·i' GiiRIC:ULTUIRE LJ CQ)[]U[S[Q) Ou [p@rns

Transcription

·i' . GiiRIC:ULTUIRE . . . . . . . .:v:: ·;. :;. )·.; t, .LJ CQ)[]U[S[Q) ou [p@rns ··-- ., ,' , 9/'- .'·' 't;: /·,,

ECONOMIC TRENDS---- .-------------------·--.Unit orbaseperiodItem'57-'59Average1962Year1963November SeptemberOctoberNovember--"------- ----Prices:Prices received by farmersCropsLivestock and productsPrices paid. interest, taxes and wage ratesFamily living itemsProduction itemsParity ratioWholesale prices, all commoditiesCommodities other than farm and foodFarm productsFood, processedConsumer price index, all itemsFood1910-14 1001910-14 1001910-14 1001910-14 1001910-14 1001910-14 1001957-59 1001957-59 1001957-59 1001957-59 1001957-59 1001957-59 -Farm Food Market Basket'Retail costFarm valueFarm-retail spreadFarmers' share of retail costDollarsDollarsDollarsPer· cent-Farm Income:Volume of farm marketingsCash receipts from farm marketingsCropsLivestock and productsRealized gross income 2Farm production expenses 2Realized net income 21947-49 al Trade:Million dollarsMillion dollarsAgricultural exportsAgricultural imports4,1053,977Land Values:Average value per acreTotal value of farm real estateGross National Product2Consumption 2Investment'Government expenditures 2Net exports 2--12!3141.6 56.778.9117.04.1588.7374.983.7125.74.3Billion dollarsMillion dollarsMillion 64,897471.220,7514,961472.8MillionsMillionsPer 957-59 100-118120126127127Million dollarsMillion dollarsMillion 59,08734,99135,15759,40835,2851957-59 100Billion ollarsdollarsdollarsdollarsIncome and Spending:Personal income, annual rateTotal retail sales 4Retail sales of food group 4Employment and Wages 4Total civilian employmentAgriculturalRate of unemploymentWorkweek in manufacturingHourly earnings in manufacturing,unadjustedIndustrial ProductionManufacturers' Sales lnventories54Total sales, monthly rate 4Total inventoriesTotal new orders, monthly. rate1DollarsAverage annual quantities of farm food products based on purchase perwage-earner or clerical-worker family in 1952-estlmated monthly. 2 Annualrates seasonally adjusted third quarter. 3 As of November 1. 4Seasonallyadjusted. s Revised series.Sources: U.S. Department of Agriculture (Farm Income Situation, Marketing-----and Transportation Situation, Agricultural Prices, Foreign Agricultural Tradeand Farm Real Estate Market Developments); U.S. Department of Commerce(Industry Survey, Business News Reports, Advance Retail Sales Report andSurvey of Current Business); and U.S. Department of Labor (The Labor Forceand Wholesale Price Index.

THE AGRICULTURAL OUTLOOKThe balance sheet of agriculture on January 1,1964, showed a rise of more than 4 per cent intotal assets from the 216.5 billion a year earlier.Much of the rise reflects increased land values;ownership of livestock and machinery is up somewhat. Production assets per farm are risingrapidly and output per farm is increasing about5 percent annually, more than offsetting the continuing decline in the number of farms.U.S. farm output in 1963 rose to a record high,2 per cent above a year earlier. The rise wasgenerally distributed through the crop and live stock sectors.Domestic and foreign markets continued toexpand last year. Food expenditures by U.S. consumers in 1963 were about 3 per cent above a yearago. Exports of farm products in 1963 were about8 per cent above the 5,031 million in 1962. Shipments of most major commodities increased,especially wheat, cotton and dairy products.Domestic carryover stocks of most major commodities at the end of the current marketing yearare expected to be smaller than a year earlier.Wheat stocks may be down one-third by mid-1964.CONTENTSTHE FARMRURAL LIFEMARKETINGTHE FOREIGN MARKETTHE CONSUMERRECENT PUBLICATIONSPage51114172223Numbers in parentheses at end of stories referto sources listed at end of issue.The Farm INDEX is published monthly by theEconomic Research Service, U.S. Department ofAgriculture. January 1964. Vol. III, No. 1.The contents of this magazine are based largely on research of theEconomic Research Service and on material developed in cooperationwith state agricultural experiment stations. All articles may bereprinted without permission. For information about the contents,write the editor, The Farm INDEX, Office of Management Services,U.S. Department of Agriculture, Washington, D.C. 20250.Use of funds for printing this pqblication approved by the Directorof the Bureau of the Budget, May 24, 1962. Subscription ordersshould be sent to the Superintendent of Documents, GovernmentPrinting Office, Washington, D.C. 20402. Price 20 cents (single copy).Subscription price: 2.00 per year; 75 cents additional for foreignrnailing. EDITOR, Theodore Crane; ASSISTANT EDITOR, Story E. Moore. eld; STAFF EDITORS: Marilyn Harrison Grantham and John'' letelsky; PRODUCTION EDITOR, Lilla Dunovant McCutchen.Stocks of feed grains and dairy products may alsobe lower. However, a substantial increase is expected in cotton stocks.Economic activity continued to expand in theclosing months of 1963, rounding out a relativelygood year for sales, production and employment.Retail sales last year were up almost 5 per centfrom 1962. Sales value of new automobiles wasup about 12 percent. Sales of most other durableand nondurable goods also gained.Industrial production in 1963 rose 4.5 per centfrom 1962. Output of iron and steel was up morethan 10 per cent because of gains in the productionof automobiles, machinery and other metalproducts. Construction of residential and industrial buildings rose 5 per cent.An additional 800,000 persons were employedlast year compared with 1962, reflecting thegenerally strong demand for goods and services.However, the labor force also expanded and theunemployment rate averaged slightly above the5.6 per cent of a year earlier.Most key indicators of economic activity pointto continued expansion in the coming months.Housing starts have been at record levels in thepast few months. New contracts for commercialand industrial construction have been at highrates. New orders for machine tools have beenabove year-earlier levels, as have new orders received by all manufacturers.COMMODITY HIGHLIGHTSBeef production will continue large in the firstquarter of 1964. Prices of fat cattle likely willremain 1 to 2 below the January-March 1963average of 25.28 (Choice steers at Chicago). Thenumber of cattle slaughtered will be up and average liveweights are expected to continue heavy.First quarter hog slaughter probably will be abovethe same quarter a year earlier and prices somewhat below. Slaughter of sheep and lambs in thefirst quarter is expected to average below 1963 butprices may be little changed.Milk production during January-March 1964 willlikely be below a year earlier, on a daily basis .The quantity of manufactured dairy products

acquired under CCC programs this quarter is expected to drop moderately from a year ago. Pricesfarmers receive for all milk at wholesale duringJanuary-March are expected to be slightly abovea year ago.Egg production in 1964 is expected to be up alittle from last year; most of the rise may be inthe first half. A higher rate of lay in the firstquarter and a greater number of layers in thesecond quarter is anticipated. Egg prices for thefirst half will likely be below 1963 because of thelarger production.Another increase in broiler production is likelythis year. Recent hatchery activity indicates thatproduction during the first quarter will be significantly above a year eaflier. However, output inthe second quarter may be limited by lower firstquarter prices and competition from beef.A small to moderate rise in turkey productionis expected in 1964. Reasons: Higher prices lastyear than in 1962, an apparent increase in production efficiency and a breeder flock large enoughto support a sizeable increase. A moderatelylarger turkey crop than in 1963 would probablycommand a price about as high as in 1963.Exports of wheat continue to run well abovethe level of a year ago. Exports in July-November1963 were about 100 million bushels above the221 million a year earlier. Prices received byfarmers leveled in November after rising sharplyfrom September. However, prices continue highrelative to the 1963 loan rate.Feed grain production was estimated in December at 153 million tons, 10 million above 1962.Both acreage and yield per acre increased about4 per cent. The 62.5 million tons carried over into1963-64 was 9 million less than a year earlier.Although the feed grain supply is up slightly, useis also increasing. Carryover stocks may be downto 60 million tons by the end of the marketingyear.a year earlier. High-protein feed prices wereabout 5 per cent higher last October and N ovember than in 1962, reflecting continued strongdomestic and foreign demand.Prices to soybean growers average 2.61 perbushel during October-November 1963, about 35cents above the same months in 1962. Prices areexpected to continue strong throughout the 196364 marketing year; all of the 1963 crop probablywill be needed to meet domestic and export demand. Soybean oil prices have declined somewhatsince October, while soybean meal prices haveremained relatively stable. Record disappearanceduring 1963-64 is expected for both soybean oiland meal. Nevertheless, soybean oil stocks willcontinue heavy.Supplies of canned and frozen vegetables intomid-1964 will be only slightly smaller than a yearearlier. Potato supplies are a little larger than in1963. Sweet potato supplies this spring will besmaller than a year ago and prices are expected tobe moderately higher.Supplies of most fresh fruits are expected to besomewhat smaller this winter than last with reductions in pears, grapes, oranges and grapefruit.Apple and lemon supplies are larger. Supplies ofcanned and frozen fruits and frozen fruit juices,especially orange concentrate,. are smaller thiswinter than a year ago. Retail prices of mostfresh and processed fruits are expected to continue above year-earlier levels.Cotton carryover on August 1, 1963, totaled1L2 million bales. This was over 3 million balesmore than a year earlier and the largest since1957. A further increase is expected this seasonbecause the large 1963 crop exceeds expected disappearance.!As of December 1, the 1963 crop was estimatedat 15.5 million running bales. This is about:700,000 bales larger than in 1962 and the largest,since 1963. The average 1963 yield per harvested,acre was estimated at 524 pounds as of December'1, up from 457 pounds in 1962.l;:::Feed gra"in prices declined 9 per cent fromSeptember to November with the harvesting ofthe record corn crop. The mid-November indexof feed grain prices, however, was 7 per cent aboveDisappearance during the current season s estimated at 13.8 million bales, up about 2 million!from a year earlier. Both mill consumption and lexports are expected to increase.IIiij

THE FARM.CALCULATING THE DOCS FOR WEATHERijiIl ;;c'.,·.!··········"')!Sometimes friend-sometimeslfoe. Weather has long been theJ uncontrollable factor in the farml er's plans. Chief among his worJries is rainfall. There seems to be either too much or too little.1 To counteract too little rain, theI farmer long ago learned to irri. gate his fields. But he never hasl been able to predict when the adJditional water will be needed or1how much will have to be applied.j To make estimating the probal bility of drought possible, the Misi souri Agricultural Experiment' Station, in cooperation with ERS,;j recently undertook a study of. drought conditions in the south eastern part of the state. l Using data on rainfall and·· computing a daily estimate of the· moisture available in the soil, the· researchersdetermined the drought days in June, July and· August over a period of years.i Drought days are 24-hour periods in which soil moisture was less:1 than the minimum consideredj necessary for plant growth.l Tabulation of drought days in dicated that the occurrence of dryj1 weather of apparently damagingj intensity is quite common duringjperiods of critical crop growth inthe Missouri delta. The probability is 50 per cent that 41 or moredrought day will occur during the92 days from June 1 to August 31in any given year. There is a 25per cent chance that 50 or moredrought days will occur and a 75per cent chance that 32 or moredrought days will be recorded. Inone out of every 10 years 59 ormore drought days can be expected during the three months.An unbroken stretch of moisture-short days would, of course,harm the crops more than anequal number of dry days occurring a few at a time. In one outof two years, a drought sequenceof 12 or more days is likely tohappen in July, a critical monthfor growth of crops such as cornand cotton. Fifteen consecutivedrought days in July will resultin sharply reduced yields andsevere losses for the farmer.The moisture available in thesoil depends on the soil type andthe amount of rainfall and irrigation. When the soil is saturatedit is said to be at field capacity.Any water in excess of field capacity will either run off or seepdown through the root zone.Water is lost from the soilthrough evaporation and transpiration. The balance remainingis called the soil-moisture base.By subtracting the amount ofwater loss and adding the quantity from rainfall and irrigation,researchers can keep track of theavailable moisture day by day.When the available moisturedrops two or more inches belowthe field capacity, the farmershould irrigate the crop. There isa 50-50 chance that six applications of irrigation water would beneeded during the three-monthgrowing season in order to maintain a satisfactory soil-moisturebase. Eighty per cent of the timeonly five applications of waterwould be needed ; 20 per cent ofthe time seven or more would berequired.Using the methods developed inthe study, daily soil-moisture content can be calculated and madeavailable to farmers in relativelylarge areas. Also, long-term dataon drought hazards can providevaluable information for engineers to use in designing irrigation systems. (1)

THE FARMPlans for Crop and Land Treatmentlrulicate Ways to Increase ProfitsGood water management mayor may not be profitable for theindividual farmer. It depends alot on the watershed in question.In one such area, Spring ValleyCreek, Iowa, the adoption of soilconserving farm plans wouldserve water management as wellas being profitable to farmers.Farmers in the area grow rowcrops on steep slopes just asthough they were gently rollinguplands or tillable bottoms. Soillosses in Spring Valley Creekwatershed average 16 tons peracre each year. Loss per farmranges from one to 40 tons annually.Economists set out to find acombination of cropping practicesand land treatment that wouldhold annual soil loss to less thanfive tons an acre and at the sametime give the farmer the maximum net income.Conservation control methodsconsidered included terracing,contouring, crop rotations andconstruction of dams for runoffwhere necessary. The situation onthe individual farm determinedwhich combination was needed.Examination of conditions inSpring Valley Creek watershedindicated that adopting terracingand contouring would actuallypermit an increase in the amountof row crops in rotations, evenwith the five-ton soil loss limit.At present, land in row crops accounts for 44 per cent of thefarmland, meadow takes 43 percent. Use of conservation practices would permit 70 per cent ofthe cultivated land to be in rowcrops with only 20 per cent remaining in meadow.The additional row crops wouldresult from the proper combinations of rotations and conservation practices on the variousslopes. With contouring and terracing, slopes up to 14 per centcan support rotations with halfrow crops. Slopes over 14 per centusually should be pasture.The cost of using conservationpractices could be paid for partly out of farm capital and partlythrough existing government programs.Whatever additional expense isincurred would be handsomely repaid. Economists estimated theadoption of soil-conserving farmplans in the watershed could addan average of 2,200 to net income per farm. (2)Budgets for Model Oklahoma FarmsWould Call for Big Investment RiseAn income of 2,500 net perfarm isn't much when you thinkof the work that goes into farming. It figures out to about a dollar an hour for a 40-hour week,and far less at the actual hoursmost farmers put in.But 2,500 is an affluent worldaway from what many a farmfamily can count up when theyear's returns are in.A few figures taken from astudy of the economics of farming along the eastern border ofOklahoma point up the discrepancy.Even with above average management, net farm incomes formodel 160-acre beef farms in thearea ranged downward from 934on the best soil to 211 on theleast productive land.To get farm incomes up to the 2,500 level would call for awhopping increase in investment.Even on the best land, it wouldtake 400 acres to reach the target; on the worst, some 2,000acres would be required.Depending on the size of thefarm, the investment in land andbuildings would run from 25,000to 40,000. The current investment in land and buildings in themost productive region is about 10,000.In addition, the beef farmerwould need to invest some 18,000in livestock and machinery, com-pared with the current 7,000average for the most productiveregions.The figures are taken from aseries of budgets prepared forfarms in Oklahoma. (3)Dryland Farming Plus Ranching TendsTo Even Out Income Over the YearsCombining dryland farmingwith ranching can help the farmer use otherwise idle resources.It can also give him a greatermeasure of financial stability ona year-to-year basis.But such a combination may,in the long run, cut down on thechances to increase his income.With livestock, the cash grainfarmer has a way to turn his timeto profit during the otherwise idlewinter season. Even in the summer there are periods when a cashgrain crop requires little or noattention. The return to laborfrom a small livestock enterpriseis apt to be extremely low, but formany a farmer it may seem bet- ter than nothing at all.A livestock enterprise can alsobolster the farmer's credit rating.The fuller employment of labor, ·the more reliable income with theaddition of livestock and the collateral provided by the animalsall make the farmer a bettercredit risk in the eyes of lending :agencies.A drought year, for instance,can wipe out a crop and the farmer's income. But it is a rare year ·. that is so dry that stock cannotsupplement short grass by grazing fields too poor for harvest.Even if the range is completelyunproductive, there will be someincome from stock that must be .sold.iThe combination of cash grain :and livestock enterprises can sta- 'bilize a farmer's income wl).ich isnot, however, the same thing asproducing the maximum income.The odds are better than eve11that the farmer will make moremoney in the long run if he cM1

THE FARMl1 specialize in his major enterprise.the use of liquid nitrogen fertili- Batch-in-Bin Drying Can Help FarmerThe capable farmer may not be zer such as anhydrous ammonia.While not as spectacular as the Keep Up With Pace of the Harvest.l equally skilled at ranching. AndBatch-in-bin drying for grainchangein use of nitrogen, the1 even if he has the ability for bothisgaining favor over the layeramountofpotashappliedtoplants' enterprises, he won't always have: the time to attend to both when by farmers in Indiana has more system because it is faster andthan tripled since 1945 and the easier to adjust to harvesting.· he should.Some 1,000 bushels of 25 perIn the absence of year-round quantity of phosphate used nearcentmoisture corn, for example,lydoubled.grazing, the farmer may have toAlong with the changes in can be batch-dried in a day in aborrow some of his cropland asa feed base. It is a difficult choice ; available nutrients, the acreages 21-foot diameter bin. Comparableof most field crops, particularly capacity for layer drying would·· the farmer may figure that his.· loss in crop production when cat- corn, went up. This reduced the be 175 bushels per day. The hari, tie graze the alternate winter rate of application per acre slight- vesting or filling rate for layerstrips is far greater ly. Another factor was the in- drying is only 245 bushels a day,1 . wheat-fallowthan the value of the feed sup- crease in the proportion of the compared with the 1,000 bushelsfor batch-drying.total acreage fertilized.1; plied.Furthermore, the farmer canMorethanhalfoftheplant, It works the other way, too.geta wide range of drying capacnutrientsusedinIndianasince . The efficient cash-grain enterprise; has a tendency to encroach on World War II were applied to ities with the batch-in-bin sys; the feed base and even the range corn. This crop received the bulk tem, with a combination of difof the nitrogen, too. Seventy-three ferent drying units for bin sizes· areas. ( 4)per cent of the total nitrogen used up to 36 feet in diameter. Andwasplaced on corn in 1959, com- with possible temperatures up toIndiana Crop Diet Richer Despitepared with 65 per cent in 1954. 140 degrees, greater capacitiesLittle Change in Fertilizer TonnageWheat was the second largest can be obtained.·,The amount of grain in the bin1,'.Indiana farmers have been sup- recipient of fertilizer in Indianaisrelatively unimportant in thewithoatsandsoybeansnext.1. plying their crops with an inDespite the past records, indi- batch system which can handle acreasingly rich diet. The resulthas been a continuous rise in the cations are that many Indiana layer of a few inches to severaltotal of available plant nutrients farmers could use fertilizer to an feet, so long as it is level.Operating costs for the batchapplied to crops in Indiana since even greater extent.in-binsystem are slightly higherRecommendedlevelsforfertilithe end of World War II.The increase in applications of zer applications by Purdue Uni- than the layer method because offertilizer is due to several things. versity reveal that to maintain the cost of moving the grain toFarmers have learned more about a reasonable supply of plant food storage bins. The cost for thehow crops respond to fertilizer. in the soil farmers in Indiana batch system averages about 3The price of crops relative to the would have to apply a total of cents a bushel ; for the layer sys50,000 tons of nitrogen, 69,000 tem it is about 2% cents. How!. price of plant food has been. fair1tons of phosphate and 23,000 tons ever, the investment in bins and:', ly favorable. And manufacturers·.,· 1·have been producing fertilizers of potassium in addition to cur- equipment is usually less for1batch-drying. (6)containing more available nutri- rent use of fertilizer. (5),· ents.Thanks to the higher analysisfertilizers, the increase in use ofHere's How to find the number of bushels of shelled corn or grain in a bin:nutrients since 1954 has been possible with little change in theFor a rectangular bin use:0.8 x length x width x average depth in feet bushelstotal tonnage applied.Suppose your crib is 18 feet long and 12 feet wide. It's filled with shelled corn toan average depth of 8 feet. The problem is worked like this:0.8 x 18 x 12The most remarkable shift inx 8 1,382 bushelsuse of plant nutrients in Indianais the increase in application ofnitrogen. During 1945-54, use ofFor a round bin use:0.6283 x diameter x diameter x average depth infeet bushelsnitrogen climbed to seven timesIf your crib is 12 feet 5 inches in diameter and filled to a leveled depth of 6 feetthe wartime level. Since 1954, the4 inches, the problem is worked as follows (12 feet 5 inches is 12.4 feet and 6 feet4 inches is 6.3 feet):0.6283 x 12.4 x 12.4 x 6.3 609 bushels(7)total tonnage of nitrogen appliedto crops has more than doubled.The latter increase was largely in'i.1. 1January 19647

THE FARMPiedmont's Cotton May Give WayTo Peaches, Poultry, Pine, ProfitLoblolly pines in the old cottonfields-a sign of neglect or goodmanagement?Most likely the latter, at leastin South Carolina's Piedmont.Cotton has a lot of competitionthese days from enterprises promising a better income, especiallyfor the 87 per cent of Piedmontfarms with less than 150 acresof cropland.Beef yearlings, dairy cows,poultry, peaches and pines-allare good alternatives to cotton,depending on the size of the farm,the capital available and the management ability of the man incharge.The agricultural picture ischanging rapidly in the upcountry, with 41 per cent fewer farmsin 1959 than in 1954. The numberof people employed in agriculturedropped from 53,000 to 34,600during the same five years.Researchers from the SouthCarolina Experiment Station andERS have worked out farm organizations designed to bring thebest possible returns to the farmers still in business. All the suggested enterprise combinationsdepend upon the price of cotton.Small-scale farms ( 10-49 acresof cTopland): It's doubtful thatcotton could be grown economically at prices below 40 cents apound, and the price has been thishigh only once in 40 years. Apoultry enterprise is about themost profitable full-time possibility, but it requires a capital investment few small operators arewilling to risk. The number offarms of this size is expected tocontinue to drop, with most ofthose remaining becoming residential or part-time. The bestpart-time alternative combines abeef-yearling grazing system withplanting of loblolly pines (no cashincome from pines for the first15-20 years).Small commercial far·ms (50149 acres of cropland): Cotton,even with prices as high as 36cents, would not be as profitableas beef yearlings grazed on Coastal Bermuda, or other alternatives.For a few farms, competition allowing, dairy cattle, poultry orpeaches would bring top returns.But for most, pines and beef yearlings would be the best combination-part-time: 67 acres of pine,12 acres of fertilized Coastal Bermuda grass for grazing and 20CAROLINA COTTON FARMS CAN'T STAY SMALL AND KEEP UPThe problem? To plan resourcecombinations that will bring farmoperator incomes up to a minimum of 2,500 in South Carolina'sUpper Coastal Plain, where anestimated four-fifths of the cotton.farmers made less than 1,500 fortheir labor and management in1959.Economists from the SouthCarolina Experiment Station andERS have worked out cotton farmbudgets for four different levelsof operator earnings: 2,500; 3,500; 4,500; and 5,500.The least cost enterprise combinations at all four levels included cotton, soybeans, pines.8Commercial cotton farms inthis region in 1959 averaged 97acres. Almost half again as muchland would be needed for an income of 2,500; 148 per cent morefor 5,500. For all the farmersto make at least 2,500 the number of cotton farms would probably be reduced by half as thesmaller farms were combined intolarger units.And a farmer may find that hisown labor and management willbe worth more to his family ifhe limits his farming activities tosupervising hired and family labor while he holds an off-farmjob. (9)beef yearlings on a representativefarm with 82 acres of cropland:full-time: more Coastal Bermudagrass instead of pine and 114 beefyearlings.Medium sized commercialfarms (150-249 acres of cropland): Cotton can bring good re-turns on a farm of this size, buton limited acreage as a supplement to the major enterprise.Grade A milk and peaches mightbring the highest returns, butconsidering the market outlets thebeef-yearling system is the bestpossibility on most farms. At 27.9cents per pound cotton would beadded to the farming system, withthe acreage held at 14 acres untilthe price of cotton reached an unlikely 43.3 cents. On a dairy farm,cotton at a low of 27.7 cents wouldallow 30 acres in the optimum organization; the acreage wouldn'tgo up again unless the pricereached 38 cents. For a peach-beefcombination the figures would be28.9 cents per pound of lint and11 acres until the price wentabove 41 cents.Large commer·cial farms (250and more acres of cropland): Cot-ton is currently profitable but itwould not be included in the mostprofitable system if the priceshould drop below 25.9 cents. Below this price the optimum organization includes 208 acres ofCoastal Bermuda grass used by342 beef yearlings. Planted pinewould cover 170 acres of onceopen land. The estimated net returns to the operator's laborwould be 6,100. At 25.9 cents forcotton, the number of beef yearlings would drop to 221 and cotton acreage would be 81 acres foran increased return per year ofonly 20. But for each tenth ofa cent increase in the price ofcotton over 26 cents, net returnsto the operator's labor would increase 40 to 60, depending onthe size of his operation. Conservation of soil resources in thiilarea limits row crops to one yearout of three. ( 8)The Farm INDE:{I

THE FARMfarm Mortgages in Second QuarterAre Up One-fourth From Year AgoThe expansion in lending reflects increases in the number ofloans made as well as gains inaverage loan size.Despite the continued rise infarm mortgage lending, repayments in the second quarter of1963 were made at about the samerate in relation to outstanding

ments of most major commodities increased, especially wheat, cotton and dairy products. Domestic carryover stocks of most major com modities at the end of the current marketing year are expected to be smaller than a year earlier. Wheat stocks may be down one-third by mid-