The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1884-04-11
Skim Milk Farming.

In the section l live in the farmers
are chiefly engaged in wheat rais .ng,
w tn growing tendency in the d,rec-
ton of stock and dairy farming. are
full estimates have placed the actual
cost OF producing bushel of wheat in
this section at not far from sixty-tive
cents; this does not includ. depreci-
alton in land nor cost of Iranspor at on
by rail, or otherwise, to the markets of
the world. These expenses q g egat at
least twenty-five cents more. and when
the wheat is placed in any market
where it will br ne 81 per bushel, the
cost of products and ranspor-
tat on have run up to at least
ninety cents. The crop of 'S3
marketed in my town agg egated
300. ryU bushels, wort in h ca o ONE
thing like half mill on do lars, on
W Itch the farmers have reali ed pro t
of not NOR. than ten per cent, or Sa0,-
o, in this favo a lie wheat year. The
freight tariff alone on this wheat
amounts, howeve' to II 200, and as
the cost of transpOrtat on affects the
price pa d. this enormous tax really
falls on the farmers. The expenses
for FIRE CHIT alone are the .efore mo e
than double their pro its.
Now. assuming that stock and dairy
farming are, of themselves. quite as
pro- table as wheat farm ng-.n
OF ell words, that it costs no
more to procure given amount
amount n wheat au assumption most
favorable Indeed to tn wheat Interest =,
it is easy TO estimate the benefit
the farmer might receive in tn S
one item alone, by condens ng his
prod lcts.
Half 4 m lion dollars worth Of live
stoc could be sent to the hica O mar
ket at an expense f Lot to e coed ,51.-
| UC0, and thus of th >ll. ,00p freight
expense in ident TO wheat raising, there
would have been saved, to the farmers
pro t, $4,000.
The same product in pork and beef
would ha gone to the same market
al an expense OF not to exceed $4,000,
and thus another $1,000 of freight
Nigh have been saved-a!l clear profit.
| The same amount in he Sc would
have required the expenditure of but
$1,000 in freight, instead of Sill, 900,
and thus an even SlC0,000 of expense
might have been saved to the farmers,
Just twice the amount of their profits
on wheat; and on d vfd ng up am ,ng
! the % or more ia merS ca h would
! have balance of 500 to sh wv for
every SO he realized on wheat.
In the production of butter the differ
ence is still more to b advantage. To
sh souO,OOO worth of butter wo I'D
cost not more than from $1,000 to
IS. 100 in place OF the Sl15.O0h, and
thus about IS per cent. of the costs of
wheat transportation would be saved,
ard the farme s. supposed profit of 10
per cent. would be increased to con-
derably OYER 80 per cent. of tie
gross receipts. Putt ng it in differ mt
form and we find that the outhwestern
! Minnesota farmer. who produces good
butter, pays oIt for tranSp rtation to
ma .ket but per ent. OF the value of
his product. The cheese producer pays
out from 81 to / per cent The pork
beef prO1u"e avs rom > to d per
cent. id the We stock shipper from Z
to 3 per cent; but the wheat ia mer
settles his little freight account b. turn
ing over from % to y per cent of all
the gross receipts of his crop. and a
large share if NIT all. of the balance
goes BROTHER expenses.
The wheat farmer is content to take
his sma pittanc, of gain in skim-m Tx,
while the m Hers sociations, The
spe ulators. AMI the railroads take al
the cream of his crop.-trom a paper
bv II E. z, ard. read before the N. w
Dairynleas Association.