The Effects on Farm Operating Units of Land Acquisition for Controlled-Access Highways
Creators: name: Vlasin, Raymond D.
name: Pendleton, William C.
name: Hedrick, James L.
name: Vlasin, Raymond D.
name: Pendleton, William C.
name: Hedrick, James L.
Publisher: name: Unknown
Year: 1962
Subjects: Crop Production/Industries
Farm Management
Labor and Human Capital
Land Economics/Use
Livestock Production/Industries
Research Methods/ Statistical Methods

description: Report Summary: How farmers adjust to the loss of part of their real estate to highway rights-of-way was the focus of this study. The 3-year history of 80 farms crossed by Iowa Interstate Route 35 was examined. Operators were interviewed concerning certain features of these farm operating units for the crop year 1956 - the crop year immediately preceding the right-of-way taking - and for the crop year 1959. Data on significant changes in intervening years were collected also. To provide a control to help in isolating the effects of the highway taking, an additional group of 82 farms in the area was selected by laying out a hypothetical right-of-way parallel to, but 3 miles distant from, the study segment. Operators in this "control" group were asked the same questions as the operators in the "taking" group, and the data from the two samples were then compared. The 33 miles of Interstate 35 examined took all or part of six sets of farm buildings and just under 7 percent of the farmland in the 80 sample operating units. Voluntary sales of excess land to the Highway Commission and the resale of some of this excess land to sample farms raised the decrease in average size of farm to about 10 percent. Despite this loss of land from highway taking and sales of excess, taking-group farms between 1956 and 1959 showed approximately the same rate of increase in average acreage as the control-group farms. More than half, however, failed to regain their 1956 acreage. The taking-group farms showed a substantially higher rate of disappearance over the study period than did the control-group farms. Three-fifths of the former were involved in real estate transactions, compared with one-third of the latter. In two other aspects explored in the study, the tenure pattern and the rate of turnover of farm operators, no differences between the groups were apparent. Differences in the use of hired labor and in the off-farm work of the farm family were in the direction expected, but they were not large. Both groups showed considerable variability as to size of crop and livestock enterprises. The taking group showed greater variability for crop enterprises, but little difference was apparent in the overall variability of livestock enterprises. No noteworthy differences in machinery investment were detected. It was clear that the highway substantially increased the dispersion of the land operated by taking-group farms, in terms of the number of farms operating separated parcels, the number and acreage of the separated parcels and the distance of these tracts from the farm headquarters. While the Highway Commission played the major role in helping farmers to dispose of separated tracts, many such tracts were retained in the farm units. Others were disposed of through normal market channels. The report closes with an appraisal of the study methods used and suggestions for the conduct of further research on this subject. An appendix explores relevant aspects of the right-of-way acquisition policies and procedures.
description: This bulletin was originally an administrative report to the Bureau of Public Roads, and with its permission is being issued without change as an Economic Research Service publication. Research reported was financed by administrative funds received from the Bureau.