BETTER FARMING.

Waipa Post, Volume XXIV, Issue 1397, 26 May 1923, Page 3

BETTER FARMING.

The Departments of Agriculture in , ihe various States, the agricultural universities, and other organisations i which have for their primary objective j die improvement of the rural iiulus- j iries. are most alert and enterprising in the Cnited States of America and in Canada. They are constantly invading new lield.s of scientific invest!- ; nation, ami much of their time is devote.! to the careful examination of the activities pursued, the methods adopted, ami the results obtained by the farmers, orehardisls, and others . operating under similar conditions. From the data, thus collected analysed deductions are made, and published broadcast, so that those farming badly \ or not doing so well as they might be | are enabled to determine where they are at fault, and •amend their policies accordingly. From the Ontario Department of Agriculture lias come to band a most informative bulletin that j deals exhaustively with the nature and I outcome of certain inquiries which \ were conducted in some of the corn . belt, the mixed farming, and the apple . orcharding areas. There is an ex- j ccllent chapter relating to Hie infill- j once of crops and live stock on labour income. It is shown that, as the crop yields increased an acre, so did the net returns of the farmer until it was ! found that there was a spread of 1318 dollars between the poorest and the j best. It is noteworthy, in comparing j the farms with a crop index between j SI a ltd 1)3 with those which had a crop | index below 81 (it may he explained | that <t farm with a crop index of 110 , per cent had 10 per cent better yields j than the average, while the man whose j crop index was 00 had yields 10 per ; cent under the average) that an in- I crease in labour income of 414 dollars j was revealed by the notwithstanding decreased size and poorer quality of j the live stosk. Again it is significant, i In comparing the group having the j highest crop index with that having an | index ranging between 108 and 120. | that an increase in labour income oc- j curred notwithstanding the greater | size and higher quality of the live ; stock in the latter group, the figures having been 89 and 106 respectively. | With regard to the influence of live j stock there was evidence of an almost j steady increase in labour income with ‘ the increase in the quality of the live , stock, the range having been from ( minus 104 dollars on the farms where j the lowest quality of live stock was | kept to '505 dollars on those properties where the stock was of the highest quality. A point worthy of emphasis j is that feed cost a unit of stock did not. j vary greatly in the different groups. ; and that it was just as great for the ! poor as for the good stock, while the j returns a unit of stock were three times as great from the latter as , from the former.