Ottumwa tri-weekly courier. [volume] (Ottumwa, Iowa) 1903-1916, 1914-04-11
THE TRUTH ABOUT CROPS.

ger.
THE TRUTH ABOUT CROPS.
Efforts of soil experts and farm
economists to bring about larger yields
per acre, per man have resulted In the
growth of a school which spreads the
belief that the farmer actually gets
more money when he has short crop
than he does when the crop is of the
bumper variety. l.. R. Johnson in the
breeders Gazette answers this con-
tention as follows:
During the last year have observed
the growth of an economic faliacy
whose dimensions now cast their shad-
ows far and wide. Old and influential
members of the farm press have sue
cumbed to it's subtleties, and its con-
verts are discovering themselves IN
unsuspected high places. But the eli
max is certainly reached when we find
this specious sophism enthroned at
Washington and speaking through no
less a distinguished medium than the
report of the department of agrlcul-
ture. Within the last two years 1t has
been taken up and championed Win
great spirit and plausibility by an
eastern farm journal of high standing,
and now, it is apparently in fair way
to be foisted upon the farmer as an ac-
cepted and orthodox canon OF rural
economics.
Briefly, the foundations of this soph-
ism rest on the fact that the value OF
a large crop is often less than that OF
a. smaller one 1t is vehemently preach
ei that the present national promotion
of farm production is a false policy
that merely stimulates the farmer to
greater exertions with an increase OF
profit not to himself but to middlemen,
and that. financially, there is no incen-
tive to grow 60 bushels of corn instead
of 40. Such seditious sentiments. if per-
sisted in. will sow a mischievious dis
trust of collegiate teaching. But even
such a result is trifling to the baneful
influence of such doctrines on the gen
era1 attitude of the farmer towards
production.
Let us examine the principles of this
new school. 1t is indeed common
"phenomenon" for the value of large
crop to be less than that of smaller
one, but it is very superficial error
to assume from this that increased
production offers no reward to the
producer In the first place, the value
of large crop is only occasionally
less than that of smaller one. Sec
ondly. a glance at statistics will snow
that this phenomenon" is merely an
unimportant variation between prox-
imal crops and has no connection what
ever with the deeper and determlna-
tive values that become apparent Wnen
we compare series Of years. For the
seven years 1899 to 1905 inclusive, we,
find an average Of SIS, 100000 bushels
Of wheat valued at $430000,000: for
the seven years 1905 to 1912 inclusive,
O36. 500 900 bushels, valued at $624,50O
600. Substantially the same story IS
true of other crops; but there are
more convincing arguments than sta
tistics can supply. Granted that the
total value of small crop is often
greater than that of a larger one, what
can we generally safely predicate OF
such years? That the year of short
production with high values is nearly
always an llnfavorable one for the farm
body. It is true the same amount of
money or more disbursed. Only those
farmers will profit from the high prices
who succeed in growing surplus
above their own necessities and these
by the way, will be those who are an
nually striving to increase the limit OF
production.
Let us roughly estimate these at one
third the farm body; those who grow
a supply equal to home requirements,
at another third. and, lastly as the
final third. are those whose crops fall
below their actual wants, and who, in
consequence, are compelled to buy
feed or suffer whatever loss the scar
city entails. Again, in years OF dl-
minished production we find regions
favored with the normal crops. while
others are contending with famine
like failure. Here again inequity is
emphasized.
The department report estimates
that 81 per cent of all crops are con-
sumed on the farm. A large crop,
therefore, implies sufficiency and in
most cases a surplus on every farm;
it jasures that every farmer will share,
more or less, in the total cash value;
that there will be a full fed body Of
live stock. with breeding and feeding
stimulated and the markets supplied
with we'll fattened animals. On the
other hand, small crop means re-
trenchment on the part of many,
maintenance instead of fattening ra-
tions, restriction Of purchase both in
stock and manufa ctures, postponement
OF improvements and a general strin-
gency in the expenditures of rural life.
To put it succinctly, large crops mean
prosperity to many; small ones, pros
perity to few.
Increased production does not mean
a corresponding increase in the ratio
of expense Larger yields are gained
at diminishing cost per bushel. Scien-