Farming was among the earliest of civilized man’s occupations, and it has been the main economic basis of every civilization down to fairly recent times. Among ancient peoples, the landowner was regarded, along with the warrior, as the most respected and honored of men.
Our own American civilization is grounded on the ideals of a simple agricultural society. Many of the Fathers of our country, such as Washington and Jefferson, were farmers and their outlook on life largely shaped the spirit of our Constitution and government.
Perhaps the first question which anyone who considers taking up farming as a career asks himself is: Do I like farming as a way of life?
According to its devotees, farming offers satisfactions not often found in other tasks. Secretary of Agriculture Claude R. Wickard, himself a farmer, told a meeting of the Future Farmers of America on October 10, 1944: “I like farming. It is a good life. After more than 30 years of it, I still would rather farm than do anything else. I envy you future farmers who have such great things ahead.”
About ten years ago, Dr. O. E. Baker, a long-time student of agriculture, addressed a rural youth conference at the University of Illinois on the advantages of farm life. Dr. Baker-who may be regarded as a spokesman for the school of farming enthusiasts -said, “I have a son now less than 5 years old, and I hope when he grows up that he will decide to be a farmer.” Dr. Baker’s reasons for wanting his son to be a farmer were:
- A farmer has more and better food to eat than have most people who live in cities.
- He is healthier and lives longer.
- He is likely to enjoy his work more than most city people do.
- He is more likely to rear a family and thereby promote the future welfare of the nation.
Let us examine briefly each of these points.
Do farmers eat better?
As to the question of diet, Dr. Baker based his assertion on (1) a United States Department of Agriculture study, made in fairly prosperous times, of 2,400 farm families and (2) a study by the United States Bureau of Labor Statistics of 12,000 workingmen’s families in cities. The farm families, it was found, were getting much more protein, calcium, phosphorous, and iron than was necessary for good nutrition. The city families, on the other hand, were getting barely enough protein and not enough calcium, phosphorous, and iron.
The farm folk ate much more meat, eggs, milk, and vegetables—which they often produced themselves—than did the city folk, who depended more on cereals. Of course, city families with large incomes get more adequate food than workingmen’s families, but many farm people, if they moved to town, would undoubtedly fall into the latter class.
Of course, there are farm families who do not get a rich and varied diet, even in prosperous times like the present. In some agricultural areas there are farmers who have no gardens and keep no livestock. Some do not have enough cash income to buy adequate, wholesome food.
Do farmers have better health?
It is often remarked that one sees many more old people in the country than in the city. Does this mean that rural people live longer, despite the poor sanitary facilities and the lack of doctors and hospitals?
According to a census study based on 1920 figures, a newborn city baby, if a boy, could expect to live, on the average, to the age of 52. If he was born on a farm, however, and stayed there, the chances are he would live to be from 56 to 60 years of age. For females, the expectation of life was 55 in cities and 60 to 62 on farms. In 1940 rural death rates were 10 per cent lower than urban.
These figures are not conclusive evidence, however, that the farmer lives in more healthful surroundings than does the average city man. Other surveys indicate that farm people are probably sick oftener than city dwellers. According to some authorities, a farmer is less likely than city folk to contract certain diseases, such as those of the circulatory, respiratory, and digestive systems. But he is more likely to contract diseases traceable to poor sanitation and inadequate medical care, such as typhoid, malaria, measles, whooping cough, influenza, and dysentery. As better sanitation and medical care are provided in rural areas, the farmer’s disadvantage with regard to such diseases is certain to decrease.
Do farmers enjoy their work more?
Whether working in the fields, orchard, or garden or taking care of livestock, farming involves many kinds of tasks and skills. In addition, a farmer usually has to keep his equipment in good shape; do repair jobs around the house, barn, and sheds; clear out brush and cut fuel wood; possibly keep drainage ditches open or mend roads; and do a hundred and one odd jobs.
Those who prefer work in the country to work in the city contrast these varied tasks with the monotonous job of the factory hand who performs the same operation at high speed, hour after hour and day after day; or with that of the white-collar worker, sitting at his desk all day long, often under artificial light and in a hot, stuffy room.
Industrial life, say the farming enthusiasts, is a relatively new experience for man. The modern type of factory and the crowded and grimy industrial city have only been in existence for about a century. It is true that a large portion of our population-and that of other industrial countries-has become adapted to the speedy tempo and inflexible routine. Some even enjoy it, but many do not and would flee from the city if they could.
It is true that nearly all of us feel deep kinship with nature—but the farmer lives with it. He is intimately connected with the cycle of life. Many envy him and long for a small plot of soil where they can at least plant and grow flowers and vegetables.
There is, of course, the old saying, “The farmer’s day is never done.” The chores on a farm are many and the monetary rewards often limited. But many farmers do not think of their occupation solely in terms of cash.
To till the earth, to plant seeds and watch them grow, to see the young shoots mature in the summer sun, and then to harvest the crop are, to many people, deep and rewarding pleasures. So is the intimate association with animals—cattle, horses or mules, chickens, pigs, or sheep—dumb creatures who serve man well but who must be cared for tenderly and patiently.
These and other rewards of farming often compensate for a meager cash income, lack of household comforts, and constant worry about drought, frost, flood, or other unfavorable turns of the weather which may damage crops or ruin fields.
Those who prefer the city to the country have their answers to these arguments. Factory and office work, they say, may be less healthy and more nerve racking than farming. Cities may be noisy and crowded compared with the quiet and serenity of country life. But an urban environment is more stimulating mentally. Its social life is richer. It offers more opportunities for entertainment-organized sports, movies, and in some of the larger cities, legitimate theaters, symphony orchestras, operas, ballets, lectures, museums, and the like.
The city enthusiasts like to quote from Robert Browning: “Had I but plenty of money, money enough and to spare, The house for me, no doubt, were a house in the city-square; Ah, such a life, such a life, as one leads at the window there!
“Something to see, by Bacchus, something to hear, at least! There, the whole day long, one’s life is a perfect feast.”
Is family life better on the farm?
Some sociologists say that the farmer tends to have a happier home life than the city man.
As a rule, farming is a family enterprise. The husband, wife, and children divide the labor, each doing what his or her strength and ability permit. By such teamwork, the family is knit into a tight and harmonious unit.
Because they work together as well as live together, farm families are generally more stable than urban families. This assertion is borne out by 1930 census figures which show that 19 per cent of family groups in cities were broken as against 14.7 per cent in villages and only 8.1 per cent on farms. According to the farming enthusiasts, family life and all it stands for seem to be more appreciated in rural than in urban communities, where people in normal times do not stay at home so much and outside distractions make the members of some families almost strangers to each other.
In answer to this, the city enthusiasts say that some farmers have more children than they can suitably provide for, and that the reason farm families tend to be more stable than urban families is that they don’t know how to get away from each other.
Do farmers earn less than city folk?
Those who prefer city life often use as a final and supposedly clinching argument the fact that farming ordinarily brings a relatively small income in cash.
What farmers have earned in the past is no certain guide to the future, but it does throw some light on the matter. According to the farm census of 1940, more than half the nation’s 6 million farm families had gross incomes of less than $1,000. This figure includes both money derived from the sale of crops and the value of food produced on the farm for home use. One-third of the over 3 million farm families with less than $1,000 gross income had supplementary earnings, usually because one or more members worked off the farm part of the year. But two-thirds had no such extra income.
Of course, farmers have been better off in the past four years than in the census year of 1940. Still, the high incomes commonly earned in other types of business are relatively rare in agriculture, except for the small percentage of farmers who work several hundred acres, keep large dairy or ranch herds, run huge fruit farms, and the like.
Those who prefer country life answer this argument by saying that, though city people generally earn more than farmers, they have to spend more. The cost of living is higher in urban than in rural areas. Rent is more; food costs more; it is necessary to have more clothes; and miscellaneous expenses are unquestionably greater.
But, ask the proponents of farming, is there as much solid satisfaction in such expenditure? Isn’t much of it devoted to “keeping up with the Joneses”?
Some economists even assert that the average farmer accumulates more wealth in his lifetime than the average city resident and that hence the farmer’s real income is higher than the city man’s.
Thus the arguments go back and forth, arguments which have doubtless been heard since cities first arose and the attractions of urban existence began to draw folk away from quiet, simple, country haunts.
What Does It Take to Be a Successful Farmer?
“More and more,” says Secretary of Agriculture Wickard, “agriculture is becoming an exact science. It is a never-ending science, with many angles that open up avenues leading in all directions. The successful farmer still needs to have a love of the land, and practical experience, and plenty of courage and determination; but in addition he now needs a thorough grounding in the science of his calling. In the future this will be even more true.”
To be successful, a farmer must know a great deal about his land and the products he plans to raise.
Every plant and animal is a complicated organism. He who wishes to succeed in the culture of wheat, rye, corn, tobacco, or cotton, for example, must be thoroughly familiar with the characteristics of the plant, its germination and growth, the diseases and blights to which it is susceptible, and the methods of controlling them.
The dairy farmer and rancher must be acquainted with the characteristics of his cattle; their feed requirements, their breeding habits, and their common illnesses. Likewise, fruit farming requires expert knowledge of tree growth as well as grafting, pruning, spraying, and fertilizing.
In addition to knowing things like these, a farmer should have a sense of business, be able to sell his product where and when it is most profitable, keep adequate records (so as to know where he stands financially), and, above all, plan his production to take advantage of the most favorable markets.
How do you select a farm?
After carefully weighing the pros and cons of farming versus other occupations and deciding in favor of the former, you are ready to consider the questions: Shall I buy or rent a farm? Where shall I farm? What kind of farming shall I undertake?
A wise choice takes many factors into account. To begin with, you should not buy or rent a farm unless you have had real experience in farming. You are almost certainly doomed to disappointment and failure if you undertake so complex a business without some experience on a good farm, under the guidance of a man who is a successful farmer. If you have had no experience, you should start a farming career as a hired man. After that you may be in a position to manage your own farm.
Mary experienced farmers stress the desirability of starting in as a tenant rather than purchaser. It is unwise to plunge into farming as an owner-operator until you have tried yourself out and know whether you like farming as a business, whether you can make a success of it, and whether you have chosen the kind of farming and location you want.
The region selected should be familiar, if possible. It is also helpful to settle where your family is known.
The region should be one that has been developed for many years, or, if new land, is close to good farming areas. The kind of agriculture that pays best in the vicinity should be a guide in determining the kind of farming selected. For example, Wisconsin is a renowned dairy state, and a dairy farmer probably has a much better chance of success there than in an area where such farming is comparatively rare. Similarly, if you prefer poultry farming, a region known for successful commercial poultry farming should be chosen.
Do not select a type of farming that is unfamiliar to the region. The chances are that the soil or climate is unfavorable and that the odds are against success.
In selecting a farm don’t be guided solely by interested parties, such as a real-estate broker seeking a fee or a seller anxious to get rid of his property. One should inquire fully into the past record of the farm, its yields, operating expenses, profits, and so on. Advice can usually be freely obtained from such well-informed and disinterested sources as county agricultural agents. State extension services, agricultural colleges, or experimental stations, and the various farm organizations can help on broader questions.
What are some general questions to consider?
Climate is a key factor in determining the kinds of crops that can be grown, crop yields, and the type of livestock that will thrive in the region. Some of the climatic factors to be considered are the amount and distribution of rainfall during the year, length of the growing season, severity of the winters, and the possibility of such natural hazards as drought, flood, hailstorms, windstorms, and the like.
Good soil is perhaps the most essential element in farming since it determines not only what can be grown but whether yields will be high or low.
The size of the farm is naturally a major consideration. Half the nation’s 6 million farms produce very little for sale—in fact, only about 10 per cent of the total commercial produce. Before the war, many of the small farms, especially in such areas as the southern Appalachians, had more manpower than was needed.
The size of farm which a family can handle is constantly increasing as more machinery comes into use. For example, a farmer using one horse can plant an average of 5.5 acres of row crops, such as potatoes or corn, in a ten-hour day; with two horses he can plant 11.5 acres; but with a two-row planter and a tractor, 17 acres; and with a four-row tractor outfit, 33 acres. With the help of a horse mower, a farmer can mow about 8.5 acres in a ten-hour clay; with a tractor he can mow about 20 acres a day.
There are other factors to consider in choosing a farm, such as, are good roads available to haul the produce to market? A farm on a dirt road may be snowbound in winter or inaccessible during wet weather, and the farmer will be unable to get his milk, eggs, fruit, vegetables, and other products to market before they spoil.
Finally, the community advantages should be considered. A farm is a home as well as a business. A neighborhood with good schools, active churches, and social organizations such as lodges and farmer’s clubs is likely to be a place where farmers are fairly successful. A region with poor schools and backward community organizations is apt to have poor and struggling farmers.
What does it cost to get started?
Farm ownership, in view of economic conditions, may be a speculative undertaking after the war.
For those who plan to buy, it is well to remember the general rule of business that the more money invested the larger is the income, and vice versa.
The price paid for land, buildings, and equipment, if buying a developed farm, is perhaps the key in determining whether the venture. will be a success. If bought at inflated prices, the carrying charges plus taxes might lead to failure in the end even if crop yields were high for a number of years. A sharp decline in prices from wartime levels would make it difficult to meet mortgage payments and loans, bringing a loss of the entire investment. Such was the unhappy fate of many farmers after the last war.
The amount of capital required to get started as a farm operator depends on the kind of farming. Broadly speaking, there are seven types of farming particularly suitable for family operation: truck, poultry, dairy, stock, cotton, wheat, and diversified farming.
Truck or vegetable farming does not take much land, but the relatively few acres must be rich. Usually they cost as much as a general farm several times as large. A truck farm may be most desirable near a town or city where the crops can be sold as soon as they are ready. Such a farm is a highly specialized business, but often quite profitable.
Poultry farming is one of the most common and successful types of farming near the urban centers of the United States. If you plan to sell eggs, wholesale, it will take from 1,500 to 2,000 hens to keep a family fully employed; if, re tail, only 1,000 to 1,500 hens will be necessary. It may take just as much labor, however, to manage the smaller as the larger flock.
Since the poultryman usually buys all or most of his feed, only enough land—perhaps 10 acres or more—is necessary to provide range for the birds. Investment in buildings and equipment—brooder houses, laying pens, perhaps an incubator—is rather high. The United States Department of Agriculture estimates that a poultry farm with 2,000 hens needs $2,500 to $3,000 for stock and an additional $1,000 to $1,500 for equipment. Feed and miscellaneous supplies alone will require $1,500 or more annually—an investment all told of $5,000 or more, exclusive of land and dwelling.
Dairying is one of the most dependable types of farming. A satisfactory setup for a family farm is fifteen to twenty cows and a minimum of 80 to 120 acres of good land for the production of pasture, hay, and other feed for the stock. The starting capital required in the North, outside of land and buildings, is from $4,500 to $6,000, plus about $650 to $1,300 annually for seed, feed, fertilizer, and so on.
Stock farming (not grazing) is found most extensively in parts of the Middle West. The typical farm of this kind in the years 1938—42 had 170 acres, sold 56 cattle and 77 hogs each year, and kept about 100 laying hens. Of the 170 acres, 70 were in pasture, 34 in corn, 29 in small grain, 22 in hay, 5 in soybeans, and 10 in rotation pasture and miscellaneous crops. Such a farm had 5 milch cows. About 80 per cent of its gross income came from the sale of livestock and livestock products. This kind of enterprise means a considerable investment in land, stock, and equipment. Operating expenses are also comparatively high.
Cotton farming usually offers less income and requires less capital. Apart from the land, an investment of $800 to $1,000, plus operating capital of $400 to $500 a year for fertilizer, seed, and the like, may be sufficient. A typical upland cotton farm for family operation has, as a minimum, from 80 to 120 acres. Of these 15 to 20 are in cotton; 20 to 25 in corn (to feed mules, cows, hogs, and chickens); 8 to 10 in soybeans, cowpeas, or lespedeza for hay; and the rest in pasture and woodland.
Cotton farming in Texas, New Mexico, Arizona, and California is usually on a much larger scale.
Since the price of cotton, unless pegged, moves up and down rapidly, it is desirable to grow other cash crops, such as peanuts, for additional income, besides producing on the farm as much as possible of the feed for animals and food for the family.
Wheat farming takes a good deal of land. Many of the wheat farms of Kansas, the Dakotas, and eastern Montana run to 640 acres or more. The United States Department of Agriculture estimates that it takes $3,000 to $4,000 for tools and equipment to get started in wheat farming, plus $1,000 to $2,000 for stock to provide additional income and keep manpower occupied during the months the wheat crop is not growing.
Diversified farming usually involves a mixture of cash crops and livestock. Its chief advantages are: (1) the risk is reduced by not banking mainly on one money crop and (2) it spreads the working time of the family. There are many possible combinations in this type of farming, such as growing cotton, peanuts, tobacco, and other crops in the South or dairying, hog raising, and poultry farming in the North. The main consideration is to plant crops which the operator can take care of and sell. The required investment in diversified farming varies with the region and the size of the business.
Part-time farming. Many men who are not interested in full-time farming may wish to engage in subsistence or part-time farming. Of the 6 million farmers in the United States in 1940, about 800,000 were part-timers, spending a hundred days or more a year in other occupations. Such farmers may have only a garden or they may cultivate several acres, keep a few hogs, a cow or two, and several score chickens. The crops and livestock may supply the bulk of the family’s food and a small cash income besides, anywhere from $10 to several hundred a year.
