The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1920-11-08
TOPEKA STATE JOURNAL
Information Bureau
FREDERIC j. HAsKIN. Director.
washington, ID. C.
FEWER FARMS.

washington, ID. G.
FEWER FARMS.
Washington, D. c., Nov. 5.-While
the population of the United States
has increased 10 per cent or more
during the last ten years, the number
of farms in the country has barely in
creased at all-only IA per cent, to
be exact.
This fact, that the amount of land
which is being cultivated Is not in
creasing as fast as is the population,
has been pointed out before, but it is
interesting to note that the census Of
ficially confirms it, and also to note
just where the increases and decreases
lie. 1t also seems especially pertinent
to set forth these facts right now.
Neither of the major parties seems TO
be taking very much account of them.
The appointment of real dirt farm
err for secretary of agriculture has
been put forward by the politicians as
a remedy. Legislation has also been
recommended, and will probably be
passed, allowing farmers to organize
for purposes of selling and buying:
Nothing more is heard of the project
which was put forward so vigorously
during the war, for the government to
create more farms out of swamps'
stumplands, and deserts.
| Meantime, there is every prospect
that, unless something is done, our
| facilities for producing food VIII soon
fall far below our needs. In 1900 II
was found that the number of farms
had increased about 10 per cent in ten
years which probably meant that the
amount of land cultivated was increas-
/ fx,or OH iIrth
! Der of people. The next census may
we'll show decrease in the number OF
farms, unless something is done in the
meantime.
Why Men Won't Farm.
1t has been widely stated and i'm
plied that the reason for the dwindling
number of farms in this country and
for the tendency of the food supply
not to increase as fast as the popula-
ton, is found in the unwilling ness OF
the young men to go on the farms or
to stay there. This, no doubt Is the
reason. But the implication is that
they spurn the farms, not because
farming is Improbable, but because
they prefer bright lights, moving pic
lures and all the other alleged allure
ments of our great industrial cities.
Representatives of ft.rmer organiza-
lions say this is not so. They say that
the country is full of men who are
farm, If only they can make a good
living at it. They say that this is often
impossible except where the land is
rich, transportation facilities of the
best, and all other circumstances
favorable. They say, further, that it
is very hard for the man who wants
to farm to get a farm. Farmlands
are held at very high prices in this
country, many thousand acres of
them lying idle. To buy unimprovec
land and put it under cultivation is
simply not a paying proposition, 1t is
said, except on a large scale, and not
always then. In other words, the man
who has or can borrow a few thou
sand dollars cannot profitably invest
1t in farmlands, and that is one very
good If not all-sufficient reason why
the number of farms las not IN
creased.
What Figures Show.
This view of the matter seems to be
sustained in a way by the census fig
ures. They show the increase or de-
crease in the number of farms in each
state. These figures prove that the
number of farms is decreasing in
nearly all of the northeastern btates,
and in many of the southern and mid
die Atlantic states, and that 1t is IN
creasing, in some parts very rapidly.
in the west
OF course, one would expect to find
the greatest increase in the west,
where there are still public lands and
relatively sparse population. Even so,
the rapid increase in the west would
certainly show that men are willing to
farm where they can get hold of land
and farm it at = profit. And the posi-
tive decrease in the east would surely
seem to prove that men are being dis
couraged in that section.
The western states which show an
increase in the number of farms are
aa.g A. Dr1a =
RADIO, Idaho, Minnesota, Montana, Ne
yada, North Dakota, oregon, Texas
Utah, Washington, Wisconsin and
Wyoming, that is, practically all of
the far western states except New
Mexico.
OF the southern states, increases are
shown by Florida, Georgia, Kentucky
Louisiana, Oklahoma, South Carolina,
North Carolina, Tennessee and Vir-
ginia. But the increases in these states
are much smaller on an average than
those in the western states.
All of the other states show de-
creases in the numbers of farms. This
means not only that the number of
farms iffNew England and the north
east generally Is decreasing, but that
the number of farms in the middle
west, the traditional granary of Amer
lea, is decreasing. The west, then, is
doing more than it's share to feed
America. The south is doing much,
but the average increase in that sec
ton scarcely keeps up with the in
crease of population. The middle west
and the northeast are steadily falling
behind in food production. They are
looking more and more to the west to
feed them.
Why West Leads.
What then are the conditions which
have kept the west in state of grow
ing agricultural productiveness when
the rest of the country has become
decadent in that respect? No doubt
the rich young soil of the region is
one reason. No doubt another reason
is that there are fewer industrial plants
to attract men to the cities