Discusses the value of County Farm Agents to farmers and how they have been of great assistance for very little investment through taxes

Dexter, A. J.

Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange

South Dakota State University Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange SDSU Extension Leaflets SDSU Extension 9-1-1922 An Item of Forty-Nine Cents and Its Relation to County Agent Work A. J. Dexter Follow this and additional works at: https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/extension_leaflets Recommended Citation Dexter, A. J., "An Item of Forty-Nine Cents and Its Relation to County Agent Work" (1922). SDSU Extension Leaflets. 15. https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/extension_leaflets/15 This Pamphlet is brought to you for free and open access by the SDSU Extension at Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. It has been accepted for inclusion in SDSU Extension Leaflets by an authorized administrator of Open PRAIRIE: Open Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange. For more information, please contact michael.biondo@sdstate.edu. U ~ V OF HE ATES RELATION SERVICE C 2 61922 10 SE ICE FJLE Extension Leaflet No. 15 September, 1922 An Item of Forty-nine Cents and Its Re-lation to County Agent Work (By A. J. Dexter, Assistant County Agent Leader) Forty-nine cent'3 per quarter section of land is the average cost of maintaining a county agricultmal agent in South Dakota through ap-propriations made by county commissioners. The average tax per quar-ter section for all purposes i $95.39. The tax for county agent work is so infinitesimal when thus compared to all the taxes, that if it was taken off altogether, the differ nee in taxes per quarter section would be so slight that very few would realize that any change had been made. County agent work has grown o rapidly in South Dakota, it is not strange that many people have mi conceptions concerning its cost. Many ridiculous statements are made by irresponsible individuals. One man in a northem county maintained publicly that the county agent in that county was co ting him personally $60.00 per year in increased taxes. This leaflet was prepared to put the fact regarding the exact cost before every taxpayer. The cost is figured in two ways, namely, per quarter section of land, and per each $100.00 actually paid the county treasurer in taxes. The figures from which the calculation were made were secured from the State Tax Commission. From these fwurei:: it i hard to ee how any man can object to coun-ty agent work on the basis of cost in dollal'S and cents; however, there EXTENSION SERVI E, South Dakota State College of Agriculture and Mechanic Arts and U. . Department of Agriculture cooperating. W. F. Kumlien, Director, Brookings, S. Dak. Distribut ed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress of May and June 30, 1914. are t\¥0 ways to determine whether this cost is high or low. First, how anxious are the farmer ' to have this wo1·k? Second, are the farmers re-ceiving "value returned," for the cost. To prove that farmer are demanding more and more county agent work each year, your attention is directed to the following table which shows the number of county agent employed in South Dakota each year for the pa t 10 years. Year __ ______ 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 1920 1921 1922 Agent s - - - ---· 1 3 3 9 12 14 16 39 41 43 49 From one county having an agent to 49 having agents in 10 years, would certainly indicate that the Li 9c a quarter tax has not worried the progre sive farmers pu hing this wo1'k. ALL OTHlR iiXl'ENSES ROADS ___/ The portion of the tax dollar that goes .(c,r ounty Agent work i very small Growing Demand For County Agent Work To prove the econd point that the farmer are recieving "value re-turned" for the cost a few illustration touching on certain lines of county agent work might be convincing. When a farmer attend a poultry culling demonstration put on by the county agent and learn how to cull out 50 percent of his hens, and then sells them, and still receive as many eggs ,from the remaining birds as from the whole flock before, it is not hard to convince that farmer the county agent is worth 49 cents per quarter section to him. When the farmer' wife can attend a meetino· arranged by the coun-ty agent where a specialist from the agl'icultural college demonstrates the use of the dress form or how to make hats at a very slight co t, it is mighty hard to convince that woman that the county agent is not worth 49 cent per quarter section to their farm. It is a busy harvest day. A farmer needs an extra hand but cannot spare the time to go to town and look around for a man. He calls the county agent's office and is informed at once that help is or is not avail-able. That farmer cheerfully pays the extra 49 cents a quarter, for this one service has many times more than repaid him. The hogs are dying. The local veterinarian calls it cholera. The -Ir I Cost per quarter Percent section of land Cost of of total Present Part of county ap-Total general appro- appro- of of propriatio n general taxes pnation priation County Total for agricul-ounty taxes paid Total paid by made for appro- general tural work o. of to County taxes "Land" by Agri- priation taxes per each quarter Treasurer paid by or County cultural for $100.00 in sections in 1922 "Land" farms for work Agri- taxes actu-of land XC pt or Agri- paid for cultural Col. Ill ally paid to special as- farms Col. III cultural by work divided County essments* divided Exten- " Land" by Col. I Trea urer by sion or Col. V I Work farms divided Col. V divid-Col. II by Col.I ed by Col.II lII V VI VII VIII IX Aurora ---------· 2,716 $ 349,421.26 ·25 ,156.70 74 1 ($2,500) $1, 50. 00 $ .68 $ 94.31 $ .72 Beadle ---------- 4,806 1,174,983.03 5 4,622.93 50 3,000 1,500.00 .31 121.64 .26 Bon Homme _____ 2,237 493,5] 5.33 291,472 .55 57 1,600 912.00 .41 130.29 .32 Brookings ------- 3,090 711,926 . 3 421,021.75 59 (2,500) 1,475.00 .44 136.25 .35 Brown ---------- 6,596 1,926,16 .47 767,163.50 40 4,500 1, 00.00 .27 116.31 .23 Brule ----------- 2,951 3 2,915.90 227,562.5 59 (2,500) 1,475.00 .50 77.11 .66 Buffa lo --------- 1,346 91 ,,151.41 77 ,869.53 85 (2,500) 2,125.00 .16 57J90 .27 Butte ----------- 5,019 501,69 .28 274,670.57 55 3,000 1,650.00 .33 54.73 .60 ampbell -------- 2,807 206,5&2.61 153,050.42 74 1, 50 1,369.00 .49 54 .52 .90 Cha1les Mix ---- 3,740 621 ,613.76 384, 80.12 62 (2,5 0) 1,550.00 .41 1 2.91 .40 Clark ----------- 3,694 636,376.01 423,528.96 67 3,000 2,010.00 .54 114 .65 .47 Clay ------------ 1 577 4 3,693 .23 2 ,226.82 60 2,200 1,320 .00 .84 1 2.77 .45 Codington ------· 2'.628 935 ,962.51 329,625.90 35 3,000 1,050.00 .35 125.43 .31 Corson _________ 3,497 431 ,36 .41 177,34 .4 41 3,000 1,230.00 .35 50.71 .70 Custer ---------- 2,493 196 ,3U .89 72,535.66 37 (2,500) 925 .00 .37 2\-J.10 1.20 Daviso:: -- ------· 1,6 3 753 ,845.29 24 ,641.85 33 (2,500) 25.00 .49 147 .6 8 .33 Day ------------- 3,9 61 637,7 3.fi2 394,69 . 0 62 3,000 1, 60.00 .47 99.65 .47 Deuel ----------· 2,430 395,474 .00 273 ,655 .46 67 (2,500) 1,675.00 .69 112.62 .63 Dewey ---------- 1,939 274,245.44 116,745 .5 43 2,500 1,075.00 .55 60 .21 .99 Doug las --------- 1,67 301,93 ,19 193,00 .95 64 2,0 0 1,280.00 .76 115.02 .66 Edmunds -------· 4,045 492 203. 4 309,J 01.89 63 2,500 1,575 .00 .39 76 .16 .51 Fall River ______ 4,160 3 6,872 .6 136,311.37 35 3 .000 1,050.00 .25 32 .77 .78 Faulk ------ ----· 3,651 40 ,1 4.24 277,1 9.t\4 6 2,500 1,700.00 .47 75.90 .61 Grant ----------- 2. 650 431,195 . l 276,152.42 64 3,000 1,920.00 .72 104.20 .70 Gregory ---- ---- 3,706 532,791.47 319,59 .68 60 (2,500) 1,500 .00 ,10 6.24 .47 Haakon --------- 6,353 310,796. 5 224,982.45 72 2,200 1,r, 4.00 .25 35.41 .71 Hamlin --------- 1,991 421,201.73 273,429.26 65 2,000 1.300.00 .65 187.33 .47 Hand ----------- 5,350 541,026.0 415,065 .72 77 2, 50 J,194.50 .22 77.6 .53 Hanson --------- 1,697 342,959.26 246,203.74 72 (2,500) 1,800.00 1.06 156 . 8 .73 Harding -------- 6,318 196,742.72 152,070.23 77 (2,500) 1,925.00 .30 24.07 1.27 Hughes _________ 2,576 418,470.51 166,317.44 39 2,000 7 \.1.00 .30 64.1 .48 Hutchinson - - ---· 3.246 60 ,462.00 412,32il.4 68 (2,500) 1,700 .00 .52 127.03 .41 Hyde ----------- 2,899 243 ,562.38 1 3, 10.54 75 (2,500) 1,s-;-~ .00 .65 63.40 1.03 Jackson --------· 2,200 224 ,425 .12 134,99 .27 60 1,500 900.00 .32 61.36 .67 Jerauld _ -------· 2,052 355,636.46 216,105.88 61 1,800 1,098 .00 .54 105.31 .51 Jones ----------- 3,723 215,6 0.76 139,651.'iO 65 2,400 1,560.00 .42 37.51 1.11 Kingsbury ------ 3, 175 621,23 .33 367,026.42 57 2.000 1,140.00 .36 115.60 .32 Lake ------ ----- 2,214 575,655 .54 325,4 5 .64 57 2,350 1,339.50 .60 147.05 .41 Lawrence - ------ 1,076 72 ,659.21 314 ,649.24 43 3.000 1,290.00 1.19 292.42 .41 Lincoln --------· 2,267 593,402.71 357, 67.14 60 3,000 1,800.00 .79 157.86 .51 Lyman ---------· 4,901 46 ,7 36.93 3 3,9 7.43 66 2,000 1,320.00 .27 62.01 .44 McCook - -------· 2,243 408,534.14 272,472.66 67 2, cOO 1,876.00 . 4 121.4 .69 McPherson -----· 3,845 319 ,599 .22 214,464.46 67 1, 60 1,239.50 .32 55.7 .58 Marshall --- ---- · 2,933 482 ,696.28 30 ,653.23 64 2,400 1,536.00 .52 105.23 .50 Meade __________ 1.0,429 464,649 .14 32 ,037 .25 71 4,000 2, 40 .00 .27 :n.45 .84 Mellette -------- 2,322 146,562.72 112,522 .10 77 2,000 1,540.00 .66 4 .46 1.36 Miner ---------• 2,169 42 ,813 .59 299,9,90.49 70 2,000 J ,400.00 .65 138.31 .47 Minuehaha ----- 3,105 2,203,455.92 601,510.70 27 3,000 10.00 .26 19.37 .14 Moody ---------· 1,999 429,671.05 2fJ0,430.!l4 68 {2,600) 1,700.00 .85 145.29 .5 ' Pof.te r ---------· 2,898 256 ,86 1.79 172,139.95 67 2.500 1,675.00 .58 59.40 .9T Penning-ton 6 306 875,601.09 2 3,161.73 32 2,500 00.00 .1 3 44.90 .29 P erkins -------- 9,950 445,103.44 310,()01.42 70 3,000 2,100.00 .21 31.16 .67 Roberts --------- 3,746 61,i,296.36 408,995.41 64 2,000 1,280.00 .34 109.18 .4S• Sanborn -------- 2,203 442,559 .66 30 ,641.59 70 (2,500) 1,750.00 .79 140.1 0 .5 . Spink ----------· 5,779 1,018,410.33 640,241.64 63 1,850 1,165 .50 .20 110.79 .1 Stanley --------· 4,525 271,763.91 169,299.66 62 2,500 1,550.00 .34 35 .43- .92: Suliy ----------- 3,476 247,484.91 J 7,652.98 76 2,500 1,900.00 .65 53.70 I.(n! Tripp -----------· 4,.954 685,148 .19 479,439 .54 70 2,500 1,760.00 .35 96.78 .36 Turner ---------- 2,432 656,605.84 403 350.36 61 (2,500) 1,525 .00 .63 169.97 .38 Union ,----------) ,734 515,683.2 346,670.76 67 2,300 1,541.00 . 9 Hl9.93 .45 Wab '•'b ------· \J ~ 4.51,627. 70 205 ,658.81 46 2,000 920.00 .36 80.90 .44 Yank v '1 -------· .l • J 9 610,191.50 290,407.74 4 2,500 1,200.00 .61 146.01 .41 Ziebach -------- 2,419 159, 05.63 101,896.64 64 (2,500) 1,600 .00 .66 42.12 1.5 6 Average 2,497 1,429.91 .4!) 95.39 .60 The data in columns, I, II, and III was taken from th report of t he Sout h Dakota Tax Commission. The i;um of $2500.00 in parenthesis is i11 se1-ted as a l)asis for calculation in count ies not appropriating. .,. pee-ial assessments u ch as hail in ·u1·an e, dog- tax, etc. farmer ha not heard of cholera in the county and is reluctant to go t the expense of vaccinating unless there is no question but that he has the dread disea e on hi fann . He calls the county agent, who, if he can-not immediately convince the farmer, ends one of the sick pigs to the Animal Health Laboratory at Brookings, or calls in the extension service veterinarian. Thus the county agent's office is a place through which th2 farmer ha received quick service and definite information. One deal of that kind will more than pay that man's tax of 49 cents per quarter for the next 10 years or more. Perhap a farmer wants to improve his seed by getting a new variety or an improved strain. The county agent locates the seed without extra cost. Maybe he wishes to build a barn or put in a septic tank. The lat-est approved plans for this work can be found at the county agent's office. A farme1· wants to secure a purebred bull or register some pigs from a purebred sow he purchased last spring. He consults the county agent who helps him fill out the necessary blanks. Farmers that learn that the county agent's office is their o_ffice and that through its use they can se-cure many helpful services, are very seldom critics of county agent work, especially if they lmow that its average cost to them is only 49 cents per quarter of land. But in every county there are men that do not know the county agent, have never been in his office, have never called on him even to get acquainted, and believe that if this office were abolished it would cut their taxes in half, or at least make a difference of many dollars. It is for this latter class of men that this story on the cost of county agent work is written. Why Support County Agricultural Work ? 1. Your county agent is the only man in the county working strictly and solely for the interests of all the farmers. 2. Because you have a source of definite agricultural information avail-able at all times within your county. 3. Because you are helping support the county agents in other counties through federal and state funds. 4. Becau e every progre sive farmer and farmers' organization is solidly behind this movement. 5. Because the average cost of the appropriation made by county com-mfssioners in South Dakota to carry on county agent work is only 49 cents pe1· quarter section of land. 6. Because the total average cost per quarter section of all taxes is $95.39. Your taxes would st ill be $94.84 even though you did not have a county agent . 

An Item of Forty-Nine Cents and Its Relation to County Agent Work

https://openprairie.sdstate.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1014&context=extension_leaflets

An Item of Forty-Nine Cents and Its Relation to County Agent Work

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Public Research Access Institutional Repository and Information Exchange