Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1921-09-28
South Carolina Leads in Crop
Values to Acre.

Values to Acre.
Atlanta, Ca, Sept. 22.-With a
farm value of 5000 per acre for
crops grown in the state, little South
Carolina leads the states of the union
in. value of crops grown on her acres
of improved land. Director j. N. Har9
per of the Southern Soil s1nproyss
ment committee has just fnishedsa
digest of the report of the census bIls, y,
reau, and finds that South Carolina
has an enviable record for the yeais
1919, for which year the census fig
ures were gathered. Her acreage OF
improved land was 6,206,644 acres
and the value of her farm crops
grown on this land was $437,121,s
837, which gives value of $70.50
per acre.
1t is interesting to note in this, con:
nection that South Cardinals expenS
ditures for fertilizers amounted to
$52,546,795, or that for each acre
she spent an average of $s.46. This
would not be SO significant werefit
not for the fact that North Carolinas
her nearest competitor in the South,
with over two million more acres. of
improved land spent $5.96 per acre
for fertilizers and has a farm value
of crops per acre of $61.50. North
Carolina had S,194,409 acres in I'M
proved land and total value OF
farm crops amounting to S503 ,229,s
313, or value per acre of S61.50.
This state spent 4s,796,694 for fer
tilizers during that year. 81
Now compare these figures with
those from two other states of the
same region.
Georgia had 13,054,O1O acres Of
improved land and a total value Of
farm crops amounting to $540,613s,
626. This gives Georgia a farm value
of crops per acre of $41.40. She:
spent s46,196,434, or only 1888 per
acre for fertilizers and her value Of
crops per acre dropped corresponds
ingly. Alabama with 9,8s3 4Q79 acres
of improved land had total value
of crops amounting to 1904 ,348; ;63S9'
sis an ae ere palue
Alabama, however, spent only $14,-
O66,1OS or just about SLAP per acre
for fertilizers and her value per acre
of farm crops dropped below half of
the value secured on South Carolina
farms. North Carolina spent just
about $6 per acre for fertilizers and
doubled the value per acre of Ala
bama's crops. Putting this in another
way, North Carolina spent little
over four times as much for fertili-
zers as Alabama and made 100 per
cent on the investment.
According to Director Harper, it
seems that as is the use Of fertilizers
so is crop production. These figures,
issued by the census bureau seem to
bear out his assertion. 1t brings to-
mind the old argument that a less
number of acres intelligently farmed
and literally fertilized can be made
to pay more actual profit than by
trying to farm large areas and secur-
ing low acre yields. With the chang
| ing system of farming that is grad
ually coming over the South, it be-
comes more and more imperative
that the acreage be reduced
This is especially true of cotton.
Under boil weevil conditions, farm
ers can not hope to farm large areas
in cotton proftably. This has been
brought forcibly to their attention
this year when the boil weeyil has
reduced the yields in some sections
to where the farmers will not make
bale on from six to ten acres Of
land. This is conservative estimate
given by some leading farmers in the
districts seriously affected. 1t would
seem that fewer acres of cotton, lib
orally fertilized and carefully tended; ;
the growing Of all food and feed
crops and plenty of hay and rough
age for the cattle and hogs; the keep
ing of sufficient cows to furnish all
the milk and butter needed; home
poultry flock ,;and an orchard and
garden will work for the complete
financial independence of the South
ern farmer.
Figures show that crops must be