The Indianapolis times. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1922-1965, 1924-04-12
WIDE DIFFERENCE
IN RESULTS SEEN
ON IND|ANA ARMS
Eight-Year Average
Income on 80 Acres. in
Clinton County, S1,722,

Operators of eighty-acre farms in
central Indiana average about a
mortgage rate of interest on their
capital, and somewhere near & hired
mans wages for their labor. in addi-
ton to getting products furnished by
the farm for family living and a
possible increase in the value OF their
land, according to business records
obtained by the United States De
partment of Agriculture and Purdue
University at Lafayette. Ind
These records show farm profits
made since 1910. under various sys-
TENS of farm management, on about
$40 eighty-acre farms. The important
thing is the wide variation shown in
the profits of different farmers. One
eighty-acre farmer in Clinton County
made an average far1p income Of
S1.722 a year for eight years, as COM
pared with 1896 a year by the least
successful farmer.
Four Farms Compared
Comparison of the four most sue
cessful eighty-acre farms in Clinton
County with the four least successful
farms in the some locality showed
that the farm income of the former
group from 1910 TO 1919 averaged
more than twice that of the other
group. The farm income of the four
most successful farms. for the eight
year period, was S1.566. and that of
the four least successful farms was
$50 year.
There was less difference between
the most successful and the least sue
cessful farms in the value Of the sup
plies furnished for the farm home
than in any other item of income. This
item on the most successful farms av-
eraged $3.50 a year, and on the least
successful farms 1903. Family living
furnished on all of the eighty
farms studied in Clinton County varied
in the different years, rising from an
average of S27S in 1910 to a high point
of s445 in 1918.
Labor Average S622
Labor income on the four most sue
cessful farms averaged 1922 a year
compared with SCI on the four least
successful farms. Labor income is
figured as the farm income. less 3 per
does not include tho value of the fam
lily supplies furnished by the farms.
The following table shows how the
four most successful eighty-acre
farms in Clinton County compared
with four least successful farms in
the different incomes:
Most Successful
Receipts. s2.527.
Farm income, S1.566.
Labor income. 1862.
Per cent on capital, 60.
Value of family living furnished by
farm, $3.50.
Least Successful.
Receipts, 81 1858.
Farm income, 1868.
Labor income. $62.
Per cent on capital. 20.
Value of family living furnished by
farm, 5000.
Three GENERALIZATION
The outstanding cropping system on
the s0-acre farms studied was built
around a three-year rotation of corn.
small grain, and clover or clover and
timothy. Other less common systems
were: A four-year rotation Of corr
corn. small grain, and clover or clover
and timothy; a four-year rotation of
corn. small grain. clover, or clover and
timothy for two years; and a ffve-year
rotation of corn, corn, soy beans,
wheat and clover or clover and tim
othy.
Most Of the successful farmers want
ed all the land in corn that they could
well care for. while still having a
good cropping system from the stand
points of the efficient use Of the labor,
Of the crop rotation. and Of the pro-
ductivity of the land. On the four
most successful S0-acre farms in Gin.
ton County the corn area averaged q
acres, small grain Is acres. and clover
or clover and timothy, 90 acres. This
gave 81 acres in corn out of a total
rotation area of So acres.