• TABLE OF CONTENTS
HIDE
 Front Cover
 Purpose of the study
 Agricultural development
 Some factors affecting farming...
 Summary














Group Title: Bulletin University of Florida. Agricultural Experiment Station
Title: Factors affecting farming returns in Jackson County, Florida
CITATION DOWNLOADS THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00026893/00001
 Material Information
Title: Factors affecting farming returns in Jackson County, Florida
Series Title: Bulletin University of Florida. Agricultural Experiment Station
Physical Description: 36 p. : charts, maps ; 23 cm.
Language: English
Creator: Brunk, Max E ( Max Edwin ), 1914-
Publisher: University of Florida Agricultural Experiment Station
Place of Publication: Gainesville Fla
Publication Date: 1942
Copyright Date: 1942
 Subjects
Subject: Farm income -- Florida -- Jackson County   ( lcsh )
Farmers -- Economic conditions   ( lcsh )
Genre: government publication (state, provincial, terriorial, dependent)   ( marcgt )
non-fiction   ( marcgt )
 Notes
Statement of Responsibility: by Max E. Brunk.
General Note: Cover title.
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00026893
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: ltuf - AEN5824
oclc - 18230646
alephbibnum - 000925179

Downloads
Table of Contents
    Front Cover
        Page 1
        Page 2
    Purpose of the study
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
    Agricultural development
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
    Some factors affecting farming returns
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
    Summary
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
Full Text


Bulletin 377


October, 1942


UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
't
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION
---- WILMON NEWELL, Director
GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA











FACTORS AFFECTING FARMING

RETURNS IN

JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA


By MAX E. BRUNK














Single copies free to Florida residents upon request to
AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION
GAINESVILLE, FLORIDA







EXECUTIVE STAFF
John J. Tigert, M.A., LL.D., President of the
University3
Wilmon Newell, D.Sc., Director2
Harold Mowry, M.S.A., Asso. Director
L. 0. Gratz, Ph.D., Asst. Dir., Research
W. M. Fifield, M.S., Asst. Dir., Admin.4
J. Francis Cooper, M.S.A., Editor3
Clyde Beale, A.B.J., Assistant Editor3
Jefferson Thomas, Assistant Editors
Ida Keeling Cresap, Librarian
Ruby Newhall, Administrative Manager3
K. H. Graham, Business Manager3
Rachel McQuarr!e, Accountant3

MAIN STATION, GAINESVILLE
AGRONOMY
W. E. Stokes, M.S., Agronomistx
W. A. Leukel, Ph.D., Agronomist3
Fred H. Hull, Ph.D., Agronomist
G. E. Ritchey, M.S., Agronomist2
W. A. Carver, Ph.D., Associate
Roy E. Blaser, M.S., Associate
G. B. Killinger, Ph.D., Associate
Fred A. Clark, B.S.A., Assistant
ANIMAL INDUSTRY
A. L. Shealy, D.V.M., An. Industrialist' 3
R. B. Becker, Ph.D., Dairy Husbandman3
E. L. Fouts, Ph.D., Dairy Technologist3
D. A. Sanders, D.V.M., Veterinarian
M. W. Emmel, D.V.M., Veterinarian3
L. E. Swanson, D.V.M., Parasitologist *
N. R. Mehrhof, M.Agr., Poultry Husb.3
T. R. Freeman, Ph.D., Asso. in Dairy Mfg.
R. S. Glasscock, Ph.D., Asso. An. Husb.
D. J. Smith, B.S.A., Asst. An. Husb.4
P. T. Dix Arnold, M.S.A., Asst. Dairy Husb.2
L. L. Rusoff, Ph.D., Asst. in An. Nutrition3
L. E. Mull, M.S., Asst. in Dairy Tech.4
0. K. Moore, M.S., Asst. Poultry Hush.
J. E. Pace, B.S.A., Asst. An. Husb.
ECONOMICS, AGRICULTURAL
C. V. Noble, Ph.D., Agr. Economist'1
Zach Savage, M.S.A., Associate
A. H. Spurlock, M.S.A., Associate
Max E. Brunk, M.S., Assistant
ECONOMICS, HOME
Ouida D. Abbott, Ph.D., Home Econ.1
Ruth 0. Townsend, R.N., Assistant
R. B. French, Ph.D., Asso. Chemist
ENTOMOLOGY
J. R. Watson, A.M., Entomologist'
A. N. Tissot, Ph.D., Associate
H. E. Bratley, M.S.A., Assistant
HORTICULTURE
G. H. Blackmon, M.S.A., Horticulturistz
A. L. Stahl. Ph.D., Associate
F. S. Jamison, Ph.D., Truck Hort.
R. J. Wilmot, M.S.A., Asst. Hort.
R. D. Dickey, M.S.A., Asst. Hort.4
J. Carlton Cain, B.S.A., Asst. Hort.4
Victor F. Nettles, M.S.A., Asst. Hort.4
Byron E. Janes. Ph.D., Asst. Hort.
F. S. Lagasse, Ph.D., Asso. Hort.2
H. M. Sell, Ph.D., Asso. Hort.2
PLANT PATHOLOGY
W. B. Tisdale, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist' 8
George F. Weber, Ph.D., Plant Path.3
Phares Decker, Ph.D., Asso. Plant Path.
Erdman West, M.S., Mycologist
Lillian E. Arnold, M.S., Asst. Botanist
SOILS
R. V. Allison, Ph.D., Chemist1 s
Gaylord M. Volk, M.S., Chemist
F. B. Smith, Ph.D., Microbiologist3
C. E. Bell, Ph.D., Associate Chemist
H. W. Winsor, B.S.A., Assistant Chemist
J. Russell Henderson, M.S.A., Associates
L. H. Rogers, Ph.D., Asso. Biochemist4
Richard A. Carrigan, B.S., Asso. Chemist
Geo. D. Thornton, M.S., Asst. Chemist
Thos. Whitehead, Jr., M.S.A., Asst.
R. E. Caldwell, M.S.A., Soil Surveyor
Olaf C. Olson, B.S., Soil Surveyor


BOARD OF CONTROL
H. P. Adair, Chairman, Jacksonville
R. H. Gore. Fort Lauderdale
N. B. Jordan, Quincy
T. T. Scott, Live Oak
Those. W. Bryant, Lakeland
J. T. Diamond Secretary, Tallahassee

BRANCH STATIONS
NORTH FLORIDA STATION, QUINCY
J. D. Warner, M.S., Agronomist in Charge
R. R. Kincaid, Ph.D., Asso. Plant Path.
Elliott Whitehurst, B.S.A., Asst. An. Husb.4
W. C. McCormick, B.S.A., Asst. An. Husb.
Jesse Reeves, Asst. Agron., Tobacco
W. H. Chapman, M.S., Asst. Agron.4
Mobile Unit, Monticello
R. W. Wallace, B.S., Associate Agronomist
Mobile Unit, Milton
J. H. Wallace, M.A., Associate Agronomist
CITRUS STATION, LAKE ALFRED
A. F. Camp, Ph.D., Horticulturist in Charge
V. C. Jamison, Ph.D., Soils Chemist
B. R. Fudge, Ph.D., Associate Chemist
W. L. Thompson, B.S., Associate Ento.
W. W. Lawless, B.S., Asst. Horticulturist4
R. K. Voorhees, Ph.D., Asso. Plant Path.
C. R. Stearns, B.S.A., Asso. Chemist
H. 0. Sterling, B.S., Asst. Hort.
T. W. Young, Ph.D., Asso. Hort., Coastal
EVERGLADES STA., BELLE GLADE
J. R. Neller, Ph.D., Biochemist in Charge
J. W. Wilson, Sc.D., Entomologist "
F. D. Stevens, B.S., Sugarcane Agron.
Thomas Bregger, Ph.D., Sugarcane
Physiologist
G. R. Townsend, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
R. W. Kidder, M.S., Asst. An. Husb.
W. T. Forsee, Ph.D., Asso. Chemist
B. S. Clayton, B.S.C.E., Drainage En".2
F. S. Andrews, Ph.D.. Asso. Truck Hort.*
Roy A. Blair, Ph.D., Asst. Agron.
SUB-TROPICAL STA., HOMESTEAD
Geo. D. Ruehle, Ph.D., Plant Path. in Charge
S. J. Lynch, B.S.A., Asst. Horticulturist
E. M. Andersen, Ph.D., Asst. Hort.
W. CENT. FLA. STA.. BROOKSVILLE
W. F. Ward, M.S., Asst. An. Hush. in Charge2
RANGE CATTLE STA., ONA
W. G. Kirk, Ph.D., An. Husb. in Charge
E. M. Hodges, Ph.D., Asso. Agron.
Gilbert A. Tucker, B.S.A., Asst. An. Husb.4
Floyd Eubanks, B.S.A., Asst. An. Husb.

FIELD STATIONS
Leesburg
M. N. Walker, Ph.D., Plant Path. in Charge"
K. W. Loucks, M.S., Asst. Plant Path.
E. E. Hartwig, Ph.D., Asst. Agron. & Path.
Plant City
A. N. Brooks, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
Hastings
A. H. Eddins, Ph.D., Plant Pathologist
E. N. McCubbin, Ph.D., Asso. Truck Hort.
Monticello
S. 0. Hill, B.S., Entomologist *
A. M. Phillips, B.S., Asst. Entomologist2
Bradenton
J. R. Beckenbach, Ph.D., Truck Hort. in Chg.
E. G. Kelsheimer, Ph.D., Entomologist
F. T. McLean, Ph.D., Horticulturist
David G. Kelbert, Asst. Plant Pathologist
Sanford
R. W. Ruprecht, Ph.D., Chemist in Charge
Jack Russell, M.S., Asst. Entomologist
Lakeland
E. S. Ellison, Meteorologist2
1 Head of Department.
2 In cooperation with U. S.
3 Cooperative, other divisions, U. of F.
4 In Military Service.
5 On leave.


Mtd"Wof lofhgAmeJ








FACTORS AFFECTING FARMING RETURNS IN

JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA

By MAX E. BRUNK


CONTENTS
Page Page
Purpose of the Study ..................... .......... 3 Soils ............................................................... 16
Agricultural Development ............................. 6 Location of Markets .................................. 17
H history ..................... ................. ...... .... 6 Size of Business .......................................... 18
Population Growth ............................. 6 Labor Efficiency ................. .......... .............. 20
Farm Real Estate ............. .............. 8 Crop Yields .................................................. 22
Crop T rends .................................... ....... 9 Tenure ........................................................ 23
Livestock Trends .......... .......... ............ 10 Education .................................................. 25
Farm Conveniences ....- ..-... ................ 11 Prices ................................... ......... ............. 26
Some Factors Affecting Farming Returns 12 Cropping Practices ................................ 29
Source of Data .............. ......................... 12 Real Estate Taxation ................................ 31
W here the Farming Is Done .................. 13 Summary ..... .... ........................................ 33


PURPOSE OF THE STUDY

That farming returns vary a great deal is well known to farm-
ers. The reasons for these variations are not so well known.
A study of some of the more important reasons will enable the
individual farmer to recognize the influences of particular fac-
tors and thereby make it possible for him to give these factors
greater consideration in the conduct of his business.
There are many types of farming areas in Florida. The map
in Figure 1 shows the more important of such areas. Farming
returns per farm in these different areas do not vary nearly as
much as the size of farms. For example, in 1939 the farms of
Hendry County averaged 2,078 acres in size while farms in
Escambia County averaged but 62 acres. Man has no control
over the natural fertility of the soil of a region. Neither has he
control over climate. Therefore, he has modified the influence
of these factors on his income by adjusting the number of acres


ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.-The writer is indebted to the members of
the Department of Agricultural Economics who assisted in outlining this
study and offered helpful criticism in the preparation of the mauscript.
Special credit is due Dr. C. V. Noble under whose direction this work
was done.
Many of the data are based on farm management surveys conducted by
members of the Department of Agricultural Economics. Credit is due also
to Mr. Marshall R. Godwin, who assisted the writer in the field work during
the summer of 1941.
Appreciation is expressed to Mr. R. S. Johnson, Registrar of the Univer-
sity of Florida, who made it possible to use electric sorting and tabulating
machines, greatly facilitating the work.
Particular thanks are extended to County Agent J. W. Malone and to
the many farmers of Jackson County, Florida, for their courtesy in furnish-
ing essential information.







4 Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


he operates as well as the purpose for which he uses his land.
Within a type of farming area there is less variation in size of
farms. However, there are vast differences in farming returns
for farms similar in size in the same type of farming area. Some












LEGEND .. 3.,
I CITRUS CENTRAL FLORIDA & FLATWO .
1-A CITrus RIDGE SECTION SOME TRUCK E .
1-B CIR INDIAN RIVER SECTION 50ME TRI "

TRUCK "ASTIN"5 pOTATOES
.- TRUCK SANFORD CELERY

TRUCK PLANT CITY STRAWBERRIES- SOME ..t
TRUCK TOMATOES L CELERY SOME CT' .t
TRUCK SOME CITRUS


STRUCK -SOME suR CANE'
TRUCK -TOMATOES, BEANS, PEPPERS, POTATOES -- -

GENERAL FARMING COTTON 2 l


GENERAL FARMING COTTON FLUE-CURED TOBACCO
GENERAL FARMING sOME TRUCK
GENERAL FARMING WATERMELONS & CUCUMBERS
GENERAL FARMING TRUCK L SOME CITRUS E
-F,.' GENERAL FARMING STRAWBERRIES TRUCK SOME CITRUS --

-4 DAIRY L POULTRY SMALLER AREAS ADJACENT TO ALL OTHER 5
TRC TOMA OF THE LARGER CITIES

5 LITTLE AGRICULTURE FOREST, CUTOVER LAND OEN AMOE
GRAZING FOR CATTLE AND HOGS

















Experiment Station, 1937.)






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 5

of these variations are due to management, while others are a
result of the varying ability of soils to produce profitably the
crops generally grown in the area. This study concerns itself
with the management factor and the land factor. The importance
of the one depends largely upon the importance of the other.
There can be no clearcut line of distinction between the two.


Fig. 2.-Location of Jackson County, Florida.

Jackson County, adjacent to both Georgia and Alabama, is
representative of the large general farming area which covers
the northern sections of western Florida. Cotton and peanuts
long have been the principal cash crops of this area. A study
of the agriculture of this county will include the major prob-
lems common to'much of the general farming area of western
Florida (Fig. 2).






Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


AGRICULTURAL DEVELOPMENT
HISTORY
Jackson County was formed in 1822, three years after Florida
was purchased from Spain. The county is "named after General
Andrew Jackson, then Military Governor of Florida, and is one
of the original counties organized on the acquisition of the Terri-
tory by the United States." 1 Marianna, the county seat, was
incorporated in 1829.
William Nickels, one of the first settlers, came from North
Carolina. He brought numerous slaves with him. Most of the
settlers who were soon to follow him were of Scotch and English
descent and came from the Carolinas and Georgia.
The "red land" in the northern and northwestern parts of the
county was attractive to the early settlers. Considered more
productive and more easily put under cultivation than the heavily
wooded lands, the red lands were settled first. The few settlers
in the southern part of the county confined their efforts to stock
raising and later went into the turpentine and lumber business.
Prior to 1839 there were a number of changes in the area of
the county. By 1839 the county was only slightly larger than
it is today. Since that time very slight changes were made in
1873, 1875 and 1915.
POPULATION GROWTH
The population growth of Jackson County was rapid between
1840 and 1910. Not until 1920 was there evidence of a retarded
increase. Year in and year out for 100 years Jackson County
has had an average increase in population of 297 persons per
year (Fig. 3). This growth was broken only during the Civil
War.
The negro population of Jackson County has been relatively
constant since 1890. There are now only about 1,000 more
negroes in the county than there were in 1890. The negro
population more than doubled between 1870 and 1890, so that
by 1890 negroes composed 64 percent of the total population.
Because of a rapid increase in the white race, by 1940 only 36
percent of the population of Jackson County was made up of
negroes.
The importance of farming in Jackson County can scarcely be
underestimated. Many people living in towns are dependent
SCutler, Harry Gardner, "A History of Florida", 1: 569-570. 1923.
fhe Lewis Publishing Co.






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 7



PUL ACTION




0000


















Dooo "-



















0 0 0-----------------------------
0
1840 1860 1880 1900 1920 1940
Fig. 3.-Population growth of Jackson County, 1840-1940.
Data from U. S. Census reports.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


upon agriculture for a livelihood. The Census of 1940 classed
60 percent of the total county population as "rural-farm".
Marianna, with a population of 5,079, has many private enter-
prises which are dependent upon agricultural trade. In fact,
there are very few non-farm industries within the entire county.
FARM REAL ESTATE
The agriculture of Jackson County has changed little since
1910. Between the Civil War and 1910 it underwent its greatest
development. The U. S. Census of 1860 reports but 581 farms
in the entire county. At that time there were 357 slaveholders
owning 4,903 slaves. Many of these slaves were on large plan-
tations.
Following the Civil War the number of farms increased
rapidly. As farms increased in number they decreased in size,
despite the fact that many thousands of acres of new lands were
broken. In 1880 there were 1,612 farms in the county, which
averaged 160.4 acres in size. By 1910 there were 4,096 farms,
which averaged 91.7 acres in size. Since 1910 there has been
a slight decline in the number of farms. For the year 1940 the
Federal Census reported 3,585 farms averaging 99.6 acres in size.
Farm real estate values in Jackson County increased at a
rapid rate during the first 20 years of this century. In 1900
farm values were reported in the U. S. Census at an average of
$3.96 per acre. The average value of real estate per farm was
then but $415. At that time agriculture had just passed through
a prolonged depression. Farm prices began to rise in the early
1900's and continued to do so until about two years after the
end of World War I. During this period agriculture was pros-
pering. By 1920 the value of farm real estate per acre in
Jackson County was six and a half times the 1900 value. In
1920 the farms of the county had an average value of $2,374.
Since then farm prices have declined. Agriculture has suffered.
This decline of prices reached a low during the early 1930's
and since that time there has been some price recovery. As a
result, the value of real estate has begun to recover. By 1940
farm real estate was valued at $18.52 an acre and the farms of
the county had an average value of $1,845.
The most common size farm in Jackson County at present
consists of about 40 acres. Over one-fourth of the farms of the
county have between 30 and 49 acres of land. The number of
farms in different size groups is shown in Table 1.






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 9

TABLE 1.-NUMBER OF FARMS BY SIZE GROUPS AS REPORTED IN THE UNITED
STATES CENSUS OF 1940, JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA.


Size of Farms
(acres)


Under 10 ..............
10 29 .....-.........
30 49 ...............
50 69 .......... ...
70 99 _:............--
100 139 ..............
140 179 ..............
180 219 ................
220 and over -....---

All sizes .........


Total Value of
Number of Land and Build-
Farms ings on Farms

160 $ 64,702
456 273,891
980 793,151
417 525,384
634 978,266
399 853,128
219 587,622
101 322,840
219 1 2,215,130

3,585 6,614,114


Value of Farm
Land and Build-
ings per Farm

$ 404
601
809
1,260
1,543
2,138
2,683
3,196
10,115


1,845


CROP TRENDS
Cotton is one of the most important crops of Jackson County.
During much of the past 10-year period the acreage of cotton
has been under rigid artificial control. This has probably re-
sulted in an abnormal reduction in cotton acreage. Cotton pro-
duction has not been reduced as much as cotton acreage because
of cultural changes which are a result of controlled acreage and
because much of the land taken out of cotton production was
the least productive.
The acreage of cotton in Jackson County increased rapidly
during the early 1900's until about the time of World War I
when the boll weevil reached the area. Between 1909 and 1919
it was reduced from 48,473 acres to 16,080 acres. Following
1919 the acreage of cotton in Jackson County expanded some
but it has never reached the acreage of pre-boll-weevil days.
In 1929 there were 23,930 acres harvested. By 1939 only 11,881
acres were harvested.
Peanuts are also one of the most important crops in Jackson
County. Nearly half of the peanuts harvested for nuts in Flor-
ida are grown in this county. It is difficult to measure the trend
of peanut acreage because a large part of the crop is interplanted
with corn. In 1939 there were 55,874 acres of peanuts planted
alone and 28,760 acres interplanted. The acreage of peanuts
dug for nuts has been increasing during the past few years.
The acreage planted to sugarcane and sweet potatoes has
changed very little over the past 50 years. The acreage of


.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


watermelons became important sometime between 1919 and 1924
but since that time has been decreasing (Table 2).

TABLE 2.-ACREAGE OF PRINCIPAL CROPS GROWN IN JACKSON COUNTY,
FLORIDA, BY CENSUS PERIODS, 1889-1939.
(Data from U. S. Census Reports.)


Year


1889
1899
1909
1919
1924
1929
1934
1939


Cotton


25,272
29,082
48,473
16,080
21,753
23,930
18,393
11,881


Sugar-
cane


833
1,537
1,049
2,025
1,334
1,684
1,750
1,573


Sweet Water- Peanuts
Potatoes melons Planted
|I Alone


988
952
1,155
1,942
962
1,653
1,987
1,541


*

*
522
3,352
3,195
1,679
1,526


3,224
12,003
17,942
*
38,833
43,031
36,566
55,874


Peanuts
Planted
in Com-
bination

*
*
*
*
*
29,457
41,989
28,760


* Not reported.


LIVESTOCK TRENDS
Jackson County is the leading hog producing county in the
State. Hogs not only furnish a cash income to the farmer but
also supply large quantities of meat for home use. Trends in the
number of hogs and cattle in Jackson County are shown in
Table 3.

TABLE 3.-NUMBER OF HOGS AND CATTLE ON FARMS, JACKSON COUNTY,
FLORIDA, 1900-1940.
(Data from U. S. Census Reports.)

Date Number of Hogs Number of Cattle
(all ages) (all ages)

June 1, 1900 ...............-----............ 35,185 16,830
April 15, 1910 .............. ...- 54,653 20,906
January 1, 1920 .................... 54,513 21,970
January 1, 1925 ................... 40,196 15,927
April 1, 1930 ......................... 32,529* 12,883*
January 1, 1935 ................. 41,599 24,094
April 1, 1940 .......................... 36,439t 15,787*

Includes only animals over three months old.
t Includes only animals over four months old.

Over the past 40 years there has been an increase in the
number of mules on farms and a decrease in the number of
horses. In 1940 there were 4,320 mules and 1,040 horses on
Jackson County farms. Fig. 4 shows that since 1930 there has







Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County


JAN. I JAN. I APR. I JAN. I APR. I
1920 1925 1930 1935 1940


Fig. 4.-Trend in number of mules and horses on
County, 1900-1940. Data from U. S. Census reports.
reported only mules and horses over three months old.


farms in Jackson
The 1940 Census


been a slight decrease in the number of mules used as work-
stock. During this period the number of tractors has been
increasing slightly. Even in 1940 farm tractors were relatively
unimportant. Tractors were reported by only 42 farmers in the
entire county.
FARM CONVENIENCES
During recent years much has been done to improve the
facilities for better rural living. Federal aid has contributed
toward this end but cannot do much more, however, than initiate
some work. The greatest good must come from the farmers
themselves. Between 1930 and 1940 many miles of federally
subsidized electric distribution lines were constructed in Jackson
County. However, the task of rural electrification is only begun.
In 1940 over 90 percent of the farms were still without elec-
tricity, despite the fact that 32 percent of the farms in the
county were within one-fourth mile of an electric distribution


1900


APR. 15
1910






Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


line. It seems that the problem of rural electrification here is
largely one of farm income. Until farmers are able to support
such a service there will be little use on the part of farmers
for that service.
The United States Census of 1940 reports that for Jackson
County 54 percent of the farm houses were in need of major
repairs. The Census also reports that 98 percent of the farms
had no private bath or inside toilet; 96 percent had no running
water in the house. The problem of rural housing is acute. Any
program, however, for the improvement of rural housing should
be based on the capacity of the farms to support such improve-
ments, but much improvement is possible with but little cash
outlay.
The construction of improved roads is desirable as long as
the farmers are able to support such services. Such roads give
the farmers better access to markets and may enhance the farm
income. Improved roads also make possible better rural mail
delivery and school bus service.
Wise plans for the development of rural conveniences and ser-
vices should be based on the farmer's ability to pay. The reason
why less than 1 percent of the farms in Jackson County have
telephones is that no more than that many farmers are willing
to pay for such service. Other things are preferred to tele-
phones in exchange for their limited incomes.

SOME FACTORS AFFECTING FARMING RETURNS
SOURCE OF DATA
Since 1925 the Department of Agricultural Economics of the
Florida Experiment Station has made several studies of farm
management in Jackson County. The first study, made in 1925,
covered 499 farms located throughout the county. All sizes,
types and kinds of farms were included in this early survey.
Other surveys, made in 1928, 1934 and 1935, were less exhaus-
tive. Much of the present work, therefore, will deal either with
material from the 1925 study or with additional material ob-
tained during 1941.
The effect of management factors on farming returns is about
the same year after year. As farm incomes fluctuate widely
from year to year, the management factors affecting those in-
comes change only slightly. The level of incomes is largely
determined by weather conditions and the farm price level. The
variation of incomes between farms under a given price level







Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 13

is determined by management or land factors. That is to say,
the efficiency of labor will have a similar effect on income under
low or high prices. For this reason the effect of management
factors on income in 1925 was about the same as it is today.
WHERE THE FARMING IS DONE
Within each type-of-farming region there are areas of poor
soils which are not well suited to the crops generally grown in
the area. The limited amount of farming done in these areas
is generally unprofitable. There are numerous reasons for this
condition. Two of the outstanding reasons are here mentioned.
First, all farming in a region tends to be of the same type be-
cause of established markets, available labor, custom, etc. This
often restricts adjustment to the type of farming that might
ordinarily be most profitable. Second, farms located in these
areas usually sell at an apparently low price which appeals to


400 OR MOR ARES OF .LAN
cuL-vATED PER s.uARE MILE


LEGEND
S LESs THAN 100 ACREs OF LAND
CULTIVATED pER soUARE MILE,


'oo To ase ACRES oF LAND HARD-SURPACED OADS
CULTIVATED PER SQUARE MILE. -UNDER CONsrRUCTION 1rAZ

Fig. 5.-Extent of cultivated land in Jackson County, 1940.


- nA..-R-uCE no- 111E






Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


prospective farm purchasers. Actually the price is high when
compared with the earning capacity of the farm.
The areas of poor soils are generally characterized by sparse
settlement, a predominance of idle land, and small farm build-
ings in poor condition. Areas of good soils are characterized
by dense settlement, a high proportion of the land cultivated
and adequate farm buildings in good condition. Experience of
farmers has shown that it pays to farm in areas where the most
farming is done.
Over Jackson County there is a great difference in the extent
of land used for crops. Figure 5 shows some of the larger, more
important areas of intensive cultivation. This map was prepared
from aerial photographs of the entire county. These pictures
were taken during the fall of 1940 2 and show the land which
was under cultivation during that year. The cultivation map
is a generalization of the detailed aerial photographs. It was
based upon the amount of land cultivated in individual sections
over the county. Each section of land (640 acres) was rated
on the basis of the extent of land under cultivation and divided
into the three groups shown on the map. For convenience the
groups were called A, B and C.
Some of the 499 farms which were studied in 1925 are located
in nearly all of the different areas shown on the cultivation map.
A study of these farms located in these different areas will reveal
some of the experience which farmers have had in the conduct
of their farming operations. The farm businesses are sum-
marized in Table 4. Summaries for white farmers are shown
separately from those for negroes. For businesses of about the
same number of crop acres negroes have less farm capital, re-
ceipts and expenses and get much lower crop yields. The table
shows that the largest farms measured by acres in crops are
located where most of the farming is done. In sparsely settled
areas the farms are smaller. Farm receipts are much larger for
farms located in the A areas than for farms located in C areas,
but farm expenses do not vary so much between these areas.
It makes little difference where a farmer lives when he buys
fertilizer because there will be little difference, if any, in the
price he pays. It makes a great deal of difference where a
farmer lives when he produces his crops because the type of

These photographs were obtained from the Aerial Photographic Lab-
oratory, Washington, D. C. The scale of the photographs is approximately
3.2 inches to the mile.







TABLE 4.-SIZE OF FARMS AND FARMING RETURNS FOR FARMS LOCATED IN
JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925.
(Average per farm)


SPECIFIED AREAS OF LAND CULTIVATION,


Number Man | Farm Farm Farm Farm Labor
Area Class Farms Crop Acres Equivalent' Capital2 Receipts Expenses Income" Income4
White farmers

A ............... 157 79 2.82 $7,379 $2,372 $1,559 $ 813 $ 296
B ......... ....... 152 67 2.32 6,077 | 1,589 1,106 483 58
C ......-............... 26 59 2.10 4,873 I 1,449 1,258 191 -150


All areas ........ 335 72 2.54 6,5.94 1,945 1,330 615 154

Negro farmers

A ........................ 89 77 2.31 4,380 1,235 793 442 135
B ....... ....... 56 65 2.24 3,943 764 635 129 -147
C 19 43 1.92 3,351 716 757 -41 -276


All areas .......... 164 69 2.24 4,111 1,014 735 279 9

1 Man equivalent is the equivalent number of full-time farm workers employed on the farm during the year, including the farm operator.
2 Farm capital is the estimated value of farm real estate, machinery, livestock and other farm investments used in the operation of the farm business.
3 Farm income is farm receipts less farm expenses, including adjustments in inventories.
Labor income is the return to the farmer for his labor and management. Labor income (the pay the farmer gets for his year's work) is obtained
by subtracting from farm income the interest that capital investment would have earned had it been placed at the current rate of interest. The prevailing
interest rate in 1925 in this area was 7 percent.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


soil on which he lives will largely determine how large a crop
he has to sell. As a result, farm income is much greater on
farms located in the more densely farmed areas where better
soils are found.
SOILS 8
It has been estimated that of the land in Jackson County 4
percent is sandy loam with slopes below 2 percent; 25 percent
is sandy loam with slopes ranging from 2 to 5 percent; 15 per-
cent is sandy loam with slopes ranging from 5 to 8 percent and
loamy sand with slopes ranging from 0 to 5 percent; 13 percent
is sandy loam with slopes greater than 8 percent and loamy sand
with slopes ranging above 5 percent; 16 percent is sands; 27
percent is soils too wet for crops. Damage by erosion ranges
from slight on slopes less than 2 percent to extremely severe
on slopes greater than 8 percent. Areas of poorly drained soils
not in swamps offer possibilities for the development of perma-
nent pastures.
On the basis of soil conditions, Jackson County may be divided
into four general areas. Area 1 includes the land lying west
of the Cottondale-Graceville road and north of a line running
west from Alford (Figure 6). The soils used for crops in this
area are mainly light colored sandy loams and loamy sands of
the Norfolk, Ruston and related series with moderate to fairly
steep slopes on which some erosion has taken place. Area 2
includes the eastern third of the county. The soils used for
crops in this area are mainly light colored sandy loams, loamy
sands and sands of the Norfolk and Ruston series. These soils
have.almost level to gently sloping surfaces and are only slightly
affected by erosion. Area 3 includes the land on both sides of
the Chipola River, lying between the Graceville-Cottondale road
and the Marianna-Malone road. The soils used for crops in this
area are mainly red sandy loams of the Greenville, Magnolia and
Red Bay series. These soils have gently sloping surfaces which
are moderately to severely eroded. Area 4 includes most of the
southwestern quarter of the county. The well drained soils are
mainly light colored deep sands of the Norfolk series. Farming
is of little consequence in this area. About one-fourth of the
land in each of these areas is poorly drained.

This section on soils was prepared by J. R. Henderson, Soil Technolo-
gist, University of Florida Experiment Station.







Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County


C CATTLE AND HOG MARKET S PEANUT SHELLING PLANT
G COTTON GIN AND MARKET W WATERMELON MARKET
H HORSE AND MULE MARKET V STATE FARMERS' MARKET
L LIVESTOCK AUCTION MARKET HARD-SURFACED ROADS 1942
P PEANUT MARKET AND WAREHOUSE ---HARD-SURFACED ROADS UNDER CONSTRUCTION
EACH SYMBOL REPRESENTS ONE MARKET
Fig. 6.-Location of crop and livestock markets operating during 1941 in
Jackson County, Florida.

LOCATION OF MARKETS
The crop and livestock markets which operated in Jackson
County during 1941 are shown in Fig. 6. In general, these mar-
kets are well distributed over the county. The southeastern
section of the county has suitable markets located at River Junc-
tion just across the Apalachicola River in Gadsden County. Early
in 1942 a poultry and egg market was opened in Marianna and
a large peanut shelling plant was opened at Graceville.
Farms located close to market have an economic and social
advantage over other farms. This advantage can be measured
by farm real estate values. In 1925 the 499 farmers were asked
the value of their farms and the distance to their principal
market. Farms in class A areas (see Fig. 5) within two miles
of market had a real estate value of $48 per acre. Farms in the
same class areas but located from 2.1 to 4 miles from market
were valued at $36 per acre and those more than 4 miles from
market at $34 per acre. The same relationship holds true in the
less intensively farmed areas of the county, but the values are







Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


on a lower scale. The fertility of the land probably has a greater
effect upon land values than has the distance to market. In
many cases the distance to market has been determined by the
fertility of the land, because markets have been established in
the most fertile agricultural areas.
SIZE OF BUSINESS
The size of business, as would be expected, goes hand in hand
with farming returns. A large business does not make large
returns merely because it is big. The principal reason why large
businesses usually make large returns is that such businesses
use labor and capital more efficiently than smaller farms. On
small farms there is much loss of time caused by shifting from
one operation to another, and there are many operations per-
formed on small farms which would require no more effort on
large farms. Table 5 shows that as the size of business on the
farms of white operators increases from 22 crop acres to 172
crop acres the efficiency of labor, as measured by productive man
work units per man,4 more than doubles. About the same rela-
tionship exists on farms operated by negroes. This means that
one man is able to accomplish about twice as much productive
work on the larger farms.
There is little relationship between size of business and crop
yields. Many persons believe that small farms tend to offset
much of their labor and capital inefficiencies by higher rates of
production. This study, as well as many other studies, has
proven this belief to be false. Crop yields are usually just as
high, if not higher, on large as on small farms. The fact that
large farms predominate in an area is often the result of good
land on which yields have been high. The relationship between
size of business and crop yields, disregarding soil fertility, is
shown in Table 5. Crop yields are measured by a crop index
which is defined in a footnote to the table.
When size of business, as measured by acres of crops, is held
constant the farming returns of the negro farmer are much less
than for the white farmer. There are a number of important
reasons for this condition shown in Table 5. The negro farmer
is less efficient in the use of labor, has lower crop yields and has
less capital with which to work each crop acre. Outstanding is
the fact that the crop yields of the negro farmer are but about
two-thirds the crop yields of the white farmer. Negro farmers
'Productive man work units per man is defined in a footnote to Table 5.








TABLE 5.-RELATION OF SIZE OF BUSINESS TO LABOR EFFICIENCY, CROP YIELDS AND FARMING RETURNS, '
JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925.
(Average per farm)

Productive
Crop Acres Number Man Work Crop Farm Farm Labor
Farms Units per Index2 Capital Income Income
Range Average Man1 __
White farmers

Under 30 ..............- 22 58 101 110 $2,473 $ 133 $ -40
30 49 ...................[ 40 83 150 113 3,915 310 36
50 69 -.--. -...-..-.- 58 89 169 113 4,776 525 191
70 89 ............. 80 42 212 116 7,513 732 206
90 and over ......... 172 63 237 116 15,872 1,510 399

Negro farmers

Under 30 ..............I 24 32 99 80 | 1,975 27 -111
30 49 .................... 38 49 129 75 2,153 1 128 23
50 69 ................... I 57 34 173 79 3,175 310 88
70 and over ......... 137 49 236 76 8,115 572 | 4

1 Productive man work units per man is a measure of labor efficiency. A productive man work unit is the amount of productive work accomplished C(
by an average farm worker in a 10-hour day. The number of productive man work units per man measures the number of 10-hour days of productive
work each man employed on the farm accomplished during the year.
2 Crop index measures crop yields on a farm relative to the average yield on all farms in the area. The average yield of crops on all farms is taken t
as 100. A farm with a crop index of 115 then had yields which were 15 percent above the average of all farms.






Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


have low crop yields largely because they are generally located
on poor soils and they do not use as much fertilizer per acre of
crops as do the white farmers (Table 6). Probably because of
labor inefficiency, lack of capital, poor credit risk and other
related factors the negro farmer has found that it does not pay
him to use as much fertilizer and therefore get as high crop
yields as the white farmer.

TABLE 6.-VALUE OF PURCHASED FETILIZER* PER ACRE OF CROPS BY TENURE
AND RACE, JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925.

Tenure White Farmers Negro Farmers

Owners -............... ...... ........... $2.39 $ .91
Part-owners .............--------............-- ... 2.42 .97
Tenants ....... -- ..........--- ...... 3.05 .56

A high proportion of the fertilizer used in this county is a mixture of 3% nitrogen,
8% phosphoric acid and 5% potash.

LABOR EFFICIENCY
A productive man work unit is the amount of productive work
accomplished by an average man in a 10-hour day. The number
of hours required in the production of crops and livestock is
known from enterprise studies. The man work units required
on each enterprise are obtained by dividing the number of hours
required by 10. Thus a man work unit is equivalent to a full
day's work. The number of man work units multiplied by the
acres of various crops and the number of various livestock gives
the total work units accomplished on a particular farm. In other
words, the number of productive man work units per man is a
measure of the number of days of average work accomplished by
each man on the farm. It is a good measure of labor efficiency.
One of the most important factors affecting farming returns
was the amount of productive work accomplished per man (Table
7). Labor efficiency was, with one exception, closely related to
all the measures of size of business. This exception was man
equivalent. Only a slight relationship existed between the effi-
ciency of labor and man equivalent per farm. Many small farms
had more men around than the size of business justified. Suc-
cessful farmers plan their work and get it done with the least
possible amount of labor. They also use labor-saving equipment











TABLE 7.-RELATION OF LABOR EFFICIENCY TO SIZE OF BUSINESS AND FARMING RETURNS, JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925.
(Average per farm)



--- --------------------------------------;-------------------re
Productive
Productive Man Work Number Acres of Crops Man Man Work Farm Farm Labor
Units per Man of Farms I Equivalent Units per Capital Income Income
Range I Average] Per Farm I Per Man per Farm Farm

White farmers

Under 100 .-.. 76 31 24 12 1.9 144 $2,450 $ -6 $-178
100 159 ...... 134 119 48 21 2.2 299 4,413 312 3
160 219 ....... 185 111 81 28 2.8 527 7,643 683 148
220 and over 290 74 116 41 2.8 821 10,263 1,261 543

Negro farmers

Under 100 .... 80 28 29 14 2.1 168 2,355 -42 -207
100 159 ........ 129 49 47 22 2.2 283 2,786 165 30
160 219 ........ 187 52 67 30 2.2 410 3,712 331 71 4
220 and over 296 35 134 53 2.5 747 7,965 617 59 0

------------------------------------------------------------------------ __------- ( .






Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


to a like advantage. A large farm business uses labor more
efficiently because on large farms it requires less work to care
for an acre of crops or an animal unit. For example, it takes
just as long to get ready to plow a large field as it does to plow
a small one. Also more time is required per acre to plow small
fields because much time is consumed in making turns.
Crop yields were not related to labor efficiency. Labor effi-
ciency and size of business are closely related but neither has
a direct relation to crop yields.
CROP YIELDS
The crop index of a farm measures the yield per acre of crops
on that farm compared with the average yield per acre on all
farms in the area. A crop index of 100 is average. A crop index
of 90 means that crop yields per acre are 90 percent of average.

TABLE 8.-RELATION OF CROP YIELDS TO LABOR EFFICIENCY AND FARMING
RETURNS, JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925.
(Average per farm)
Productive
Crop Index Number of Man Work Farm Labor
Farms Units per Income Income
Range Average | Man
White farmers

Under 70 .... 56 18 159 $ 116 $-142
70 89 ........ 81 53 205 356 72
90 109 ......---I 100 98 173 403 63
110 129 ...... 118 72 179 766 263
130 149 ..... 139 51 195 913 345
150 and over 173 43 206 1,021 349

Negro farmers

Under 50 ..... 48 49 171 61 -132
50 69 ... . 64 28 190 150 -162
70 89 .......... 78 33 188 354 8
90 109 ........ 98 35 194 557 272
110 and over 129 19 140 390 20


In general, the farms having low crop yields had low farm
returns and farms with high crop yields had high farm returns
(Table 8). Good crop yields usually pay greater returns on good
soil because much additional fertilizer is required to get good
yields on poor soils. Good yields pay until the cost of producing
the increased yield equals the value of the increased yield. In
other words, it no longer pays to obtain higher yields when the






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 23

additional costs exceed the income from the additional yield.
The farmer's aim is high financial returns, not the highest pos-
sible yield of a crop. Farmers on poor land should not attempt
to obtain as high yields as farmers on good land. Fertilizer
applied to good land will yield greater returns than the same
amount of fertilizer applied to poor land.
The fertility of the soil is one of the greatest factors affecting
crop yields. One reason negro farmers have low crop yields is
that they use much less fertilizer per crop acre.
TENURE
The principal types of tenure in Jackson County are: Owner,
part owner,5 cash renter, and share renter. The United States
Census of 1940 shows that 58 percent of the farmers in Jackson
County were either owners or part owners and 42 percent were
tenants.
The largest farms were operated by part owners, while the
smallest were operated by cash renters. A high proportion of
the white farmers were owners. This was not true among the
negro farmers. The crop index was exceedingly low on cash
rented farms compared with the other types of tenure (Table 9).

TABLE 9.-RELATION OF TENURE TO SIZE OF FARM AND CROP INDEX,
JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925.

Tenure Number of Crop Acres Crop Index
Farms per Farm
White farmers

Owners ....----------......... ..... 210 70 116
Part owners ----- ... 79 88 114
Cash renters --.- ... 24 45 94
Share renters ..-.... .. ... 22 57 108

Negro farmers

Owners .............. ..........-- 39 55 85
Part owners -..-...............| 40 88 79
Cash renters .................-.... 68 62 69
Share renters ..................-- 17 83 86


Although during the past 20 years there has been little change
in the proportion of farms operated by tenants, there has oc-
curred considerable shifting of tenants from farm to farm every

Part owners are farm operators who own their farms but in addition
farm other land which they rent.







Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


year. In 1940 the average Jackson County tenant had been on
his present farm but three years. Owners had been on their
farms an average of 15 years. This movement of tenants from
farm to farm is the most undesirable characteristic of Jackson
County tenancy. It is advantageous neither to the landlord nor
to the tenant. The use of written leases might help solve many
of the misunderstandings which cause this continual shifting
among tenants. Further study is needed to determine the causes
of tenant-landlord disputes so that satisfactory, simplified leases
can be prepared and advocated for use.
During 1925 it was cheaper for most Jackson County farmers
to be tenants. The current rate of interest on investments at
that time was about 7 percent. Farm owners must supply their
own capital while tenants supply only a small part of the capital
which they use. The income for the farmers' labor then can be
computed by deducting 7 percent on their invested capital from
their farm income. The result is called labor income. Labor
income is the return to the farmer for his year's work. Table

TABLE 10.-RETURNS TO OPERATORS AND LANDLORDS ON FARMS OPERATED
BY OWNERS, PART OWNERS, CASH RENTERS AND SHARE RENTERS, JACK-
SON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925.
(Average per farm)
Operator Landlord


Num- U 2-
Type of ber of 3 g
Tenure Farms a S -




White farmers

Owners -.--- 210 $7,045 | $469 $-24
Part owners .. 79 5,936 898 482 $1,365 $162 $ 66
Cash renters 24 476 374 341 2,405 85 -83
Share renters 22 484 220 1 186 3,315 359 127
IIII I
Negro farmers

Owners ............---- 39 4,984 202 -147
Part owners .. 40 2,938 363 157 1,202 78 6
Cash renters 68 549 102 64 2,922 120 -85
Share renters .. 17 315 48 26 4,288 255 -45






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 25

10 shows that during 1925 white farm owners lacked $24 of
earning 7 percent on their capital. Nothing was received for
their labor. White owners who rented additional land (part
owners) received $482 for their year's work in addition to earn-
ing 7 percent on their capital. White cash renters and share
renters both received more for their labor than owners.
On share-rented farms the farm income of the landlord was
greater than the farm income of the operator. This is the re-
verse of what would be expected, considering the usual method
of share-renting. The landlord furnished most of the cash
expense and usually got half the crop. However, the tenant
usually did not sell his half of the feed crops nor did he sell his
half of things ordinarily consumed by his family on the farm.
Furthermore, not all tenant-landlord share arrangements were
on a fifty-fifty basis.
The average age of white owners was much higher than that
of part owners or tenants. Of the owners, only 37 percent were
under 50 years old, while 61 percent of the part owners and 62
percent of the tenants were under 50 years of age. Apparently
many owners were living partly on the capital which they had
accumulated during their younger years.
Another very important point is evident from Table 10. Land-
lords are frequently accused of profiteering on the tenant's labor.
Facts shown in the table disprove this common accusation and
show that landlords do not always earn the current rate of
interest on their investment. When prices are low, the landlord
may not have any return on his capital. A tenant can take
advantage of a landlord just as well as the landlord can take
advantage of the tenant. There is a great need for a better
understanding between landlords and tenants. This is one of
the outstanding farm problems in Jackson County.
EDUCATION
The problem of education in rural areas is an extremely vital
one. Many studies have shown that farmers with the most edu-
cation earned the highest returns. Part of this increased income
is due to the same urge that caused the individual to attain an
education. But it stands to reason that the farmer would re-
ceive some help from an education in the selection, management
and operation of his farm.
As shown in Table 11, very few of the operators of the 499
farms investigated in 1925 had ever attended high school. Less







Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


than 1 percent had attended college and none of the 499 farmers
had finished college.

TABLE 11.-EDUCATION OF OPERATORS ON 499 FARMS, JACKSON COUNTY,
FLORIDA, 1925.


Operator's
Tenure
Status M
o
z


Owners ...............
Part owners .....
Tenants ---

All farmers .......


Common Sch. High School College





Percentage

36 40 2 1 *
43 39 1 1 1 2
43 25 1

40 35 1 1 1 1


Less than 1/2 of 1 percent.

PRICES
Within a particular year farmers do not get the same price
for their crops. The price they receive for their crops has a
great effect upon their earnings. Prices on different farms are
best measured by a price index. A farm with a price index of
100 means that prices received on that farm were equal to the
average of the prices received in the area during the year. If
a farmer has a price index of 105, it means that he has been able
to dispose of his crops at a price premium of 5 percent above
the average of all farmers in the area. The effect of prices re-
ceived by farmers on their income is shown in Table 12.
Prices of farm products are ever changing. From year to year
as prices rise or fall the advantage of performing certain opera-
tions changes. For this reason the most profitable combination
of crops is always changing. In one year cotton may be more
profitable than some other crop which in turn, the next year,
may be more profitable than cotton. If a farmer is to achieve
the maximum success, he must constantly plan his next year's
business in the light of changing prices. For studying some
effects of changing prices, 20 owner-operated farms located
within six miles of Graceville were selected for detailed analysis.
These farms were all operated by white farmers. All were of
about the same size and grew about the same kinds of crops.






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 27

TABLE 12.-RELATION OF PRICE INDEX OF CROPS TO LABOR INCOME,
499 FARMS, JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925.

Price Index of Crops Number of Farms Labor Income per Farm

Range:
Under 85 ........................... 28 $-388
85 94 ................................ 91 46
95 104 ................................ 242 98
105 114 .............................. 93 106
115 and over ...................... 43 533

All farms ...... ..------................ 497* $ 100

Two of the 499 farms sold no crops.

All 20 farms produced cotton. Farm business records were
obtained from the operators for the crop years 1925, 1928, 1934
and 1935.
Between 1925 and 1935 the price of cotton in this area fell
from 21 cents to 10 cents a pound. Spanish peanuts fell from
99 cents to 77 cents a bushel, and watermelons fell from 13 cents
to 5 cents each. This change in price resulted in a general lower-
ing of farming returns. It also brought about some changes in
crop acreages. These changes are shown in Table 13.

TABLE 13.-TRENDS IN ACRES OF CROPS PLANTED ON 20 OWNER-OPERATED
FARMS, GRACEVILLE AREA, JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925-35.

Crop 1925 1928 1934 1935

Acres per farm

Cotton ..........................----------- 18.6 14.2 13.1 13.2
Corn .......................................------ 13.2 17.1 21.0 20.3
Runner peanuts (harvest) .......... 0 .3 4.7 7.2
Spanish peanuts (harvest) ........ 3.8 5.6 2.3 1.3
Peanuts pastured ..-....................... 11.9 10.8 10.0 13.0
W atermelons ................-- ..... ..... 9.2 9.1 3.9 4.8
Other crops .......... ................... 3.2 8.0 6.1 4.6

All crops .............. .. ................. -- 59.9 65.1 61.1 64.4


Between 1925 and 1935 the acreage of cotton decreased from
18.6 acres per farm to 13.2 acres. To some extent this is a result
of government control. Some adjustment was made by increas-
ing the acreage of corn and peanuts. During the same period the






28 Florida, Agricultural Experiment Station

acreage of watermelons per farm decreased from 9.2 acres to 4.8
acres. The decrease in watermelon acreage was caused largely
by low prices. Other crops paid better, required less cash outlay
and were less hazardous, so that farmers were forced to make
adjustments.
The reduced acreage of cash crops and the decline of prices
caused gross farm incomes to fall from $2,419 to $979 from 1925
to 1935. The decline in prices was not so great for the things
that farmers buy. Farm expenses fell only from $1,548 to $707.
The two principal items of expense curtailed were labor and
fertilizer, due primarily to a reduction in the amount but partly
to decreasing costs of labor and fertilizer. Labor in 1925 and
1928 cost about $1 a day. During 1934 and 1935, hired help
was paid 65 and 66 cents a day, respectively. The cost of fer-
tilizer also decreased during this period, but not as much as that
of labor. Many of the remaining items of expense were fixed
costs over which the farmer has little control (Table 14).

TABLE 14.-TRENDS IN ITEMS OF INCOME AND EXPENSE FOR 20 FARMS IN
THE GRACEVILLE AREA OF JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1925-35.

Item 1925 1928 1934 1935

Dollars per farm

Income:
Cotton .......... .......... --................ $1,317 $ 533 $ 516 $345
Peanuts sold ............. ....... ..... 123 112 128 169
Watermelons .....................- ... 555 180 100 42
Other crops . .................... 230 155 101 100
Livestock and products ..........--.. 139 215 163 212
Miscellaneous .......................... 55 63 131 111

All income ........................................ $2,419 $1,258 $1,139 $979


Expenses:
Labor ..................... $ 774 $
Fertilizer ........................ ........ 323
Other ............... .... .............. 451


410 $ 347 $271
237 84 99
544 350 337


All expenses ..................................... $1,548 $1,191 $ 781 $707

Income less expenses ........................ $ 871 $ 67 $ 358 $272

During the 1925 crop year 49 percent of the time of all farm
labor was expended on cotton and 12 percent on peanuts. Ten






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 29

years later, only 36 percent of all farm labor was expended on
cotton while the proportion expended on peanuts had risen to
23 percent.
For the four years studied, there was less variation in net
returns from cotton than from peanuts or watermelons. This
was true despite the fact that the price of cotton fell more than
50 percent during the period studied. During 1925, when crop
prices and the weather were good, net returns were high for
all crops. During 1928 when prices were good but the weather
was less favorable, net returns were negative for peanuts and
watermelons. During 1934 and 1935 prices were low but weather
conditions were normal. Both cotton and peanuts were grown
at a profit during these years. Under low prices there was a
great decrease in watermelon acreage. The cash outlay to raise
a crop of watermelons is large. The cost of marketing water-
melons is a large part of the retail price, so that when prices
are low farmers frequently find that they are unable to sell their
melons at any price. When this happens farmers lose the entire
cost of production. This is one of the principal reasons why
there is greater risk in producing watermelons than in producing
crops like cotton and peanuts, for which there is almost always
a market at some price.
CROPPING PRACTICES
Cropping practices affect crop yields and costs of production.
In turn, these factors affect farming returns. The soil fertility
as measured by crop yields is dependent to such an extent on
cropping practices that the effect can be measured within a com-
paratively short period of time.
Cotton is one of the most important crops of this area. The
yield of cotton is the result of certain cropping practices and in
turn it largely determines farming returns. During the sum-
mer of 1941 about 160 cotton farms were visited for the purpose
of studying the effect of different cropping practices on cotton
yields. Only Jackson County farms within six miles of Grace-
ville were visited. The study was limited to farms having only
one field of cotton so that accurate yield data could be obtained
from ginning records. Ginning records for each farmer show
the total amount of cotton produced on the farm, regardless of
the number of fields. By limiting the study to farms with one
field, yield data for that particular field could then be obtained.
The farms were thus necessarily small, the usual amount of
cotton grown per farm being about five acres. Some records were






Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


eliminated from the study because of unusually severe boll weevil
infestation, incompleteness of the data or some irregular prac-
tices that divided the cotton field into too many sections. There
were 131 farms included in the study. Table 15 shows the yields
of cotton on these small farms under different practices of crop
rotation and fertilization. The yield figures are for the 1940 crop.

TABLE 15.-AvERAGE YIELDS OF COTTON ON 131 SMALL FARMS UNDER DIF-
FERENT PRACTICES OF CROP ROTATION AND FERTILIZATION,* JACKSON
COUNTY, FLORIDA, 1940.

Cropping System for the J Initial Fertilizer with Initial Fertilizer Only,
1940 Cotton Field, Four I Side Dressing Added No Side Dressing Used
Years (1937-40) More Than 400 Pounds More Than 400 Pounds
I 400 Pounds or Less 400 Pounds or Less
Pounds of lint cotton per acre

Cotton every year ........... 382 330 232t 228t
Crops rotated, no peanuts
were dug during period 290 252 300 229
Crops rotated, peanuts
dug either one or two
years during the period 265 239 206 189

Over 90 percent of the initial fertilizer used was a 3-8-5 mixture and the side dressing
consisted of either nitrate of soda or a mixture of nitrate of soda and potash. The most
common practice was to use about 300 pounds of 3-8-5 initial fertilizer and side dress with
100 pounds of nitrate of soda to the acre.
t Less than 4 farms in group.
The highest yields of cotton were obtained from fields where
cotton was planted each year and on which more than 400 pounds
of fertilizer per acre was used. It is a fairly common practice
on small farms in this area to plant cotton on the same field year
after year. This will probably not hold true on larger farms.
The highest yield was obtained under this practice on small farms
for a number of reasons. Some of these reasons are that the
fields selected for cotton were frequently of the best soil on the
farms or were the nearest fields to the dwellings and thus re-
ceived greater care by family labor.
The cotton field was adjacent to the dwelling on 50 of the 131
farms studied. Yield on these 50 farms averaged 283 pounds of
lint per acre while that on the remaining farms averaged but
233 pounds.
The soils of each field were carefully examined and classified
as excellent, good, or fair.6 Very few farms in this area had

Soils were examined and classified by Mr. Hugh Dukes of the Soil
Conservation Service.






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 31

cotton planted on inherently poor soils. The soil of 19 fields was
classed as excellent. The yield of lint cotton on these fields was
308 pounds per acre. The soil on 90 of the fields was classed
as good and the yield of lint cotton on these fields averaged 252
pounds per acre. The soil of 22 fields was classed as fair. Yields
of lint cotton per acre on these fair soils averaged 210 pounds
per acre. The average per acre yield on the 131 farms was 253
pounds.
REAL ESTATE TAXATION

The problem of real estate taxation is very complex. It is
difficult to assess agricultural land in accordance with its pro-
ductive capacity. Usually the more productive land is under-
valued and the less productive land is overvalued. This results
in the over-assessment of poor land, which in turn results in
much tax delinquency. It is safe to assume that lands are over-
assessed if in certain areas there is a predominance of tax delin-
quency.
If land remains delinquent very long the State takes title,
thereby loses a source of revenue, and becomes the owner of
much poor land. The problem of equitable real estate taxation
is as much that of the State as it is of the individual landowner.
The initiative of any reform must be taken by the taxpayers.
The map in Fig. 7 shows the extent of tax delinquent or State-
owned land in Jackson County on April 1, 1941. It shows that
tax troubles are greater in some areas than in others. Excessive
tax delinquency is not caused by a decadent agriculture. Tax
troubles are caused by excessive levels of valuations. Four areas
of about equal size have been marked on the map. Areas I and
II include some of the better agricultural land in the county
while the lands included in areas III and IV are not as productive.
Land in area IV is assessed for about half the assessed value
of the land in areas I and II. Land in area III is assessed for
two-thirds the assessed value of land in areas I and II (Table 16).
Apparently actual values are of a much greater difference than
are assessed values. It is evident that the land in areas III and
IV is over-assessed as compared with other areas. Not only tax
assessors fail to recognize the true differences in land values, but
also many farmers have made the same mistake in buying farms.
Jackson County has some good farm land and also some land
better suited to forest and recreational uses than to agriculture.











U

I- I


*.I


Ii *

*I. *~: ~


STAX DELINQUENT OR STATE
OWNED LANDS APRIL ,1941
40 ACRES
160 ACRES
640 ACRES


I I AREAS SELECTED FOR
VALUATION STUDY



Fig. 7.-Location of tax
delinquent or State-owned
lands in Jackson County,
Florida, April, 1941.


I


- I
U
3 3


Jl
A 8 A


0.
*


- I -


5


* I


-^ '


2 M


* I*U






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 33

TABLE 16.-ASSESSED VALUATION OF REAL ESTATE PER ACRE AND THE
PROPORTION OF LAND DELINQUENT OR STATE OWNED IN FOUR SELECTED
AREAS, JACKSON COUNTY, FLORIDA, APRIL 1, 1941.
Percent of
Value per Acre of Percent of Area State-
Area Total Acres Real Estate Area State- Owned or
in Area Tax Not Tax Owned Tax
Delinquent Delinquent Delinquent
I 37,790 $3.19 $3.15 0.62 6.04
II 40,520 3.14 3.07 1.21 5.36
III 35,670 2.29 2.37 1.43 17.98
IV 38,400 1.61 1.42 9.66 30.58


Because land varies in productiveness and location, it varies in
the purposes for which it can be most profitably used. In the
past, Florida's land taxation policy has tended to ignore this fact
and as a result the most profitable use of the less fertile lands
has been discouraged. The use of an annual ad valorem rather
than a severance-yield tax frequently results in all timber of
any value being cut from large areas of land. The land then
reverts to the State through tax delinquency. This land, with
much of its tax base thus destroyed, is then of little value until
another crop of timber has reached the stage where it pays some-
one to purchase it from the State and again repeat the process.
In the meantime, the State receives little or no revenue from
such lands. This same condition also discourages the best timber
management.
Some states have gone far towards solving this problem for
the benefit of both the public and the landowners. Under the
system used, a very small tax is collected annually for such
lands. The bulk of the tax is deferred until the timber has
reached the most profitable stage for cutting. A severance tax
is then charged on all timber cut. This plan works for the benefit
of all concerned.

SUMMARY

For 100 years Jackson County has had an average increase
in population of 297 persons per year. The negro population has
been relatively constant since 1890.
There were 581 farms in Jackson County in 1860 and 3,585
farms in 1940. The average size farm in 1940 was 99.6 acres.





Florida Agricultural Experiment Station


In 1900 farm real estate was worth $3.96 per acre as compared
with $18.52 per acre in 1940.
There were 48,473 acres of cotton and 17,942 acres of peanuts
(planted alone) in 1909. By 1939 there were 11,881 acres of
cotton and 55,874 acres of peanuts (planted alone).
In 1940 there were 4,320 mules and 1,040 horses on Jackson
County farms. Only 42 farmers reported tractors.
In 1940 more than 90 percent of the farms were without elec-
tricity, despite the fact that 32 percent of the farms were within
one-fourth mile of an electric distribution line. The problem
of rural electrification is largely a problem of farm income.
Within each type-of-farming region there are areas of poor
soils which are not well suited to the crops generally grown.
The limited amount of farming done in these areas is generally
unprofitable. Experience of farmers has shown that it pays to
farm in areas where the most farming is done.
A map was prepared based on the amount of land cultivated
per square mile (Fig. 5). Records were obtained on 499 farms
in this county for the crop year 1925. Of these 499 records,
only 45 farms were located in areas where less than 100 acres
were cultivated per square mile (class C areas). There were 208
farms located in areas where between 100 and 399 acres were
cultivated per square mile (class B areas) and 246 farms were
located where 400 or more acres were cultivated per square mile
(class A areas).
The largest farms measured by crop acres were located in
class A areas. Farm receipts were much larger for farms located
in the class A areas than for those in the class C areas. On the
other hand, farm expenses did not vary so much between areas.
The most profitable farms were located in class A areas.
Summaries for white farmers are shown separately from those
for negroes. For businesses of about the same number of crop
acres, negroes have less farm capital, receipts and expenses and
get much lower crop yields.
Farms located close to market have an economic and social
advantage over other farms. Farms which were located in class
A areas (see Fig. 5) and which were within two miles of market
had a real estate value of $48 per acre. Farms in the same class
areas but located 2.1 to four miles from market were valued at
$36 per acre and farms located more than four miles from market
were valued at $34 per acre.






Factors Affecting Farming Returns in Jackson County 35

As the size of business of the farms of both white and negro
operators increased from 22 to 172 crop acres, the efficiency of
labor, as measured by productive man work units per man, more
than doubled. One man was able to accomplish about twice as
much productive work on the larger farms.
There was little relationship between size of business and crop
yields.
When size of business was held constant, as measured by acres
of crops, farming returns for negroes were much less than for
white farmers. The negro farmer was less efficient in the use
of labor, had lower crop yields and less capital. Crop yields of
the negro farmer were but about two-thirds those of the white
farmer.
Labor was more efficiently used on large farms than on small
ones. Many small farms had more men around than the size
of business justified. Crop yields were not related to labor effi-
ciency.
In 1940 Jackson County tenants had been on their present
farms an average of three years. Owners had been on their
farms an average of 15 years.
Many tenants in Jackson County move every year. There is
need for better understanding between landlords and tenants.
This is one of the outstanding farm problems in Jackson County.
Only 4 percent of the operators of the 499 farms studied in
1925 had attended high school. Less than 1 percent had attended
college, and none had finished college.
Between 1925 and 1935 farm receipts on 20 Graceville cotton
farms fell from $2,419 to $979, while expenses fell only from
$1,548 to $707. The decrease in expenses was primarily due to
economies in the use of labor and fertilizer.
During the 1925 crop year 49 percent of all farm labor was
expended on cotton and 12 percent on peanuts. Ten years later
on the same farms only 36 percent of all farm labor was expended
on cotton and the proportion expended on peanuts had risen to
23 percent.
On small farms the highest yields of cotton were obtained from
fields on which cotton was planted each year of a four-year rota-
tion and on which more than 400 pounds of fertilizer per acre
was used. It was a fairly common practice on small farms in
this area to plant cotton on the same field year after year. This
probably was not true on larger farms.






36 Florida Agricultural Experiment Station

On soils classed as excellent, good, and fair the yield of cotton
during 1940 was 308 pounds, 252 pounds and 210 pounds, re-
spectively.
Real estate tax troubles are much greater in some areas than
in others. In four large selected areas of the county, tax de-
linquency and State ownership varied from 5.36 percent of the
area to 30.58 percent (Fig. 7).
Jackson County has some good farm land and also some land
better suited to forestry and recreational uses than to agricul-
ture. Florida's land taxation policy has tended to ignore this
fact and as a result the most profitable use (forestry) of the less
fertile lands has been discouraged.




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs