ECONOrIc ASI-T-CTS OF Pi.ST" E II "-N T L ND-rFJJ:T I, jG 1"C. C,-,
By ls, Frici.l Agriculture! cniit
In C]. rCoe, Div isi( n of F'.r; i.!-.n, go-cnt nc0 Costs
t.NIIV OF FL LIB
-. ', E.'1 q S DEPT
.. Address, A-.Tric-n Suciety .f Agrrn,. 1.,,,
.V.. sl.ington, D. C., 1 vL::b.r 2P, 1934
c c i Eportrrnt factors Fcvt bean rpsp:.x. ible f. r pus].inGC con-sir ti. n
of p:-stures to toe f.-regr,.und in l-nd-use planning. The first is the surplus
crop production which 1-.s rL. .r.ct--rizod our agriculture in recent yetrs, rn
the second iE tL.c c,_nserv-.tiunr ,,f soils cinL other n,-tur~-l resources. TMe first.
of thtse fact-rs beg. n to n' k,: itself felt in &- trngible wiy in -hu deprssi, n
of 1.20 rnd 1.921 nd bec:.c'e -cute with the present d -pression, cuLmin-ting in
t'1e Gov-,rnr.int rrogr,_m tc rc-duce surpluC--s of the Cr, ps- in Whic1: the pr--bern
was most acute, ..nd to --djust thl. ncrc'-rO cfi Or..Es -nd 'the nut.r livestock
:nd the volume of the. output uf livestock prcdvcts into a- rttibhll relrticnr.ip
with the existing ond po.tenti. l dt:r .snd. The second of these factors we hove
h-d with us for f-ny yet-.s, but it hs s be in rngul rly owvorlo.ked in pr pur-r ft--
tenti.n until t1-. present -drinistrutin nerc'bned it in its c,.rchcns-ive nr.--
grEm of conservrticn !nd :djust::.r. nt,
These two fancOtLors give .-mple justificr.tion for tV..e importance 7hich the b
pasture question h.s assutcd. Thu issue, on first ctnsidercticn, sE-l.ive rea-
sonably cleor. We should sift substantial ptrtir.ts ,'f lnd frci erosive crips
to grcss, refit tr, c-rg-niz'-t:on Af frIs to this -f justed use of f. rr. 1Ind, rn]i
achieve t-he Cuuble :bjectivc -uf reducing t!e tot~l ftr cutput of crops -nd livc-
stock to & vwluie which h correspords to. tl-, dcr'nend for their use, and st the s-? c
tir.-e c,.nserve in p yrpctuity tb.c niturr--given -ricnulturl resources.
Unfurtunitely tlhis s-luti,..n m,..-ts with cthre finrces whPich in'.-ive s-ricus
cifficultibs and nktks tic ,pp,-rntily..si:ip1E. solution -muc more difficult thn-n it
appears up.n the surf.- ct 0nv of' tjhust. forcets is th, ? pressure Af p "ple (cn fthne
lpna, induced by tl.I lorg,., Lm,.unrt cf un pl,.. nt in n n- re-
w.Vhich has be-en ocW siLnod by tle ncpres.Aicn. n, -,t only hns tere been ria st pin
of'th. nr..rms I fi :t c.'- populti.n fr.-- agriculturee to industry, but ther. l hs ne-
veloped a bcck'flow uf prepl frum ind-ustry to vpg:'iculture wvic1o constitutes a
resistance t,- thL. propccscd prg;u, t the signifiC rce f t ich ses t.s yt .nly
p-rtly realized. nMore p. ople --n the l--'en usu-lly m.-ns rnce int..n.Ive use,
where.s a gratusr ain-isce f" p" sturf, tends to :"te" n, less intensive use.
There is t.e furtl.r f--ctr. of thhe inor ivi.s peu r ffarcrs interest in the
propusld to plbce r. l-rger pr.pcrticn of i''nd in n-stur, rnd of his r,_.cti.n
to this propus l Whtteve' t.hEl p'.,gr.rn: it t,-nust bry wrkLd out in theo li. t cf
thEse two factors, .r sti.ough 'ct the ,-uts,.t, t least, thf se f, ctors s e' to be
in opposition t" the considerations' that appear to make more pasture rather than
less pasture a rational objective from the point of view rf public policy.
Finding the best ultimate plare of-pastures in the planning for agricul-
ture must bc worked out through a program that will reconcile these two sets of
opposing forces. Such reconciliation will be extremely difficult, but there
seems no reason for believing that it cannot be made. In its working out, both
agronomists and economists have an important responsibility,
In the following discussion it is proposed, first, to present infcraation
on the place which pasture now holds in American farm economy; second, to dis-
cuss ways in whi'h the use of pasture is involved in the farmnner's problem of the
organization and management rf his farm; and, third, tn present what appears to
be the major points relating to pastures in land-use planning,
The Place of Pastures inAmerican Farming
It will help to place our pasture problems before us to consider some
data on the present place of pasture in American farming and the trends in its
importance, and to compare the place it holds in our farming with its importance
in pertain foreign countries.
According to the 1935 census, there wrcre in 1929 just a little less then
a billion acres of land in American farms. Of this area approximately 89 per-
cent was in pasture and crop land; the remaining 11 percent was in woods not
pastured, in building sites, and in waste land. (f the land in crops and pas-
ture, 52 percent was pasture, and 48 percent was in crnp land Of the pasture,
rnly 27 percent was reported as tillable, The remainder was pastured woodland
and other untillable land used as pasture,
Figure 1 shows 12 regions, as blocked out for purposes of analysis by
the Planning Pivisicn of the Agricultural Adjustment Administration. Figure 2
shows the percentage of all farm land in pasture by these regions, An examina-"
tion of Figure 2 shown important variation in the relative importance nf pasture.
The highest percentage of land used for grazing is found in the range region.
The reasons are rhvious. Because of the natural conditions which make this vast
territory unfitted for more intensive uses, it he.s become highly specialized in
the grazing of cattle and sheep, m st of which are taken to mthor areas for fin-
ishing on grain and roughage before they are moved to the market.
The next highest relative position of pasture is found in the Mixed Farm-
ing and Fruit Regions, These represent scattered areas in various parts if the V
country in which the butter lands are used for intensive crors and the poorer
parts, representing the mujor part of the twtsl, as pasture.
The Dairy Region also shows-a relatively high prce-ntage of farm land in
pasture. Here the nature of the land itself is such that a very high propnrtinn
of it in pasture means a higher return than if more wore kept in craps. Further,
the dominant farm enterprise, dairy production, utilizes tq advantage a high
proportion of pasture relative to ocher feeds. Its situation, well to the north
of the.regions more suited for grain and other crop production, its short grow-
ing season, and its ample rainfall, tend to make dairy farming the most profit-
able use of the land.
Pasture is shovi'm to have a rel tively high place so far as acreage is
eon.-ernr v in the Whoat and Small-Grain Regiyn. This is largely because there is
considerable land in this region uhi':h is fit only f)r Fre7ir.r '- :rAi j. ri
in the figures as pasture land, thus bringing up the- tntal to a SIzabAle r, -
in thE General Fa.mning and Cotton Regions, rpErture occupies a fairly hc:h
percentage of the land. Th.- ruascn her,. sp.-rs te be primarily the hirh percent-
age if untillable lcnd that can be used only for pasture.
The Corn Belt has a relatively liv7 proportion qf its total farm l--nid in
pasture. This region is fortunate in havingL a high pcrcentear of lIn.n] that is
not mnly tillable but highly productive in its natural condition. Its climate
favors thE growing of large crops of feed grains .nd a sizable acreage. c( !.b'.t
and other crops, The highest comparative advantage in the use of this land,
up to the -resent at least, has been found in putting them aj-r proportion into
It will be interesting at this point to compmre the position of pasture
in this country with its position in certain groups of foreign countries. Re-
calling the figures of 48 percent in crops and 52 percent in pasture as shonm y
the 1929 census for our own country, let us consider first a group 6f countries
characterized by a very high percent-ge of farm land in pasturt.. In the Irish
Free State, for example, crops occupy -nly433 percent of the tillable farm l-.;.n-
and pasture A7 percent. In addition, there Is a large area of rough, untillable
lan-d which is alno used for grazing. In the United Kingdom the :'arable" land
represents 37 pe-rc-nt and permanent grs. 63 percent of the presumably tillable
area. Th'-re is in addition a largc extent of untillable land, pnrt of which is
used for the grazing of livestock. Ukcw Zealand represents the extr-vme in the
dominance of pasture, Only 12 percent of the land which has been imnprovcd in
that island country is in c^ps, -ih ereas "tnme gras:- pasture occupies"PE p-r..-nt
and in addition there is aLmost an equal area in native grasses which is u.,%d for
the grazing nf livestock.
It has been suggested that the United States should follow the Rx'nplL "'"
these countries which have Fpparently found thet their b st economic interest is
served by ke.ping a very hirh percuntar- of th. ir lend in grass. It is fu'-'th-r"
pointed out that the trends in land use in these countries hA3 been toward -ore
pasture and that this represents a rational adjustment to dcpres?--,d condition. in
There are special conditions affecting the adjustments in these foreign
countries, however, which should not be lost sight cf. They all have a marine
t.clirmate, -.-hich tends to give pE:sturz- a higher crmpvrative adv ntage than cro's.
This is p-rtly for the reason that the production and riTrning of gr-in is less
su3'-essful thrn in the countries vyith a continental climate such as our -.*'n, nd
partly-that the-se same climatic conditir.s -'-r id1eally suited to the production
of grass and other pasture crnps with an extremely high carrying capacity. In
the competition between these different land uses, therefore, it is not si::p'Vis-
ing that pasture has the ascendency,
In thu .ELse'of New Zealand there is the ad itional factor of lcn- dist:n.'P
from impr;t.nt -onsvining mae.rkets, which makkes it profitable to concentrate liho
products of the lnd into high-specific-vslue animal products vwhiich reduce the
freight ,hrrgis to a ninimum.
in contrast',-ith the figures from the countries just listed, .7e ml-y t'k
the example of certain European continental countries. According to the latest
available. figures from Germany, of the total acre:-:e, oc-upied by crnrs :n-J p-s-
t-ire 7?11- per-'nt arre in crops -nd nly ,PI rroent in pa.,tures. ]n lvpnP thse
figures are 62 percent and. 38 percent, respectively. This situation rer-seBmts
the reLults of a combination of factors including a continental climate, a relta-
tively densA rural population which necessitates' intensive use nf land, and..a
type of farm economy characterized by a very high degroR of self-containment.
Coming back tn a consideration of the place of patture in. our own coun-
try, it is worth while to consider thp trend in the importance nf pasture. Fig-
urea 3 and 4 show geographically thp shifts in the use nf land for pasture bhe-
tween 1i09 and 1D29, as shown by the county census figures for those 2 years.
Each dot in theseA maps represents 5,Q00 acres. Figure 3, showing the areas in
which pasture has decreased, reveals.that in only a fnw scattered areas has there
been any de.rease. Most of this dcporease is in the Corn Belt, notably in north-
western Iowa and adjoining areas, with some. scattered decreases in.other parts
of thp Corn Belt and the northeastern States. Limited decreavpn aro shown- in
the Panhandle of Texas and in other portions of the Great Plains.
The dpecrpases in the Corn Bnlt are in those mreas favored with thp most
highly. productive soil. and most level surface, which give the production of grain
a high tcomparativp advantage. The dpcreases shown, in the southern Great Plainsa
represent for the most part the breaking up of grazing land for the production
of wheat and cotton in response to factor such as mechanization, which led to-.
the recent remarkable Pxpansion in cropping in this region.
Figure 4 shcws that an increase in pasture acreage has been widespread
and of very substantial proportions. Some. of this increase, to be sure, is nci- "I
nal rather than real. Throughout the Great Plains it represents, for the most
part, the incorporation into actual farms of public land previously used for graz-
ing; outside the boundaries of farms and hence not reported at all in the earlier
"ensus. As a matter of fart, there was a substantial nhift out of grazing in1
crop-growing in this region. On the other hand, the increase shown in the eastern :,:i:[
half of thp country rpprespnts a real shift from crops to pasture. The causes of
this shift arp various. A growing realization of the danger of soil depletion is'
one of the most important. Another important one is a real decline in the eta-
paretive advantage of feed grains, brought about largely by the introduction of
tractor power and the accompanying falling off in the use of feeds in the support
of workstock. Within this 20 years there was a temporary increase in grain pro-
duction induced by the war situation, which was followed by the resumption -6f the
trIline. These changes have been accompanied to seane extent by an increase in
the average size of farms and a decrease in the numbt r of farms but'suh hellnges
are not so conspicuous as the major shift from grain to pasture.
The question of whether this progressive shift frman crops to pasture in
the eastern part of the United States has been continued since 1929 is hard to
answer. There has been a substantial reduction in the acreage of all crops, ..114
pertly due to drought and more recently to the Government's adjustment program, K#
but available figures do not show conclusively that there has been a correerond- g
ing increase in pasture. The 1935 census will give comprehensive figut'e6 by .J;.!...
whioh the change in pasture ovbr the last 5 years can be measured. It seems '......
probable that the movement which was so apparent up to 19iP, was .ubit.ntinlly K
slowed up by the'pressure of the back-to-the-land movement. ii
Considering the importance of pasture as a source cf feed, nw entirely
al^"rate figures are available. However, we have been making sane careful eti-
mates, the results of which are embodied in Figure 5, which shpwn the estimated y
perngntage of feed derived from astures, from feed grains, and from hay and
ailage, respectively. I/
1/ raeija.nmadc by R. D. Jennings, Agriculturrl Economist, Bureau ef A t'gttl-
^'y : En"r* rrr-i..s.......
RLferring gain to Fii-ure 1, in order to gC t the location mf the r i7,-ri
for which data arc" shorn in Piyure 5, wve T,, y .eynin, the ,'h-,rt for what it re-
veals of the rUlative-importinece of p-sture as a source of f1':d It is esti-
mated thL.t, for the United States as a v;hole, 41 p.:rcent of all available fed
units are derived, from pasture.
WIhun we take this up by r. gions we find a-gain a wide ranre of variation.
The RE.n-u Rugion, because of the highly spccializd grazing enterprise, is the
hihbEst. This represents a rLgional division of function in the production -
cattle and shLep for the market,- these animrn-l being mcv'Ad from the grazing re -
gion into the grain regions to be finished.
The high percentage of feed units derived from pastures in the Cotton
belt, which is only very incidentally a livestock-producing region, is to he
accounted for !lriely by the climate which m!-kes possible a long grazing season.
Th.- relatively high percentage of fc:.d derived from pasture in the 'Theat
Region is due to the situation already cited, that of a large inter-mixture of
grizing land with crop land.
ThL Dairy and Truck regions each show 40 percent of the total feed produc-
tion derived from p.sture. This relatively high percentage is due to the fact
that pcstures,for the most prrt, are of relatively high quality in these regions
and th.t diiry production lends itself admirably to the use of pastures.
Th.- region that shows the lowest percentage of the total feed derived
*from posture is the Corn Belt. The reasons here ere obvious. Th- high cimpara-
tivu -'v. rit&ge of cr.in, caused by favorable snil and climatic conditions, re-
aucos thu impirt.nce of pasture t3 a relatively l10: position.
One of the most imp-rtant considerations determining the repl inmprt-nce
of p-sture is its carrying cpr.city, Figure 2 shows this factor, apprnxim-tely,
in tbrms of the acres p, r rnim:.l unit require, d to support livestock .9urinc" the
no ,rcl pasture season. Th-L rEnge in carrying ctprcity, so expressed, is -ide.
In the range country where native grcasss are utilized, and vrhere' the 'rinftll is
extremely low, a maximum acr(e.g is necessary. A rel tively higi acreage per
.niml unit is found in the Cotton Belt Lnd adjoinriin- regions:. This .eflects
poor quality of pasture, pr rtly as a result of lack of core, nd p rtly the poor'
cd.ptthility of much of the soil in this arec. for pr.sture. These factors oire
partly counter--_oted by the. longi:r grazing season.
The carrying capacity of pa.stur-es is seen to be lowv in uhe WheatMixedr
Farming,Fruit, and Tobr ceo Re ions. The reasons are vw rile. In the WheF.t
R-=gion the quality- of pasture lund tends to epprn'ch the low carrying cop-city
of the grazing region.
Thu highest carrying capacity is to be found in the p_ stures of the Corn
and the Dairy Regions. This is ex-i.in.d by a -imbintinn of good slil, favor-
.ble cIL-n-te, and relatively more careful m-r.n:m.- nt of p-stures. Since pns-
turfs in these regions rqnstitute a more important resource in the production of
livestock productss, they receive somewhat more Ettention than is nharracoevistic
in snr.u of the other parts of the country.
Pasture in Frrm Economy
Before proceeding to a discussion 'of pstur;-s in 1-nd-use plEnning, it
may be well to consider a number of aspects of the problem, from the'paint nf.
view of the individual .farmer. Fiphasis in the phrase, "land-use plaEaing,"
should be upon the wori "use."' It is the fa mer who uses the 1'nd. Planning
should proceed, therefore, with him and his interest as thpe focal pint.
The first and most patent consideration in the fanner's reaction to the
usa of pasture, and to proposals for increasing the importance of the place it.a:.
holds in farming systnpms, is the relation ef pasture to livestock praiuctien.
Pasture and hay must obviously be used by livestock if their place in the farm- a
inE system is to be economically 'justified; but the influence of the amount and
kind of pasture on the amount and kinds nf livestock and livestock products is
not so obvious. The fainmer must be concerned with getting a maximum utilization *
of all his productive resources; that is, he must get as large a net income as'
possible, and this means to a considerable extent, the largest gross income. f ii
a given proportion of his land must, for physical and economic reasons, be use4 II
for pasture, he must determine the kind and amount of livestock which will makewi.
best uce of it. This depends partly on the nature of the pasture, and pertly oa.:i"
the relative prices he csn get for different classes uf livestock and of live-
stock products. It alsr depends on the relation of his pasture resources to tO'i
othjr feeds he can raise, or finds it most profitable to raise.
The importance of these relationships may best be illustrated by a con- :.
sideration of the geographic distribution of the more important livestock enter-i
prisess. The dairy industry is largely localized where it is through the ele- i
ments of srii, surface, end climate which make 'pastures 'and the production Of MY,
nd othtr roughage a more successful rnd prrfftable use of his land than a syst.B.
of lend use involving higher acreage and feed grains and other grain crops. T71el
farmer must supplement febd from these sources with adeauc-te mounts of concen -
trates either grown or purchased. The proportion of these Vhich he grows himself.
is largely dutcrmined by physical 1 factors which mrke growing or buying of concfi.
tr'.tes th.. more profittblc.. ':|
Contrasted with this situation in the d-iry region is thEt of the Corn |
Belt, whert nLtural runditions of soil, surfecet, and climate five grain productit .
a superior economic advantageto. Ferm-rs in these two different regions have ad-
justed thoir livestock enterprises to these natural conditions, thich have all :9!
the essentials of economic forces. The chain of causa.tion tends to run (1) fr ,
the nature of the land and climate which determines the best utilization of t0 aq
land in terms of spt-cific crop and gesture e systems aE.nd which yield specific pfl- aii
portions of thet different feud elements, to (2) the kind of livestock system *
which give the best e-onomic utilization of thuse feeds. In areas where natura:l:i|
non. tions give highest comparative advantage to a system in which carbohydrateto'
feeds th:-t is, corn r.nd similar grains huve a dominant proportion, the prnlit
tion of me: t tnimnls i3 domin-nt. In erues where postures a-nd legumes give tho ,
bhst use v;.luu to tlihu lrnd, dairying tends to be dominant.
This stc-tes th; case only as a goneralization. There are hundreds of ,e-tS9
dlifying factors both physicUl end economic.. The important point is that the Pfl-'i"J
poseails to increase pasture in specific arbas must be mr.do with duo considert.tio j, f
of thfrsu fundementr-l f-ctors thet are so vitEl to the former. This is not to BSar,
thzt adjustments c-nnot and should not be m-de. Farmers, like 11 other humens,,,
hvc much incrtic in their mckoup. Howov-.r, they do hFve n lively end reelistlo i
sense of f..m economy, born of thuir close end vitrl relations to forming. They:::,
know th'.t'th,.ir interest depenil.s in, i-rrr-. mrn.-ure i:. irm int -in:nli' n e:':'ctivQ
b-l n. bt'.''en pr sturc c.nd livestock nd b*:t.'.-nr p sture ni h-y *r. fA i-r i r.
th,-ir lrnd-use systems. Their chief w,'--.kn..s probably lies in th4ir i ilure to
rucognizc "nd act upon their opportunities to Improve th rrrnriuctivity r f r-s
ture, a.nd tu m-.ke its actual competitive powur oa,.irn-t ethLr 1-nd rues rise tn
its p-t~nti.-i level. Mu-h can pr-b- bly be done in helping f- r 'm- s to realize
the opportunity to ggt a highr-r utilization of 1: rnd through p:.-ture iipr-v-':.nt,
effuctivo crop rotations involving-, p:-ture, ,nd a more effective combination of
p-s.ture nd rough:-ge with grains in their rEtions for liv,.stock.
The forcgoing L,-ds logically Lo a consideration of the relation of posture
to tht- inome nmd cost side of the former's problem. Much hts been sid -nd .
written on the adv'nttge of giving pasture a 1 r-eTr plFce in the frnmir.r- system
tec-.use it mnans lover costs of production. It is pointed out thct p--,ture re-
quires mnu-h less lebor per feed unit than do gr- in crops, rnd for this reason it
h-_.s ben Lssumud th.t a higher proporti .n of pasture in the croppin' system riuuld
bze to the economic advantage of the ffrmecr because it reduces his costs. T-,,is
is .n incomplete view mf the problem. It is impcrtr'nt to consider not only costs
p-r unit but the totr1i volume of output, because both of those things ere factors
in the frrmrr's grc,ss and net income.
In a consider-tion -f the cost side of this problem an im.ortrnt distinc-
tion between the tvw outst.rAnding classes cf costs in f-.rm- production is over-
looked. This is the distinction between fixed costs and v:rirble costs. Fixed
costs are those thtt do not rise nnd fall, at. least in the im'- ediite period under
considcr:'tion, with increases or decreases in the total volume of output. In
fErming the:,, arE represented by such important elements as the interest on in-
vestm,-nt in farm land, interest and depreciation on farm buildings nnd other lnd
improvements, interest and. d.preci.tion on farm equipm.:nt, ''nd the fr.r-,zr's rvm
l'-bor End th't of the family to the extent that it cannot find rcedy emplo,-r. nt
outside of tLe f.-rr-ing -business. The variable costs, on the other hand, -re
those th:-t rise and f'a.ll pretty much in proportion to the volume of output. They
are repres--ontd by such farming costs as fertilizer, hired labor that can be en-
gaged and released as the demand for labor on the f:.--r is greater or less, .and
other eLmn:.nts w.,hich are directly connect with the nature and volume cf the out-
put of f'_rm products.
The significance of this classification of costs in terms of the question
as to vh .th-r it pays to increase or decrea,-.e pasture, lies in the f-:',t thet the
fixed costs carnnt be reduced by reducing the output, whereas the variable costs
can be so reduced. It is a stubborn fact thvt fixed costs rather than variable
costs domin!.to in the farmer's production. In systems of farming in whichh live-
stock z.nd livestock products ar.e the principal output, our figures showv that thes-
fixed costs constitute -,pproxi.D.itely 75 percent of the -hole. It is obvious,
therefore, thct a reduction in total output of product mcans rn increase retih,-r
th-.n a decrc,-se in the total costs per unit of product; -nd, so far as this single
factor is concerned, if n shift to more pasture means a reduction in the total
output, it moans a rise in the cost per unit rather than a fall.
The kLy to the rel-tionship of these considerations to the former's re-
action to a pr-posal for more pasture, is the relative productivity of past.ur'-s
as compared with crops. '.',- have no dpend:ble fiE-ures on the rel'-tive r''.duc-
tivity per acre of lend in pasture as crupe-re1 with l'.nd in focid gr-ins. UTdcr
conditions favorable for the production of alfalfa a higher production of di-
gestible nutrients can be obtained in the form of good alfalfa h-.y or prstur%'ye
th-n can be obtained from corn undcr normal yields. This is not true, however,
8 ^..: ........
if the.average pasture now found on Ametican farms, The great bulk *f it iB
decidedly lower in productivity thrn the grain crops which could be grown on
most of the.tillcble l:nd which is in psture or might be put in posture. Coer-
tain retc.tion pasture crops such aa sweetclover., -nd probably lespedeza, eatnii
compete to tdv'.-ntLge with oEts and other smell-gr.in feed crops on lands that
are -.uittble for such rot-.tion pasture crops. Some of -the bluegrass pasture in :::
the aress of more fa.vorable soil con probably compete on fairly even terms with s
these groin crops. However, these high carrying-cc.pacity pastures are the ex- il
ception rather tht-.n the rule in American farming. If p sture is to occupy a !.
more important position c.nd t-ke its place as a means of preventing soil erosion. -J
and the depletion of fertility which now presents such a-n a.cute problem, it is
obviously necessary to build up the productivity of pastures. If they cannot beO.
given a stronger competitive position as compared with grain crops, the prepnsauii
to innresse the acreage in pastures will encounter almost hopeless resistance i
the p rt of f.rmers.
Thust. same considerations rhich have been discussed in terms of costs' eeil
probably be more effectively presented in terms of gross and net income from
farming. A basic principle in private economy is that of maximum utilization
rf resources. It meens that the former's motive in planning the use of his isv
labor, rnd equipment is th-t of getting the lErgest possible income from them. ft
Too eften, it is true, third motive is considered frrrnthe point of view of a 'I
short-timre return md does not consider E.dequrtely the longer time aspects of i ...
However,. it is ono of the most stubborn realities in the farming situation. Itiil
reflects the basis of the former's thinking in the use of his lend. He insists
using it in the -;ay ,which appears to him to premise the maximum income in te"l'm
of sale rrLd direct household use of products. Since the fixed elements in. his
resources so largely dominate, this very largely becomes a mnttur of mrximum: l :i'
gross income. + i
Thtre is, to be sure, rn irport-nt collective aspect of this meptter in
tcrms.of the rela-.tion of supply End demand of the various farm products as they, !dP,
a-ffect not only price but tctal income. The price "f the product is one impor- -
tent Llement otich the fa-rmer must consider in reaching his objective of maxiMsi
utilization. His cacsider, tion if this factor is probably far frmm adequate b1w."!!:
cause of his l-:ck of understanding of economic forces. Moreover, he is at a
fundamentE.l dis.dvant:ge &s an individul-1 in considering it because his indiViA-d|j
ual action m.-tturs so little in the whole alignment of forces vhich determine
price. This is probably the most impor-trnt reason bf.ck of the present agricul- :m
turnl adjustment program. However, even with the present machinery rf adjust-i
ntunt, or under conditions which may result from a rational evolution Mf the pre:o'-L
sent adjustment efforts, the fanner will still have a major responsibility 1.a :
determining the use he mLkes of the things he has to produce with. It is i r..or..
t-nt, therefore, that this fundamental motive in farm economy he given due -001-
sideretion in the proposals for modifying the present position of pastures in
Anericrn farming. I
Pasturns in Rplation to Land Use Planning
Lrt us now turn nur attnntirn to the more specific rplatiens of pasturea'Bil
to land-usp planning. While the more direct -and ibjectivr aspect of this rfla-
tinn is that of thp nepd to save the soil from the damaging Affocts of erosion, II
as well as to build up and preserve an adequate supply of the Plempnts cf fer- ..
utility, nthpr factors ^f at least Pqual importance must be kept constantly In ii||
view. Thp ultimate objective in efforts to conserve natural resources is to
strength. the basis far in nd-iduuFt- str-nd-rd of Il'.'ir.r. it 13 :rI;r r r.,
therefore, t kpp in mind thit Lh.r 1 is to I: g r'-;r- for. u:."- ;'th,'r Lr .r: f"r its
own srke. Th-n first consid'-krt ion i. a. to h-w any ,-iJ"n yrry'.pc.-."J r-f;:: 'jr i:1"
affect the economic -Flfearn jf the user--s cthi pr.:;'*,nt ainru future i:', ."r
example, we rtL goin,, to have in thi1 fut.A.-"r rncrp r-c, lp C11i tnr I'-nd .-ir r, in
directly on f,--r:,.ir for th,:ir r".jnc;,.A-" "ppo:'tur.i ity, this .2ust bp t-:krn i:.'r ac-
count in dnte:'niinnir.g he plece we prc.i-': ) -iv ti past'ures-. in f:-r'r,-ljn
planning p:'r-ran. The scriptural di-t'im "r,nan -onnot liv" by br-Ad Alonr-" is
often q.', t.-d; it might hr, pr tr -" ob' rvry hre tha-t noitbl-' -fan he eF"t ..gr-.~:
at all :xycpt as it is t onverted into -Ats tr::,ropri-tn prouu'-ts. Th. W r' rr ir:c-
tiral and i "m u,.i,...te qut .--.0ol1 is, C'.n w- ut ;lize the produLts derivable from n
apir.cis.li:' hiiher" proportion *.-,"' pasture in a. way to realize maximum .nrfits
from our l-nd rssourres? 02-n we by this m( sr-.s maintain a prr'd,.,?ti,.n -:" 'il of
the; various .gr tur'tl prclu'-ts 1'.t.,onr-lly bclnr',-,d with the n.'-.ds of our
TI.es,- qu stions irmply the importsne., nf o well--roundeed -on-SiL:- ri- iirn of
all of The i t t.,.ttu obj.-.et ivrs t..nd c-11 f the fcrrrcs and nn.'] t iior:. involved
in l'nd-us.- plU.rziin. Diffir-ilt -.s it is tn recnciln f,11 o tho conflicting
intr,-ssL. c nd corn:.,,rrstionz, it in n t unrcE.:scn,-lL. t' exT,'--'t th-t the- motive
of s5vinL tht- land %no that if rr-nl7.i:in --n '-to. u'-te fejr.j supr.ly mnd ':n f-lplo
economic opportunity for those _:npa',d in f'-orminr- zr- net -nt-c gnri.-t tic but can
be h-r-iconized into ultim' t.. r'tlirm-t>.n.
4iV t, n prob!. b! ht,-st F, 1 rt tl ',.. ,oncr-et- phm,,s;. s 0c th.- r--l'- t ion cf pcs-
ture to rh7.- n'..d fcr plonnirnp fut.ur-_. Us< of 1- ni ty st'-ly of h< prc-:r.nt situa-
tion in c-Jrt in so-' -,d p'robl-:r-i por-i :.. Fi -ui'e 2./ sho-:s th; p rccfnt..: cf
the totc.l crop r.nd .'L tare l' nd in f' a rm' in ..1 such -ri- .' o p'upid by 1 1) in-
tcrtil.d crops ,[ ) non-in-t rt i I d r-.,ps, ':r*d (') .'n tures. Tte 3e '.r--s ore
all in -h.- o:st-.rn 'na mncr., hunid portion of the country.
Inspection of this ,h-.;'.t shos t.hot the intr't.ill.-d, .nd hence- more
highly erosive rrops, h:.ve thuir hih,-st rel-,tive imrorttnre in th:e Vr'l-s of the
'otton Bulit. A pceuli-rity cf ti,- p-cv.-: iliring ty7es of ft--rr.ing syst,.ms in the
South is th:t th.re is no es.t.nt.i:l r,..: ticn bc.twu.:-n t:.u chief crap cotton -
and livestock. In .,OE t cth,-r Lc'3-s *'hi're liv,.-., k is gron"m th.-re !re important
suplpcmunt;t.ry 'nd nimpl-.mentary r. 1' tions bcwcen the -rops .o-nd the livestock
&nd h'-noc moi'e intir.: te rol.ction bt":,.n th,.se rrops t.nr p- sturu. This is not
true cf cottct, sine,. it is not --, f1-,,d cr.ip nd is not cssentislly tied up with
th, oth-r -ctiviti-s of ti., f- r-n -,;.cpt :s eich aotivitis int .rfere with the
i1bor d,,rndrs of tl, cotton crc,'p. Sincu cotton must bc intortilled c!id since,
s the ch-.rt sho.-s, it i- sF-c. much moro impucrt' nt th-n the non-inturtilled crops,
thcre tinds to be ; imnnst const: nb usr. in cotton of the 1'nd best fitted for it.
Tha poor l..-.ld is n tur: 12v relug-tAd to pcsturc snrd th--re is extremely little
in th, way of crop nrt-'tioli, prrticA.L '] y rs it involv.-,s p' sture. This condition
enco',ir ..as erosion, 'Cgm ntEd to .. considL'rhl]t dcgr,'c by tho f-ct thnt the
frost-free season a-mounts to ,. Almost the entire y-or, thus giving the U-nd but
little rest from thu effects ol soil-depleting forces. It is under tht.ze condi-
tions th..t erosion h-s rc.sehcd its most rdv: nced ctcge.
The non-cotton nrens shown in the ch: rt hrvc rv very low puret ntrpe )f in-
t'.;rtilled crops a.nd a hirh p..rcEnt-' -g of prttres. In mrost of t.ht se -rr-s live-
stock canstitutcs f tic botwvee:i crops end p-. t'ir.s rnd tend.- ti mTinimiz7 tl'e :'-
f, et if erosion. In mrst of thes.-. orr:-.s ,liso non-inritertillcd c-ops, mostly h'y,
2/ Data supplied by 7". W. Wilcox, Agricultur: 1 Fconomist, Agri.ultur-I Adjust-
'e q .
which, is an erosion preventive, exceed intertilled crops in importance. This
means that there is opportunity to keep the int 'rtillod crop area in. grass for
a p: rt of the rotation p.-riod, -nd thus to minimize the effects of erosion.
This system of farming r. presents -_ fairly satisfactory adjustment of the crrp- :i.
ping and pasture system to the n- ture of the lard. i
In the Corn Belt are,.s, &.s shown by the ch.rt, there tends to be a prac-
ticclly even distribution between intertilled crops, non-intertilled crops, eand
posture. In this region th- winter months rre E resting period with reference-
to erosion forces -.nd there is thu closest sort of relation between the two
classes of crops grown said the posture. This rel'-tion "rises from the impor- ..
t';nt livestock enterprises which are themselves built upon the products of the..
land. Hero, ag-.in, c fairly workable adjustment hos been achieved. .
Going ovcr the different parts of the country once more for brief cam- .
ments with reference to points of policy end planning on the matter of pasture M
the cropping systems, it r',oul.d p-,,r thr.t the southern problem is D'rg:Jly thsa "l.,
of preserving an ndcqu-te e creag-. r'f crop lr'nd r:nd of keeping up its productive. *'.
quality; this in thu f ce of th.. difficulties inhere'zt in the faF.rming system afki:.
the climate whiqh mtk-sthu prevention of erosion very h:-rd. It is probable th0.a:i
cs time goes on minore ',nphr:sis .:ill b: placed upon pnsture, feed crops, rnd liy e
stock as a. regula-r though minor Lource of f.rm inccme in th.. South. However, :JJE
the naturUl disadvc.rtures of such system in this region as compared with thd:':.
present speciElized livestock nreu-cs, together with the economic end physical C0I.
diticns which give cotton its unquestionid ascendency, seem likely to make th
solution of the problem- only.. jLr.ti:.l one. Something must be tone to presoi*'
the qu-lity of the best cotton linds, which represent 'the h-ea.rt 'of the agricui-,!!%
tural resources of th.m South. The protective possibilities of cover crops is ,p
important element in the solution of this problem and has at least an indirect',:,ii
bearing upon the pasture problem:. However, the pr-sture problem itself centers.
more spucifir-cally in the ninor developmernts aireedy referred to, nrmely, the
gro-7th of feed crops id prsturu to support e limited livestock enterprise, -In
this relation p.:-.ture;s ctn no long-r be looked upon merely as a vacation for wornlll
out land. The questions of their v-gcta.tion and m-nca-emunt must be taken up not ::"l
only from.thu point of view of resuscitating 1-nd fertility but in connection''rithi-
their us= as E direct source of incoue through livestock. '
Throughout most of the Ex.ns in the North, it soems question.able cs to '
whether any very substanti 1 further mevenent toward pemzanently shifting lend il
from erops to p.c:turu cF. n be economically m.intsaincd. The solution of the prob- :i
lcm in most of thcse c're.s w.uld seum to be in the direction of preserving ..from ;t
loss thu present crup rind without tEking it permc.nently out of crops. This ii
mbcans, f'or thL .ost p-rt, ,. gre, tEr attention to effective rotations involving .i
legumes which will net only contribute to erosion prevention through providing a Up
larger r-mount of hrus in the soil, but will raise the yields of grp-in crops so P I
that the ar'-.ie wimount, or .t la-st -.in ridquete amount, of griin crops ca:n be ;
rr.ised upon a more liLitcd E crcrgc, thus rrking it possible to keep a larg1r1,0r- ".|
portion than ,t-prescnt of the crop lend in scil-consurving crops which, in- ,
cident.lly, muons enhanced pa-turr r.s:.urccs. In most eress, provided suitable
soil-building crops en be found, the g in in.yield p-r acre rqll be.enough tb :,
nompensete for the redurced ecre'.ge occ-: si.:ned by the soil-building crop in the
One of the outstanding nceds in this connection is the d'.v,.loer.nrt .nd
popul-rizatic.n of an ,cid-tolernnt l.-w:, which will fu-nition in the aci:-soil
rcGa in rpprox i,. tely the s,:ie -.ry that sweetclover is c'.rminr to functii. in
thu sw.out-scil ,r..s. Lesp.dc-L is such a crop, but its Frers.nt .'.d-'ptability
places r: northern lir:it to its territory somei-htre in th.-. southern half of the
Corn PBit. At present the greatest honr, for this sort of crop in the north rn
IIf of the Ovrn Belt and in the !'..iry recion seems to be sweetclcver. i-ut the
necessity of incurring the heavy costs involved in li~inF the land to mnke
svit:utclovur a saf- crop is zn effective e bar to its very wide developm-r.t, at
lea.st und..r present economic conditions. Probably no greater contribution to the
presurvzlti ,n cf the soil of the Middle -est, end the inprcv,: .- nt of cropping
systems frer the point of view of the support of livestock, could be rvdc by the
s-grrjn'.-.ists th?.n that of discovering, developing, rnd popularizing succc-3sful
ecid-tolcr'-.nrt l._ur:-, crop which would fit as well into cropping systems on the
:cid sjils of the Corn Belt cnd the Dairy P.ogirn as sweetclovcr does no07 on the
It h-_s been sufggested in rrL.ny quarters tha-t the increase in pasture lend,
whnich is -ssu:ed to be needed in certr.in hilly sections, p.rticuli.rly of the
southernri Ccrn Belt, ,nd in other arees throughout most of the agricultural por-
tions of the country, -ight be" greatly facilitated by the consolidation of f.rr.-s,
which is assumed d to be needed in o dtr to provide &-n -mple economic holding un-
dr L, c.nditlj.n of the less intensive use of ]ind rcprcsented by a p-sture system.
It see-.s f-.usible, froth an offhand consideration, to plan for converting con-
sider-ble reas of hilly fcrr:-. land, no-.- in relatively smanell farms, into larger
grazing holdings tilmost to the exclusion of crop growing. When one go-s into
the f_ actors involved in such a pc zp IW I, he encuunt;ter-s wh'-t vi1ll probrlI.ly be
seri'ius barriers to the successful carrying out of the plan. In the first piece,
with the back-fl,-w uf pcpula.tion frtor industry to agriculture, wre can ill afford
to reduce the number cf fras. Thousands of fern fnilies with recent farm ex-
periurnce erc now living ".n relief" in the citi.,s nd tc;:ms of our agricultural
regions tc.use they hs.ve been displaced either c s tenants from the farms of
landlords w.ho had to move back on their farms to make their own living, or
through foreclosure of mortg-.^os in the case of owner operators. Presumably,
nz.ny cth.r thousands of men recently employed in industry, but now rut of employ-
munt, "icL h-.ve an agricultural background, are potential co:ipctitors fcr the op-
portunity to occupy and run a farm. The cise 7_ust be m'de air-tight to justify
a reduction in thL n'i-.b,.r of ferms under the present conditions. Such justifi-
ca.tion is probably limited to the plainly submarginal situations where the land
is bhEiii ciLred by -he Govermi:ent to bt converted into grazing reserves or con-
sclid,.ted hoi.ings for grazing enterprises. This is p-rticularly exemplified by
situ- ti.j:-s in th. ?,re&t Plains and otli.cr rcrticns of thc; grazing regionr.
Juii.tLer cr-sidr&rati~n in connection with the proposed cons ,lideticn is
the qu,:.sti,.n of w'hctbh.r the p.s.ture tync of use wh.iich is cont.-rpl: ted will sup-
part t,.- invcst:..:nt involved in buildin-g- up a lf.rg.r huldin,. AssFuning thtt the
prcsrnt systems of use of such l nd yi-ld a lrrt: current incocne per cre thbn
this "Land .'.,.uld yield if uccd untiruly or rncstly fz';r posture, we hve c-npeti-
tive elernt which miuut be f'aced in ec.nsid-.rink tho new propos.l. Lowr-.r use ,must
be eccomrp.niud with lc>or inv-st.-..-nt p r cere in r.rd;r to be successful. It
looks es if it were not possible, in the fsce of the present competition for
f-.rr-.s, to stale doen these values to e. p-stor-l-use-returns basis.
Suimiing up the c-.nsiderrti *ns so loosely discussed in the fori','ing, we
mey condense then into four propositions .s follows:
(1) The first objective in considering the expanded use of pasture is
to make a better present -nd long-tine opportunity for the people on the Send.'
Ti:is does not mean merely a plece on the land for those unfit for farming; but
in the long run, if opportunity for industrial employment continues to be lack-
ing, we must look for a higher pVrcentage of our people on farms solely through
thu results of less migration frum fr.rms to industry. '
(2) The second objective would seen to be to snve the land and make it
more productive. This and the first objective, are, in the long run, competi~le
and h.rmonious. Their reclizntioh involves conservation of lend with the use.of
(3) Contrary to the rec-nt assumption that the service of those whose. 'V
life wcrk had been devoted to mea-ns of making the farnner more efficient tnd hs a ,
lcnd more productive ore now outdated rnd unneeded, it would seem' that the prp- i
sunt situr tion -nd its de.u-nds require more service from these men then ever e-
fire. Consequently, the cgronomists concerned with the develcpnent of psturesa
and other frge crops hfve F brooder and more important responsibility. They
share this responsibility ith soil specialists, economist's, Fnd m1ny ethers
whose services -re needed in meeting the now problem. i
(4) Fine.lly, in r.11 of this "urk there is needed, as the condition of .
successful outcome, a h.ppy btljnce between vision and good' sense. 5*
ii ii ir ii ii 1 .,I( ii
TYPE OF FARMING REGIONS
pi" /: "\ I I T/?L ".. ', 2-fruit and
e mi xedf~mg
,, \ F II ---- r .,-- y/" ,4-wheat &
"-- 1 '* '' '. --'Y-"* y"-'- ",'- .,.y-* .^ signal gr
\ \ > / .-il'' -^ v ~ --.. a a y -. -_.'_ / s- e .. g
$23r <. crops
^ ,_ .. ,. .. .... .... ......3.. -non-agr.
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE N9. Z@6 13 BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
FIGURE I THIS MAP SHOWS THE LOCATION OF THE REGIONS LISTED IN FIGURES 2 AND 5.
Percentage of Farm LadiPstran
Acres of All Pasture Rqie oCr o
for the Usual PsueSao
PERCNT F ARES OF ALL PASTURE
FARMLAN REQ I ED TO CARRY A COW FOR
FARMING REGION IPATRTHUSUAL PASTURE SEASON
UNITED STATES --------------
FRUIT AND MIXED FARM ING--
RANGE LIVESTOCK -----------
WHEAT AD SMALL GRAIN
G ~ENR LT---IN--- ------
TONARCO FAENRMI .A NG
iiiiiiiiiT---U---------- ENT OF AULTURE NEG. 28114 BUREAU I..L L ECONOMICS
FIUE2-NALiAFO H ONR SFRMLN 8I ATR U T RDCIIYI
TERM OFFEE U eNNIT-E ACR IS MUHBLWTA FTELNDIpAVSE EDCOS
NOT TH AITOSB EIN N OHTEPRENAtO AD NPSUEADISCRYN
PASTURE LAND IN FARMS (EXCLUDING WOODLA
7Decrease in Acreage, 1909-1929
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG. 98161 BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
FIGURE 3 DECREASES IN PASTURE LAND IN FARMS IN THE 20 YEARS ENDING 1929 WERE VERY
LIMITED. GRAZING LAND OUTSIDE FARMS DECREASED IN THIS PERIOD THROUGHOUT THE GREAT
PLAINS BY THE ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW FARMS DEVOTED LARGELY TO WHEAT GROWING.
.. ... .. .... ... iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~iiiiii A#H
iii iiiiiiiii iii iii iiiiiiiiiiii iiii i li iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ii~ iiiiiii iiiii ii ii ii iiiiiiii
PisiuRi L A NDi INiiiiiili rAi ( E X CL U DIN G W Oii iiiili iiili ii ii .. lii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiAiiSTU R E)iliilii
iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii~i=I nciiiiiiiiiiiiiii imiiiiiii A c r a g e ,' 9 0 9iii~iiiiiiiiiiii==i -1 9 2 9=i iii~ illiiiii
Iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iii iiiiiiiiiiii ii ......................... ............. ii ii iiiiiiiiiii ii i i iil iiii=Vi iiiii.I i
.. ........... II ii iii ilili ii iii ii iiiiliiiiiI==ii~i i iilii l~ii= i iiI=ii Iiiiilii iiiii iiiiliiiiiii ii= i iiii i i iiiiiii ii iii = i iii iiiiiiiii V .ii =
........ S T T E T O T AL......... N Eii T.. .. i i" ii i l i iii.......iiii~ iiiiiii ii iiiiiiiii======== =.iiiiiiiiiil i = iiiiiiiiii ii Ii iiii i N C R E A S
iiiiiii8iiiiiiiii A C R E S= ==== = O Riiil i iiii iiiiiiiiiiiiii5iii.3ii ii P E R C E N Ti iiiii iiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiil i
iiii iii~ iiii iiii~ li iiiliii li i iiili I==iiii ii i iil~ i iiiiiiiiiiiiii~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiii iiiiiiiiii[" iiiiiiEa c hiiii d oiriiiiriiiep r e s e n t s
iiiiii iiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii .... ...... l ~iiiiiiiiii i i i i iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii ii i ... 5,0 0 0 a c r e s
' M D W iM I ii i i i ii i i i iiiiiiiiUiE N E G 2 8 1 6 0, B U R E A il i ii i i ii i i ii i i ii i i ii i i i i C U L T U R A L E C O N O M I;
.................. ..... 4 1 ii iiiiiil iiiiiiili oiiii P A S T U REiiiiiiiii A R E iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii G E N E R A L I N Tiiiii 2i0ii~ liiliiiiiiiii Y E A RSi iiiiiiiN G 1 9 2 9 M O S T O Fii i iii iiiiii iii iiiiiiiiii iiiiiii = = i i = i i == i ii i ii = i= i i l~ i ii i= ii
TiiiHiiiiiii iiiEiiii~ iiiiiiiiiiiii I N R E S IN iT H Eiiiiiii W E S T E RNiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii H A LFiiiiiiiiiiii i iii OiiiiiiiiiiTiiH Eiii iiiii C O U N T RY IS O IAL R A T H ER=i T H A N R EAii~ iiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiii $ O N CE~i I T
R E P R E iiiiiiiii S O L Giiiiiiii===iii Iiiiiiiiiiiii I Nii= N EWiii F A R M $* == == I N TiiiH E E A S T E R N P A R T T H E @ N C R E A SE
W A Siiii A C U A A N D A C O M A N E Aiiiiiiii iiiiii iii iiiiiiiii D EiCiRiEii A S E iiI N ii i iiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iii iiiiiii iiiiii~ iiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiii iiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiii A R E Aiii iiiiiiiiiii I Nii H A R V E S T E Diii iiiiii iiiiiiPiiiiiii
Percentage of Total Feed Units Produced' From
Feed Grains, Hay. Silage, and Pasture in
Different Farming Regions
0 25 50 75
RANGE LIVESTOCK-- ----
HEAT AND SMALL GRAiN -
-RUIT AND MIXED FARMING
vIIXED FARMING ---------
*DOES NOT INCLUDE STRAW, STOVER, AND OTHER BY-PRODUCT FEEDS OR WHEAT AND RYE
U. S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG. 28115 BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS
FIGURE 5 NOTE THE SMALL RELATIVE IMPORTANCE OF PAStURE AS A SOURCE OP FEED IN THE CORN
BELT AS COMPARED WIT* OTHER REGIONS. HAY IS ALSO RELATIVELY OF LITTLE IMPORTANCE IN THE
CORN BELT AS COMPARED WITH FEED GRAINS.
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
3 1262 08921 5233
: ..: ...... .,. :~ ~i:.. i'
Percentage of Land in Farms in Intertilled Crops,Otw"
Crops, and Pasture in Selected Farming Regions::: ::.:
PERCENT :40 6 O
FARMING AREAS 0 20 40 60 80 :
INTERTILLED CROPS i
MISS..ALA..GA., SANDY LANDS -
MISS. BROWN LOAM AREA -
ALA.,MISS., BLACK PRAIRIE- -
ALA.. GA., S.CAR., PIEDMONT --
ALA., GA.,LIME STONE VALLEYS--
ALABAMA HILLS -----------
RED PLAINS, CENTRAL OKLA.,TEX. E
RED PLAINS. NORTH TEXAS -.
OKLAHOMA CROSS TIMBERS-- -
PINEY WOODS SECTION------
BLACK WAXY PRAIRIE-----
SOUTHERN BLUE RIDGE------
CENTRAL PIEDMONT --------
NORTHERN BLUE RIDGE------ ......
EASTERN TENN. VALLEY-----
WEST VA. HILLS -------------
EAST OHIO AND WEST VA.- -
PENN. GENERAL FARMING -
SOUTHERN LOAM TOBACCO --L
INDIANA. KENTUCKY, OHIO -
KY., OHIO. TOBACCO -------- -...
SOUTHWEST WISCONSIN- -.
NORTH EAST IOWA---------
MO. VALLEY LOESS---------
MO.. IOWA AND ILL.--------
OTHER CROPS PASTURE "a
^ ^ 1' -- !
I .. .-
I^^ I *
I ----- ^ -I -
A&6 -- *- -- ". "*M :JJ
- i --- ... :'.** :i.jg
.IMW --- :E
1 \ J
NECG 25116 -BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS ..J
*' "" ",:"
FIURE 6 NOTE THE HIGH RELATIVE POSITION OF INTERTILLED CROPS IN
THE COTTON AREAS AS COMPARED WITH OTHER AREAS* NOTE THEIR LOW POSI-.
TION IN THE HILLIER AREAS.
U S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID E70BB640O_9MY2Y8 INGEST_TIME 2014-04-25T08:57:13Z PACKAGE AA00017378_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8
REPORT xmlns http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitss xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.fcla.edudlsmddaitssdaitssReport.xsd
INGEST IEID EMY64XGIJ_MYDLJP INGEST_TIME 2014-04-22T00:30:28Z PACKAGE AA00017378_00001
AGREEMENT_INFO ACCOUNT UF PROJECT UFDC