Armentrout, W. W.

Metzler, William H.

English

The Research Repository @ WVU (West Virginia University)

West Virginia Agricultural and Forestry ExperimentStation BulletinsDavis College of Agriculture, Natural ResourcesAnd Design1-1-1959Farming, farm people, and farm expansion inFayette, Raleigh, and Summers counties, WestVirginia, 1958William H. MetzlerW. W. ArmentroutFollow this and additional works at: https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wv_agricultural_and_forestry_experiment_station_bulletinsThis Bulletin is brought to you for free and open access by the Davis College of Agriculture, Natural Resources And Design at The Research Repository@ WVU. It has been accepted for inclusion in West Virginia Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station Bulletins by an authorized administrator ofThe Research Repository @ WVU. For more information, please contact ian.harmon@mail.wvu.edu.Digital Commons CitationMetzler, William H. and Armentrout, W. W., "Farming, farm people, and farm expansion in Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers counties,West Virginia, 1958" (1959). West Virginia Agricultural and Forestry Experiment Station Bulletins. 439.https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/wv_agricultural_and_forestry_experiment_station_bulletins/416Digitized by the Internet Archivein 2010 with funding fromLyrasis Members and Sloan Foundationhttp://www.archive.org/details/farmingfarmpeopl439metzBULLETIN 439December 1959FARMING, FARM PEOPLE,and FARM EXPANSIONIn Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers Counties,West Virginia, 1958WEST VIRGINIA UNIVERSITY AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATIONTHE AUTHORSAuthors- of Farming, Farm People, andFarm Expansion in Fayette, Raleigh, andSummers Counties, West Virginia, 1958, areWilliam H. Metzler and W. W. Annentrout.Mr. Metzler is Agricultural Economist, Agri-cultural Research Division, Agricultural Re-search Service, United States Department ofAgriculture. Dr. Armentrout is Professor andHead of Agricultural Economics and RuralSociology in the College of Agriculture,Forestry, and Home Economics and Agricul-tural Economist in die West Virginia Univer-sity Agricultural Experiment Station.West Virginia UniversityAgricultural Experiment StationCollege of Agriculture, Forestry, and Home EconomicsA. H. VanLandingham, DirectorMorgantownFarming, Farm People, and FarmExpansion in Fayette, Raleigh, andSummers Counties, West Virginia, 1958WILLIAM H. METZLER and W. W. ARMENTROUTTHE purpose of this report is to give some insight into the farmingsituation, attitudes of the farm people, and possibilities for increas-|ing farm income in the Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers county areaof West Virginia. Agriculture is important in the economy of an areaeven though relatively few of the area's people are engaged in it. If in-come from agriculture, or any other industry, could be increased, thetotal income in the area would be increased by an amount several timesthe size of the original increased income. The original increase in incomeis passed from one service industry to* another before it is all taken outof circulation through savings. It is the industries which bring outsidedollars into the community which are most important in establishingthe amount of business that will be transacted within the community.Some of the basic data in regard to the agriculture of Fayette, Raleigh,and Summers counties are presented here. They were obtained in aspecial survey made for the Area Rural Development Committee in May1958. They represent the findings from a random sample—297 farms inthe 3-county area.Table 1. Sources of Income of Sample Households Living on Farms,Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers Counties, 1958Item Number Percent297 100Farm households withall income from farming 41 14Major source of income from49 lflAgriculture a minor source of207 70Only 14 percent of the families living on farms in the 3-county areaobtain all their income from agriculture (Table 1). Nonfarm work is,for most of the others, the major source of income but they do somefarming on the side. They may do farming to supplement their regularincomes, or it may be that they simply like farming.3This means also that many of our farms have become chiefly resi-dences for nonfarm people It may mean that the soil resources arenot always used to the best advantage.Those who live by farming alone are close to the bottom of the in-come scale (Table 2) . Only a few had net incomes of more than $2,000 peryear. Of those families with the two sources of income—agriculture andnonfarm work—approximately half had total incomes of more than $5,000.Those families with incomes from pensions, social security, unemploy-ment compensation, and similar "nonwork" sources, in addition to agri-culture, usually came within the income bracket of SI,000 to $3,000.Tahlk 2. Source and Size of Incomes of Families Living on SampleFarms, Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers Counties, 1958SourceofALLFarmersReport-Families With IncomeUnder$500$500TO$1,000TO$2,000TO$3,000TO$4,000TO$5,000ANDing $599 $1,999 $2,999 $3,999 $4,999 OVERNumber Number Number Number Number Number Number NumberAll families 297 19 26 52 55 36 29 80Income fromagriclture41 15 13 11 2 — —Agricultureplus nonfarmSo — — 7 10 13 13 42Agricultureplus nonwork .. S3 3 12 28 28 7 1 4Agriculture,nonfarm work,and nonwork .. 8S 1 1 6 15 16 15 34A third of the farms in the three counties are less than 30 acres insize (Table 3). Usually they have investments ranging from $2,000 to$2,500 in land and farm buildings. Another third are from 30 to 100acres in size but do not have an equivalent increase in the size of invest-ment. The proportion of the land in crops in the latter is smaller than inthe former, but there is a marked increase in acreages of pastui eland andwoodland. Farms containing more than 100 acres tend still further inthe direction of pasture and woodland.Most farms m the area are also small in terms of the total amount ofwork done on them (Table 1). In 1957, on half the farms, this wasless than 50 days. Only 10 percent were large enough to occupy the fulltime of a worker.Note that the income figures here are for net income from the farmand do not include income from other work done by the farmer or by4Table 3. Value and Use of Sample Farms, By Size, Fayette, Raleigk.and Summers Counties, 1958Number ofFarms inSamplePercentageof AllFarmsAverage Valueof Land andBuildingsPer Farm**AVEIAGr Number of Acres in*Farm Size(Acres) CropsOpenPermanentPastureWoodlandDollarsAll farms 297 100 3,138 13 34 37Under 10 50 17 2,100 4 2 110 to 29 543318112,3783,84758616430 to 49 - 1450 to 69 36 12 2,269 11 21 2270 to 99 36 12 2,678 14 24 38100 to 139 38 13 3,321 17 46 45140 to 219 .... 30 10 3.823 20 62 77220 and over .. 20 7 7,639 42 196 205*Does not cover an average of 4 acres per farm that were devoted to other uses, forexample, building areas, garden spacs. roads, and so on.** Excludes value of dwelling.Table 4. Net Income of Farmers on Sample Farms Related to TotalDays of Work, Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers Counties, 1957Total Net FarmAllFarmersReport-ingTctl Number of Days of Work on the Farm*IncomeCDollars)Under5050 to99100 to149150 andOVERAverage NumberDays of WorkNumber33302843436831212971926212817308O1525451320237582511412723241129113150.7$ to 249 26.3250 to 499 35.4500 to 749 48.2750 to 9991,000 to 1,49965.666.81,500 to 1,999 121.82.000 and overTotal165.078.9*CaIcuIated in terms of total number of days of productive work required.members of his family. More than half received less than $1,000 fromtheir fanning operations in 1957, but neither did they do any largeamount of farm work.Operators who lost money despite a large amount of work wereusually beginners who were putting out money in order to build up theirbusiness.The major source of income horn farms in the area in 1957 wasfrom the sale of livestock and livestock products (Table 5). Sales ofbroilers and other poultry accounted for almost half of the income fromagriculture, SI 64,604. Sales of cattle were next in importance. Dairying5Table 5. Total Sales From 297 Sample Farms, Fayette, Raleigh, andSummers Counties, 1957Item SoldValues of Sales(Dollars)PercentageofTotal SalesPercentageofLrVESTOCKSales260,853164,60474,8606,07813,31334,61623,43923,7909,5222,3573,08172106631210063Cattle 2925Eggs __WoolOtherTotal 359,544 100is on the increase in this area and now accounts for about 10 percent ofthe farm income. Sales of eggs are also important. In 1957 they broughtabout as much income to the area as sales of all crops—grain, feed, fruit,vegetables.Total sales averaged $1,200 per farm.Approximately three-fourths of the farmers in the area have dairycattle (Table 6). Approximately three-fourths have poultry. These, then,make up the stable backbone of the agriculture in the area. Some hogs,however, were raised on more than half of the farms. Only one-fourthhad beef cattle.The highest return both per farm and in total was from poultry.Table 6. Number, Value, and S\les of Livestock on Sample Farms,Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers Counties, 1957Type of LivestockNumberand Percentageof FarmsTotalFarmsReportedAverageNumberPerFarmTotalValueofSalesPercent-age ofTotalSalesAverageValue ofSalesPer FarmTotal farmsFarms with - -Dairy cattle ....Beef cattleHogsSheepPoultryWorkstockOther livestockNumber297214731633722712725Percent1007225551276438Number1,1469326131,709181,7391885134468011Dollars260,04938,48836,3726,07813,313164,6041,1941514Dollars876180498373607259Sales of crops are a minor source of income to fanners in the area(Table 7) . Although many produce hay or grain for use on the farm,the amount sold is not important. Corn comes nearest to an exception.Some corn was produced on almost half of the farms, and sales of cornaveraged SI 25 per farm.One-third of the farms produced some fruit, but sales of fruitaveraged only S62. One-fifth of the farms produced some commercialvegetables. Sales of vegetables averaged about $200 per farm.The biggest expense to farmers in the area is for the purchase of feedand hay for poultry and livestock (Table 8). A reduction in this costmight be possible through home production of feed; or purchases fromlocal producers might be expanded.Table 7. Acreage and Sales of Major Crops on Sample Farms,Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers Counties, 1957CropTotalFarmersReportingPercent-age ofFarmersTotalAcre-age nsrCropAverageAcreagePerFarmAverageValueof SalesPerFarm*AverageReturnPerAcreNumber2971425657501811053558100481919176135122044338225733919231834498374711212Dollars821254353531086279199Dollars40Small grains for grain ..Small grains for hayAlfalfa6128Other hav 1036Fruit, small 63118*Only 289 farms reported any sales, so this average per farm is based on those farmsthat had sales.Table 8. Farm Expenses on Sample Farms, Fayette, Raleigh,Summers Counties, 1957ItemNumberand PercentageofAll FarmsTotalExpensePercent-age OFTotalExpenseAverageExpensePer FarmReportingAverageExpenseAllFarmsNumber29726928323612323269Percent100m9579417823Dollars213,36617,28312,427102,8234.41972,6223,792100864S2342Dollars71864444363631355Dollars7185842346Other livestock expenses ..-.Hired labor, custom work,repair work1524413Farmers in the area do not always use the most up-to-date methods(Table 9). This is as likely to be due to inadequate finances as to lackof interest. Greater use of the most productive methods should bringlarger amounts of money into the community.Table 9. Extent to Which Farmers on Sample Farms Were Using NewFarm Practices, Fayette, Raleigh, Summers Counties, 1957Farm Practice Number of FarmersReportingPercentage ofAll, FarmersAll farmers -Had soil tested during last 5 years ....Applied lime to cropland during2971421471091116696124818546641004849Applied lime to pasture during37Fertilized pasture during last37Made changes in fertilizer program22Seeded pasture during last 5 years ..Mow or clip pasture each yearMade changes in crops grown4227Made changes in insect controlduring last 5 yearsMade changes in feeding livestockduring last 5 years2915Made changes in controlling livestockduring last 5 years 22Only the farmers under 50 years of age were asked whether theywould like to expand or change their farm business. Almost half of themsaid they would like to do so (Table 10). One in eight would like toexpand his livestock operations. An equal number would like to clear orimprove additional land. Others would like to add to their machineryor equipment, or expand their fertilizer program.Most of those wanting to make these changes were part-time and sub-sistence farmers. Most of them stated that they had difficulty in makingthe changes because of lack of capital.The reason most frequently given by farmers for lack of interest inincreasing income from farming was that they had other employment orwere not interested in farming. Two other reasons were important also:(1) satisfaction with the farm at its present size; and, (2) the idea thatfarming was not profitable and there was no use in expanding operations.Farms in the area are not highly mechanized (Table 11). More thanhalf operate with horse-drawn equipment. Hay is still harvested by old-fashioned methods. Few of the farmers who keep dairy cattle havemilking machines.8Table ](). Attitudes of Farmers on Sample Farms in Regard toIncreasing Size of Farm Business, Fayette, Raleigh,Summers Counties, 1958ItemAllFarmeksReportingPercent-age ofAllFarmersAll..CommercialFarmersReportingOtherFarmersReportingType of ChangesAll farmers under 50 years oldAll farmers wishing to makechangesIncrease livestock enterpriseChange to more fruits andvegetables ;Land-clearing, fences, ponds, etc.Add machinery and equipment ....Use more fertilizerFarmers with obstacles to makingchangesLack of moneyLack of marketLack of timeFarmers who do not desire to makechangesReasons for not making changes:Other employment or lack ofinterest in farmingSatisfied with present farm,No money or lack of profit infarmingPoor soil or locationIllnessLabor not availableNumber11850143141064839636836111004212128558309Number28105122218Number9040921231613156121Table 1 1 . Type of Farm Equipment on Sample Farms By Type ofFarm, Fayette, Raleigh, Summers Counties, 1958EquipmentNumber and Percentage of Farms With SpecifiedEquipmentAll FarmsCommercialFarmsOther FarmsNumber29710114697134161Percent1003449334154Nuniber783950348339Percent10050644410150Number21962966361123Percent10028Truck 44Automobile used in292Milking machinesHorse-drawn equipment 56!; Less than 0.5 percent.X wr HH- Wi>«»1w feC <•faPi< <- faX Tw H ccr fa iOh > U)a!<< hUh h z3CU<-, (/)-" lad asr pd WC To £ "C/3 §faH ^as<faIo< wMh fa<C pd *Was occAWQ P.&S<CM \n'—'faW~ -35 V<h=* «E" 1 <b-ft ga fa K «w M53 W O53J>O £c 2;fa§ 555 £ 8^ Q 53a « &a gH H<- 53 g < »m «! g OS 53* i 3 e o^ * cs« »o ^ 9H m fe ^OS Q Cfi C3 z « ftfa -^ < .9* fa H pj>9 °iH tl IIS -r6 g u3 h 9 t; 3t. c _ z -~_ tt O -t^ 3 fa ctf10This may reflect lack of capital, or it may indicate that existing farmsare too small to permit their operators to farm with the highest degreeof efficiency.Many of the farmers under 50 years of age who were interested inexpanding their farm operations were willing to borrow money in orderto do so (Table 12). These people were largely those who had additionalsource of income.Lack of ability to obtain capital to expand existing farm operations,is one of the major problems in the area. When farmers wish to expandtheir operations and bring more money into the community, how can,the community help them get the necessary capital?Most of the farm homes in the area have electricity, refrigerators,and power washing machines (Table 13). Three-fourths of them havetelevision sets, and one-third have deep-freeze units.Although the farmers are most alert to the advantages of electricity,they lack some other modern conveniences. Approximately half haverunning water in the house, and half have telephones. Only a third haveflush toilets, and a fourth have central heating.What These Figures MeanThese are only a few of the findings of the 1958 survey of farms andfarm people in these three counties. A more complete analysis will bepresented in a later report. It will indicate that many farm and nonfarmpeople are not fully employed. They constitute unused resources thatmight be bringing more income and spending power to themselves andto the community.Although the return per hour of work is much less in farming thanTable 13. Household Equipment of Farm Families on Sample Farms,Fayette, Raleigh, Summers Counties, 1958ItemNumber of FamiliesReportingPercentage of FamiliesReportingAll families 29729616628910328521721110779139172100Electric lights 99Water in house 56Refrigerator 97Deep-freeze unit 35967371Flush toilet 36Central heating 27Telephone 47Daily newspaper 5811in most occupations in the area, two important aspects concerning farmingin the area must be considered: (1) The $2,500,000 in agricultural salesmean several times that amount in the total economy; and, (2) theequally important fact that our farms are primarily homes for peoplewho like to live in the country, although their major income is fromsome other source.Both for them and for the community, income from farming is im-portant. This can be increased by such measures as the following: (1)more credit available for farm development; (2) more careful selectionof crops adapted to the area; (3) greater use by farm operators of thelatest farm practices; and, (4) more complete use of all the good soil re-sources that are available in the area.The trend in agriculture is toward greater specialization in the cropsand products that can be produced to the greatest advantage. For WestVirginia, these are grade C milk, eggs, broilers, and turkeys. The areais best adapted to a grassland economy, and production trends in theState indicate that specialization here is proceeding in that direction.The major problem in the 3-county area does not involve agriculturedirectly. It stems from the decrease in labor required for mining coal.Agriculture will be unable to provide employment for all these additionalpeople. The situation calls for both local industrial expansion and in-creased efficiency in the use of other resources in the area.The 1958 survey indicates that the area has a large amount of laborthat is not fully utilized. It indicates also that a large amount of localcapital exists and that there are many residents with managerial experi-ence and ability. What is lacking is a community plan that will utilizeall these resources in such a way as to build the economy the area needsand should have.12

Farming, farm people, and farm expansion in Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers counties, West Virginia, 1958

https://researchrepository.wvu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1415&context=wv_agricultural_and_forestry_experiment_station_bulletins

Farming, farm people, and farm expansion in Fayette, Raleigh, and Summers counties, West Virginia, 1958

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

The Research Repository @ WVU (West Virginia University)