Grant County herald. [volume] (Lancaster, Wis.) 1850-1968, 1884-11-06
Andersonville, Millen, Co.
|lumbia, Florence, Tyler,
Salisbury, cahawba, Dan
vile, Libby, Pemberton,
Castle Thunder, BelleIsle.
Cost OF Wheat.

The Chicago Tribune gives some re-
cent computations of the cost of raising
wheat in England. and then make.
some estimates for our country which
are not very encouraging for wheat
growers:
The wheat question is big question
bigger than any one who has vet Ia
ken hold of it. The London Economist.
in an article which we recently repro
duced, ciphers out the cost of an acre
put to wheat in England at not less than
$50. With the average return as it is
this year, only S25 an acre. the farmers
of England are losing SO an acre on
their wheat. Various estimates have
been made for this country. The Trib-
une. giving the farmer the benefit of ey-
cry item, in order to make the result as
little discouraging as possible, has put
the cost OF an acre in wheat at 81. Cor
respondents who have written us from
the wheat districts have corrected our
figures as too low. and have estimated
the cost at 50 to $40. One of the most
intelligent efforts to arrive at the facts
of the case is made by the St. Paul cor
respondent of Bradstreet's. Present
prices, he says, do not give the farmer
a living profit on any estimate OF cost
that is warranted by experience. One
OF the bonanza farmers of the Red Riy-
or Valley finds that in q good year his
lands produce twenty bushels to the
acre at cost of SIS, or 40 cents BUSH
ell. This is the minimum cost, for it
represents the economies of gang plows,
labor hired, housed and fed with mill
tary system, wholesale price for all sup
plies, steam harvesting and threshing
The maximum cost this correspondent
puts at 80 an acre of fifteen bushels, or
60 cents bushel. The average cost
lies between. The amount the farmer
is getting for his wheat, taking II cents
for freight and three cents for other
charges out of the 63 cents for which
his wheat is selling in Minneapolis and
st. Paul, is but As cents. These figures
show conclusively that the farmers of
the Northwest are losing money at the
present prices of wheat, just as the
farmers of England are falling behind.
They are receiving no interest on their
capital; not even the actual outlay of
labor and money.
Will these losses persuade the farmers
to raise less wheat and something
else than wheat? Another correspond
ent of Bradstreets shows that in the
last ten years wheat in England has
fallen considerably more than oats and
barley, and he predicts that the English
farmers will therefore raise more of
those grains hereafter than of wheat.
Butcher meat and dairy produce have
risen in price while wheat has been 90
ing down, and farmers will replace
wheat with these more profitable pro-
ducts. In Minnesota and Dakota the
correspondent of Bradstreet's says that
stock-raising has already assumed large
proportions in the southern counties,
and is rapidly gaining in favor. But
the great rush will be flax. The farmer
can raise about as much flax seed to the
acre as wheat; but while the wheat sells
for only 63 cents bushel for the bulk
of the crop and 20 cents for the very
best. flax seed brings SLY bushel in
st. Paul. But all farmers who read
this must not rush into the culture of
flax. for it will be easier to glut the fax
market than that for wheat. The best
outlet for the farmer is the production
of meat and dairy products.