79 
 
 9.00 
 
 38.79 
 
 1.55 
 
 25.0 
 
 8 
 
 55 
 
 15.15 
 
 4.94 
 
 1.54 
 
 4.71 
 
 25. 34 
 
 3. oo 
 
 23. 34 
 
 9.00 
 
 32.34 
 
 1.62 
 
 20.0 
 
 9 
 
 140 
 
 13.74 
 
 5.41 
 
 1.55 
 
 4.89 
 
 25. 59 
 
 .51 
 
 25.08 
 
 9.00 
 
 34. 08 
 
 1.66 
 
 20.5 
 
 10 
 
 185 
 
 13.97 
 
 5.37 
 
 1.43 
 
 5.45 
 
 26. 22 
 
 2.59 
 
 23.63 
 
 8.40 
 
 32.03 
 
 1.70 
 
 18.9 
 
 11 
 
 20 
 
 14.84 
 
 5.39 
 
 1.41 
 
 4.65 
 
 26. 29 
 
 .65 
 
 25. 64 
 
 6.00 
 
 31.64 
 
 1.71 
 
 18.5 
 
 12 
 
 75 
 
 15.54 
 
 6.67 
 
 1.72 
 
 5.90 
 
 29. 83 
 
 .64 
 
 29.19 
 
 9.00 
 
 38.19 
 
 1.75 
 
 21.8 
 
 13 
 
 70 
 
 12.67 
 
 5.75 
 
 1.32 
 
 5.40 
 
 25. 14 
 
 .43 
 
 24.71 
 
 7.50 
 
 32. 21 
 
 1.79 
 
 18.0 
 
 14 
 
 85 
 
 13.55 
 
 5.28 
 
 1.29 
 
 4.32 
 
 24. 14 
 
 1. 00 
 
 23.44 
 
 7.50 
 
 30.94 
 
 1.85 
 
 16.7 
 
 15 
 
 30 
 
 15.84 
 
 8.17 
 
 1.20 
 
 4.51 
 
 29. 72 
 
 5. 33 
 
 24.39 
 
 6.00 
 
 30. 39 
 
 2.07 
 
 14.7 
 
 16 
 
 39 
 
 23.90 
 
 4.62 
 
 1.76 
 
 6.73 
 
 37.01 
 
 
 37.01 
 
 9.00 
 
 46.01 
 
 2.22 
 
 20.8 
 
 17 
 
 39 
 
 14.82 
 
 4.33 
 
 1.27 
 
 8.75 
 
 29.17 
 
 3. 08 
 
 26.09 
 
 7.50 
 
 33.59 
 
 2.24 
 
 15.0 
 
 St. Charles County, Mo. 
 
 1 
 
 15 
 
 . $9. 48 
 
 $3.86 
 
 $2.86 
 
 $6.76 
 
 £22. 96 
 
 SO. 33 
 
 S22. 63 
 
 $12.0 J 
 
 $34. 63 
 
 $1. 15 
 
 30.0 
 
 2 
 
 90 
 
 10.18 
 
 3.84 
 
 2.21 
 
 5.28 
 
 21.51 
 
 .56 
 
 20.95 
 
 7.50 
 
 28.45 
 
 1.19 
 
 24.0 
 
 3 
 
 144 
 
 12.34 
 
 4.21 
 
 2.21 
 
 4.01 
 
 22.77 
 
 .14 
 
 22.63 
 
 8.40 
 
 31.03 
 
 1.35 
 
 22.9 
 
 4 
 
 67 
 
 7.57 
 
 3.82 
 
 2.14 
 
 7.24 
 
 20.77 
 
 .37 
 
 20. 40 
 
 U.OO 
 
 32.40 
 
 1.39 
 
 23.3 
 
 5 
 
 35 
 
 12.73 
 
 2.94 
 
 2.01 
 
 4.16 
 
 21.84 
 
 .32 
 
 21.52 
 
 9.00 
 
 30. 52 
 
 1.40 
 
 21.8 
 
 6 
 
 33 
 
 15.08 
 
 3.61 
 
 2.55 
 
 4.82 
 
 26.06 
 
 .42 
 
 25.64 
 
 13.50 
 
 39.14 
 
 1.44 
 
 27.3 
 
 7 
 
 52 
 
 11.80 
 
 3.70 
 
 1.81 
 
 4.17 
 
 21. 4S 
 
 .48 
 
 21.00 
 
 8.40 
 
 29.40 
 
 1.48 
 
 19.9 
 
 8 
 
 89 
 
 10.93 
 
 2.99 
 
 1.91 
 
 5.04 
 
 20.87 
 
 .44 
 
 20.43 
 
 12.00 
 
 32.43 
 
 1.49 
 
 21.7 
 
 9 
 
 60 
 
 13.84 
 
 3.25 
 
 2.03 
 
 5.33 
 
 24.45 
 
 .83 
 
 23. 62 
 
 9.00 
 
 32.62 
 
 1.51 
 
 21.7 
 
 10 
 
 105 
 
 10.04 
 
 3.40 
 
 1.76 
 
 3.93 
 
 19. 13 
 
 1.19 
 
 17.94 
 
 10.50 
 
 28.44 
 
 1.57 
 
 18.2 
 
 11 
 
 36 
 
 15.82 
 
 3.17 
 
 1.93 
 
 6.34 
 
 27.26 
 
 1.22 
 
 26.04 
 
 8.40 
 
 34.44 
 
 1.60 
 
 21.6 
 
 12 
 
 90 
 
 11.89 
 
 3.14 
 
 1.86 
 
 3.57 
 
 20. 46 
 
 
 20.46 
 
 12.00 
 
 32.46 
 
 1.62 
 
 20.0 
 
 13 
 
 20 
 
 12.48 
 
 3.55 
 
 1.83 
 
 4.41 
 
 22.27 
 
 .46 
 
 21.81 
 
 10. 50 
 
 32.31 
 
 1.62 
 
 20.0 
 
 14 
 
 80 
 
 9.91 
 
 4.49 
 
 1.77 
 
 5.04 
 
 21.21 
 
 
 21.21 
 
 9.00 
 
 30.21 
 
 1.63 
 
 18.5 
 
 15 
 
 51 
 
 13.35 
 
 3.53 
 
 1.73 
 
 5.87 
 
 24.48 
 
 . 58 
 
 23. 90 
 
 7.50 
 
 31.40 
 
 1.65 
 
 19.1 
 
 16 
 
 23 
 
 11.36 
 
 3.51 
 
 1.73 
 
 4.22 
 
 20.82 
 
 .51 
 
 20.31 
 
 10.50 
 
 30.81 
 
 1.69 
 
 18.3 
 
 17 
 
 70 
 
 11.73 
 
 3.48 
 
 2.10 
 
 7.52 
 
 24.83 
 
 .29 
 
 21. 54 
 
 12. 00 
 
 36.54 
 
 1.73 
 
 21.1 
 
 18 
 
 52 
 
 15.93 
 
 4.09 
 
 1.84 
 
 5.42 
 
 27. 28 
 
 
 27.28 
 
 9.00 
 
 36.28 
 
 1.80 
 
 20.2 
 
 19 
 
 70 
 
 9.45 
 
 3.59 
 
 1.69 
 
 5.21 
 
 19.94 
 
 .43 
 
 19.51 
 
 12. 00 
 
 31.51 
 
 1.82 
 
 17.3 
 
 20 
 
 65 
 
 18.58 
 
 3.87 
 
 1.92 
 
 6.14 
 
 30. 51 
 
 1.00 
 
 29.51 
 
 7.50 
 
 37.01 
 
 1.85 
 
 20.0 
 
 21 
 
 60 
 
 12.69 
 
 3.89 
 
 2.29 
 
 7.73 
 
 26.60 
 
 .50 
 
 26. 10 
 
 18. 00 
 
 44.10 
 
 1.86 
 
 23.8 
 
 22 
 
 110 
 
 13.43 
 
 3.92 
 
 1.89 
 
 4.96 
 
 24. 2d 
 
 .23 
 
 23. 97 
 
 13.50 
 
 37.47 
 
 1.87 
 
 20.0 
 
 23 
 
 41 
 
 17.19 
 
 3.84 
 
 1.99 
 
 5.96 
 
 28.98 
 
 .41 
 
 28.57 
 
 9.00 
 
 37.57 
 
 1.88 
 
 20.0 
 
 24 
 
 40 
 
 18.63 
 
 6.69 
 
 2.00 
 
 6.97 
 
 31.29 
 
 .75 
 
 33. 54 
 
 7.5(1 
 
 41. 04 
 
 1.99 
 
 20.6 
 
 25 
 
 40 
 
 14.55 
 
 4.31 
 
 1.98 
 
 7.44 
 
 28. 28 
 
 .30 
 
 27. 98 
 
 12.00 
 
 39.98 
 
 2.00 
 
 20.0 
 
 26 
 
 38 
 
 13.12 
 
 5.22 
 
 1.88 
 
 5.41 
 
 25. 63 
 
 .57 
 
 25.06 
 
 15.00 
 
 40.06 
 
 2.00 
 
 20.0 
 
 27 
 
 77 
 
 14.60 
 
 5.01 
 
 1.91 
 
 5.96 
 
 27.48 
 
 .52 
 
 26.96 
 
 15. 00 
 
 41.96 
 
 2.02 
 
 20.8 
 
 28 
 
 55 
 
 17.67 
 
 4.71 
 
 1.77 
 
 6. HI 
 
 30.16 
 
 .64 
 
 29. 52 
 
 9.00 
 
 38.52 
 
 2.06 
 
 18.7 
 
 29 
 
 80 
 
 12.36 
 
 3.64 
 
 1.27 
 
 5.16 
 
 22.43 
 
 .'38 
 
 22.05 
 
 7.50 
 
 29.55 
 
 2.15 
 
 13.8 
 
 30 
 
 42 
 
 14.87 
 
 3.32 
 
 1.42 
 
 5. 19 
 
 24.80 
 
 .65 
 
 24.15 
 
 9.00 
 
 33.15 
 
 2.32 
 
 14.3 
 
 31 
 
 180 
 
 12.01 
 
 1. 19 
 
 1.29 
 
 5.41 
 
 22.90 
 
 .27 
 
 22.63 
 
 9.00 
 
 31.63 
 
 2.48 
 
 12.8 
 
COST OF PRODUCING WHEAT. 
 
 59 
 
 Table XXX. VII .—Individual costs per acre on owned land, spring and winter wheat, 
 1919 (827 farms)-^ Continued. 
 
 Acres 
 har- 
 vest- 
 ed. 
 
 
 
 Factors of cost, per acre. 
 
 
 
 Total net cost , 
 with rent. 
 
 Labor. 
 
 Mate- 
 rial. 
 
 Thrash- 
 ing. 
 
 Miscel- 
 laneous. 
 
 Total 
 gross 
 cost, 
 with- 
 out 
 rent. 
 
 Credit. 
 
 Total 
 net 
 cost 
 
 with- 
 out 
 
 rent. 
 
 Rent 
 (inter- 
 est on 
 
 invest- 
 ment). 
 
 Per 
 
 acre. 
 
 Per 
 bushel. 
 
 Yield 
 per 
 acre. 
 
 WINTER WHEAT-Continued. 
 Phelps County, Nebr. 
 
 1 
 
 20 
 
 $6.48 
 
 $2.50 
 
 $0.82 
 
 £2.82 
 
 $12.62 
 
 $1. 00 
 
 SI 1.62 
 
 $6.00 
 
 $17. 62 
 
 $1.58 
 
 8.0 
 
 2 
 
 20 
 
 7.33 
 
 3. OS 
 
 1.38 
 
 3.77 
 
 15.56 
 
 
 15.56 
 
 6.03 
 
 21.56 
 
 1.66 
 
 13.0 
 
 3 
 
 100 
 
 8.20 
 
 3.86 
 
 1.63 
 
 4.17 
 
 17.86 
 
 .1 1 
 
 17.72 
 
 7.50 
 
 25.22 
 
 1.68 
 
 15.0 
 
 4 
 
 235 
 
 9.49 
 
 2.87 
 
 1.53 
 
 4.97 
 
 18 si; 
 
 
 18. 86 
 
 6.90 
 
 25.76 
 
 1.86 
 
 13.8 
 
 5 
 
 110 
 
 9.56 
 
 2.82 
 
 1.53 
 
 4.61 
 
 18. 52 
 
 
 18.52 
 
 7.50 
 
 26.02 
 
 1.86 
 
 14.0 
 
 6 
 
 43 
 
 12.30 
 
 2.84 
 
 1.66 
 
 4.34 
 
 21. 14 
 
 
 21 14 
 
 7.5D 
 
 28.64 
 
 1.91 
 
 15.0 
 
 7 
 
 80 
 
 9.19 
 
 3.37 
 
 1.20 
 
 3.23 
 
 16. 99 
 
 2.50 
 
 14.49 
 
 6.60 
 
 21.09 
 
 1.92 
 
 11.0 
 
 8 
 
 430 
 
 9.70 
 
 2.67 
 
 1.28 
 
 3.44 
 
 17. 09 
 
 
 17. i>9 
 
 7.50 
 
 24.59 
 
 2.05 
 
 12.0 
 
 9 
 
 100 
 
 8.73 
 
 2.65 
 
 1.05 
 
 4.88 
 
 17. 31 
 
 1.10 
 
 16.21 
 
 7. 50 
 
 23. 71 
 
 2.43 
 
 9.8 
 
 10 
 
 140 
 
 9.40 
 
 2.60 
 
 1.02 
 
 3.91 
 
 16.93 
 
 .48 
 
 16.45 
 
 7.50 
 
 23.95 
 
 2.48 
 
 9.6 
 
 11 
 
 120 
 
 9.74 
 
 3.08 
 
 1.06 
 
 3.90 
 
 17.7s 
 
 .42 
 
 17.36 
 
 8.40 
 
 25. 76 
 
 2.69 
 
 9.6 
 
 12 
 
 90 
 
 11.22 
 
 2.42 
 
 .94 
 
 3. 56 
 
 18.14 
 
 
 is. 14 
 
 6.00 
 
 24.14 
 
 2.76 
 
 8.8 
 
 13 
 
 105 
 
 9.09 
 
 2. 38 
 
 .75 
 
 3. 67 
 
 15. S9 
 
 
 15.89 
 
 7.50 
 
 23. 39 
 
 3.11 
 
 7.5 
 
 11 
 
 55 
 
 6.38 
 
 2.53 
 
 .43 
 
 5.34 
 
 14.68 
 
 .42 
 
 14.26 
 
 9.00 
 
 23. 26 
 
 6.33 
 
 3.7 
 
 Saline County, Nebr. 
 
 1 
 
 50 
 
 $10.59 
 
 $4. 36 
 
 $1.83 
 
 $5. 95 
 
 $22. 73 
 
 $0.20 
 
 $22. 53 
 
 19.00 
 
 $31.53 
 
 $1. 43 
 
 22.0 
 
 2 
 
 55 
 
 15.15 
 
 4.72 
 
 2.86 
 
 4.74 
 
 27.47 
 
 .45 
 
 27.02 
 
 9.00 
 
 36.02 
 
 1.61 
 
 22.4 
 
 3 
 
 30 
 
 16.44 
 
 5.19 
 
 2.28 
 
 6.47 
 
 30. 38 
 
 2.50 
 
 27. 88 
 
 12.00 
 
 .71. B8 
 
 1.69 
 
 23.6 
 
 4 
 
 48 
 
 13.30 
 
 3.96 
 
 2.19 
 
 5.43 
 
 24. 88 
 
 .31 
 
 24.57 
 
 12 Oil 
 
 36. 57 
 
 1.76 
 
 20.8 
 
 5 
 
 65 
 
 10.15 
 
 4.55 
 
 1.72 
 
 6.39 
 
 22.81 
 
 
 22. SI 
 
 12.00 
 
 3 1, si 
 
 1.93 
 
 18.0 
 
 6 
 
 50 
 
 13.33 
 
 3.64 
 
 1.99 
 
 6. 97 
 
 25.93 
 
 .50 
 
 25. 43 
 
 15. 00 
 
 10. 43 
 
 1.93 
 
 21.0 
 
 7 
 
 85 
 
 12.97 
 
 3.38 
 
 2.39 
 
 5.05 
 
 23. 79 
 
 
 23.79 
 
 15.00 
 
 38. 79 
 
 1.94 
 
 20.0 
 
 8 
 
 45 
 
 13. 42 
 
 3.58 
 
 1.61 
 
 5. '.'.) 
 
 24. 10 
 
 .22 
 
 23.88 
 
 9.00 
 
 32.88 
 
 2.05 
 
 16.0 
 
 9 
 
 40 
 
 11.62 
 
 3.58 
 
 1.76 
 
 3.97 
 
 20. 93 
 
 
 20. 93 
 
 Hi. 50 
 
 37.43 
 
 2.08 
 
 18.0 
 
 10 
 
 35 
 
 19.16 
 
 4.20 
 
 1.94 
 
 6. (13 
 
 31.33 
 
 
 31. 33 
 
 10. 50 
 
 41. S3 
 
 2.09 
 
 20.0 
 
 11 
 
 50 
 
 14.39 
 
 3.90 
 
 1.80 
 
 7.31 
 
 27.40 
 
 
 27.40 
 
 12.00 
 
 39. 40 
 
 2.10 
 
 18.8 
 
 12 
 
 55 
 
 16.62 
 
 7.03 
 
 2.02 
 
 8. 11 
 
 34.11 
 
 .82 
 
 33. 29 
 
 15. Oil 
 
 is. 29 
 
 2.10 
 
 23.0 
 
 13 
 
 40 
 
 13. 87 
 
 3.38 
 
 1.85 
 
 5.62 
 
 24.72 
 
 .38 
 
 24.34 
 
 12.00 
 
 36.34 
 
 2.14 
 
 17.0 
 
 14 
 
 90 
 
 18.51 
 
 5.52 
 
 2.02 
 
 5.04 
 
 31.09 
 
 .33 
 
 30. 76 
 
 12.dll 
 
 42. 76 
 
 2.16 
 
 19.8 
 
 15 
 
 16 
 
 17.24 
 
 4.07 
 
 1.80 
 
 1.66 
 
 27.77 
 
 
 27.77 
 
 16.50 
 
 44.27 
 
 2.21 
 
 20.0 
 
 16 
 
 30 
 
 19.11 
 
 5.25 
 
 1.80 
 
 6.33 
 
 32.49 
 
 .33 
 
 32. 16 
 
 12.00 
 
 44.16 
 
 .2.21 
 
 20.0 
 
 17 
 
 60 
 
 13. 30 
 
 4.22 
 
 1.68 
 
 5.86 
 
 25.06 
 
 .40 
 
 24.66 
 
 12. 00 
 
 36. 66 
 
 2.29 
 
 16.0 
 
 18 
 
 15 
 
 14.69 
 
 3.97 
 
 1.75 
 
 7.29 
 
 27.70 
 
 .50 
 
 27.20 
 
 12.00 
 
 39.20 
 
 2.31 
 
 17.0 
 
 19 
 
 22 
 
 13.43 
 
 4.31 
 
 1.28 
 
 5.46 
 
 24. 48 
 
 .91 
 
 23. 57 
 
 12.00 
 
 35.57 
 
 2.37 
 
 15.0 
 
 20 
 
 122 
 
 11. 15 
 
 3.90 
 
 2.05 
 
 0.42 
 
 23.52 
 
 
 23.52 
 
 15. 00 
 
 38. 52 
 
 2.49 
 
 15.4 
 
 21 
 
 65 
 
 17.58 
 
 3.85 
 
 1.48 
 
 5. S7 
 
 28.78 
 
 1.15 
 
 27. 63 
 
 15.00 
 
 42.63 
 
 2.51 
 
 17.0 
 
 22 
 
 90 
 
 15.73 
 
 4.63 
 
 1.56 
 
 6.02 
 
 27.94 
 
 .33 
 
 27.61 
 
 15. 00 
 
 42.61 
 
 2.61 
 
 16.3 
 
 23 
 
 74 
 
 21.50 
 
 4.31 
 
 1.94 
 
 9.87 
 
 37.62 
 
 
 37.62 
 
 12. 00 
 
 49. 62 
 
 2.64 
 
 18.8 
 
 24 
 
 20 
 
 17.27 
 
 3.68 
 
 1.85 
 
 5.85 
 
 28.65 
 
 .50 
 
 28. 15 
 
 12.00 
 
 40.15 
 
 2.77 
 
 14.5 
 
 25 
 
 12 
 
 17.09 
 
 3.38 
 
 1.28 
 
 6.32 
 
 28.07 
 
 .42 
 
 27.65 
 
 12. 00 
 
 39.65 
 
 2.83 
 
 14.0 
 
 26 
 
 50 
 
 15.55 
 
 5.50 
 
 1.08 
 
 5.01 
 
 27.14 
 
 
 27. 14 
 
 9.00 
 
 36. 14 
 
 3.61 
 
 10.0 
 
 27 
 
 30 
 
 14.65 
 
 4.34 
 
 1.24 
 
 5.19 
 
 25.42 
 
 .20 
 
 25.22 
 
 14.40 
 
 39.62 
 
 3.96 
 
 10.0 
 
 Keith County, Nebr. 
 
 450 
 
 $8.09 
 
 130 
 
 13. 02 
 
 65 
 
 11.94 
 
 150 
 
 8.24 
 
 60 
 
 12.64 
 
 60 
 
 7.53 
 
 100 
 
 7.32 
 
 65 
 
 9.29 
 
 100 
 
 11.69 
 
 40 
 
 13.86 
 
 65 
 
 12.06 
 
 200 
 
 5.44 
 
 20 
 
 15.07 
 
 $1.56 
 2.14 
 2.23 
 2.77 
 2.20 
 2.20 
 2.00 
 2.98 
 2.83 
 2.50 
 2.49 
 2.25 
 2. 50 
 
 $2.07 
 2.94 
 2.61 
 2.49 
 1.96 
 1.44 
 1.22 
 2.05 
 1.69 
 1.60 
 1.41 
 1.11 
 1.09 
 
 $4.04 
 5.18 
 8.33 
 9.65 
 4.86 
 5.41 
 2.74 
 6.45 
 4.88 
 3.40 
 5.31 
 4.84 
 4.02 
 
 $15.76 
 23. 28 
 25.11 
 23.15 
 21.66 
 16.58 
 13. 28 
 20.77 
 21.09 
 21.36 
 21.27 
 13.64 
 22.68 
 
 25 
 
 $15 32 
 22.93 
 24.88 
 23. 09 
 21.32 
 16.48 
 13.28 
 20.77 
 20.84 
 21.36 
 20.96 
 13.64 
 22. 43 
 
 S3. 90 
 5.40 
 4.80 
 
 8.40 
 4.50 
 6.(1(1 
 6.00 
 7.50 
 6.00 
 6.00 
 7.50 
 6.00 
 2.40 
 
 $19.22 
 
 25. 33 
 29.68 
 31.49 
 25 S2 
 22. 4S 
 19.28 
 28.27 
 
 26. 84 
 27.36 
 28.46 
 19.64 
 24.83 
 
 $0.96 
 1.01 
 1.19 
 1.35 
 1.37 
 1.50 
 1.57 
 1.60 
 1.68 
 1.82 
 1.99 
 2.00 
 3.08 
 
 20.0 
 28.0 
 25.0 
 23.3 
 18.8 
 15.0 
 12.2 
 17.3 
 16.0 
 15.0 
 14.3 
 9.8 
 8.0 
 
ADDITIONAL COPIES 
 
 OF THIS PUBLICATION MAY BE PROCURED FROM 
 
 THE SUPERINTENDENT OF DOCUMENTS 
 
 GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
 
 WASHINGTON, D. C. 
 
 AT 
 
 IS CENTS PER COPY 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 000 935 606 ft 
 
H< 
 
LIBRARY OF CONGRESS 
 
 000 935 606 ft