The Nonpartisan Leader Newspaper, July 12, 1920, Page 5

. In actual practice, we find that many farm- ] : farms, ranged from $1 to $8.20, with the average - crop 1mmed1ately~ after the crop estimdte High Pnce for Wlteat Needed What Is Wheat Worth? Three-Dollar Price Would Still Leave Many Farmers Wxthout Profit T t;e. ey st S e Waslungton Burean, @l i Nonpartisan Leader.: S REPORTED prevxoualy‘m ‘the Leader~ in daily -newspapers, the" United tes department’ of “agriculture, as §i| wheat crop, found $2.15 per bushel to = . ‘e the average cost, allowing no profit to the farmer:” be grown at a loss. ey This manifestly’ would be unfair, Therefore the: Teader’ cortespondent - Doctor. H. C. Taylor,. chief of the: office of farm management; which had charge of the. department of agnculture mvestlga- tlon,xwhat ‘would be'a fair price. “That is difficult for any one to answer," said ‘Doctbr Taylor, “but we. offer the so-called ‘bulk- line” theory ‘The federal trade commxssxon, during the war, in settling on a fair price for lumber; coal . and someé other: products, figured on ‘the cost neces-- sary to produce from 80 to 90 per cent of the sup- ply. < In many. instances they settled on 85 per cent, “Now, if you look over the. tabulatlons on these 481 wheat farms, you will see’ that while® the range of cost ran from ‘$1 a bushel on two farms to $14.40 on one farm, the aver- age cost for. the last group. of. farms neces- ; sary -to: make up 85 per cent of the pro- duction was $2.70.a bushel. - 3 “We want to determine the pnce wlnch S * will stimulate the necessary productlon—— Fn neither an under-productxon nor-a glut of = the market. This price, which will give us the right amount: of wheat production, we /1 » call the ‘necessary. iprxce, and the cost cor- responding to-the ‘necessary prlce’ we calL the ‘bulk-hne cost.l FARMER SHOULD KNOW A COST OF HIS CROP : / “Two things of pnme importance to ev- ery wheat farmer and to the nation are in- volved in a completion of this study of pro-— duction costs for wheat First, we shall be able, in my opinion, ‘after three yea of survey of farm production costs, to isd o sue'a cost estimate report on the wheat - report is made. .The wheat grower, then, - will know, as’ nearly as scientific study can deternrine it, what' his crep should bring: He 'will know the supply, and he wxll know the cost. “Second, we shall be able fo reduce the normal cost of the wheat crop by enablmg those farmers whose cost of production is: too high to learn what regions are produc- ing similar wheat at a much lower cost, The tendency will then be for “those who find: themselves ‘producing at a_ loss. to\' either quit raising wheat or to 1mprove their methods. "It -is unportant for the country that they do the one or the other. ers do not realize that their cost for rajs- e ing a given crop are prohibitive, “'These surveys prove the 1act to, them, aud save them further, loss.” Doctor Taylor As of the opmxon that the augges-. tion of adding 10 _per cent to the average cost as & “hulk-line cost’? will not do, for the 481 farms stud-. ied'this year the cost for the bulk of the' crop would thus ‘be set at $2.36, which would pay the cost of . - production on less:. than 715 per cent of the wheat: If 90 per cent o‘f the production were' to;be covered by a bulk-line price, then-the cost would ‘have to be set at an even $3'a. bushel. - ‘Winter wheat ¢osts in Ford county, Kan., on 32 S at $1.82. In Pawnee county it averaged $1.85 for 82 farms: In McPherson: county it averaged; for 85 farms, $2.38 per bushel.. In Jasper county, Mo, 30 farms averaged $1.80 net cost; in St. Charles "county, 38 farms showed an ayerage; coet of $1.74; in Saline county, 29 farms had $2.17 as their aver- age cost per busbel Phelps _ ounty, Neb showed the result'of investigations of the 1919 . This' means, of course, that at a price ‘'of $2.15, half the wheat xn."the country would WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENC an average cost, on 30 farms, of 32'.20 ; Keith county showed $1.57 for the average of 23 farms; Saline county, with 35 farms studied, showed an average = of $2.19 cost per bushel. Spring wheat on 38 farms in Clay county, an., cost $2.82 for productlon' on 42 farms in Traverse county .the average ran $2.80. In Grand Forks county, N. D., the average cost on 39 farms was $2.24; on: 39 farms in--Morton county it averaged $4.26. On 39-farms in Spink county, S. D., the av- ' erage cost was $2.40 a bushel. For Morton ‘county, in the drouth’area, the cost figure of $5.60 a bushel covered just 84.4 per cent oi the productxon on the 39 farms studied. 3 FUND FOR STUDY OF COSTS OF PRODUCTION REDUCED The. cost per acre of the winter wheat eovered by-the study of 284 farms ranged thus:, Under $20, 22 farms; $20 to $25, 52 farms; $25 to $30, 60 farms; $30 to $35, 656 farms; $35 to $40; 49 farms; over $40, 37 farms. For spring wheat the range of costs per acre was: . Under $20,46 farms; $20 to $25, 88 farms; $25: to $30, 50 farms; $30-to $35, 12 f.arms, $35 to_‘ $40, none; over $40, 1 farm.' Cougress did not' give' sufficient 'funds to- the .+farm management office to. make so extensive a study as was, wanted for tlns year. It has seut ¥ den thelr estlmates for the needed funds for next ‘ ment will lose some of its most valuable specialists. year. fLongress does not want the farmers to know ° too much about tl;e way in which they are being exploited by the grain: gamblers It is probable ‘that the bipartisan machine in congress will be < even more hostile when' this report on the cost. of wheat productlon comes to their attention, in spite : of the promise in the Repulilxcan national platform < pledging “Scientific. study of 'agrieultural’ prices and:farm productxon costs’ at home and abroad and & the uncensored publication 'of such reports:” But they won’t be able to stop-the worl;, it has ~ got away from them, and the farmers of the United ‘States.are going to force them to give Doctor Tay-. = “Tor the funds for further inquiry. If he can; in three years, establish’ a scientific basis for telling ~“them, in. September, what thexr wheat for that year- ~has cost them, in every region ‘and as a whole, the farmers ‘are going to get that informatxon _every year. Keep an eye on the ofiice of PAGE FIVE . - » : amemd ‘Wash " Work toward preventmn of cereal dis- : —Drawn expressly for the Leader by W. C. Morns. : arm, }nana_gement. ‘;j them! = $6 000,000 Cui From Farm Appropriation Economy—For the Farmer Congress Saves Money—at the Expense of i Agncultural Interests Washington Bureau, ‘ Nonpartisan Leader. FTER raising military ‘appropriations and paying millions. of dollars to war “contractors in settlement of contracts upon “which work had not even been started, the government took a turn at ‘being economical just before congress adjourned. ' Six million dollars was cut from the es- timates of the United States department of agri- culture, making the appropnatxons $2,185,000" less ] than for the current year, in spite of the decreased purchasing power of the dollar. Secretary of Agriculture Meredith has gotten out a summary of the activities of the department that . will ‘have to be abandoned or curtailed.. Taking only the most important matters, affecting League states, this summary shows: Hog cholera eradication demonstratoxs will be re- . duced from 140 to 54. Field stations in cereal improvement work will " be ‘closed at Amarillo, Texas, nghmore, S. D; ; Williston, N. D.;" BrooKings, S. D.; Newell, S. eases will be reduced at Manhattan,.Kan.; {° St. Paul, Minn.; Fargo, N. D.; Pullman, Wash,, <and Madlaon, Wis. - : Crop reporting specialists on cotton, to- baceo and’ riee’ will be eliminated. ~All 'work toward developing direct mar- keting of farm products by express, parcel .post, ete., will be discontinued. The market news service will be largely “reduced. Hay inspection work will be ‘eliminated “and butter will’ be mspeeted at only four cities.. * The field station at Greeley, Col., de- voted to experiments with sugar beet and potato, insects, will be abandoned. DEPARTMENT MAY LOSE MOST VALUABLE MEN Work toward eradicating the pink boll worm of cotton will be largely reduced. The irrigation agriculture station at San Antomo, Texas, will be closed. The insurance fund of $1,000, 000 to erad- * icate foot and mouth disease is wiped out. strations will be abandoned in a number of states. growing = of medicinal plants will be stopped. Appropriations for studies of the cost of producing staple farm | crops, such .as wheat, cotton and sugar beets, has beén reduced greatly.. The apptopriation for-enforcing. the food which ‘will be good news to the manufac- turers of impure and poisonous foods. dition, probably will mean that the depart- In marked contrast with the reduction in the fund for enforcement of the food and drugs act, is the action of congress in including an item " of $239,000 for the distribution of free seeds by congressmen: to their constituents. The depart-~ ment of agriculture recommended that. this an- cient graft be discontinued and the senate com- mittee agreed to it. . The house members refused to | concur, howeyer,. and also rejected a compromise’ proposal to reduce this appropriation to $75,000. As a result the constituents of congressmen who are seeking re-election will still be burdened with packages of seeds; generally of poor quality, in en-. : ‘velopes bearing inently the ' congressman’s name, bought wit] ‘government has not money enough to prosecute Milk testing experiments and demon- = Experimental® work to: encourage the and *drugs act has been reduced $30,000, . The reduction of appropriations, in ad-- 239,000 of government funds, . franked through the mails at government expense— . 'while the millionaire manufacturers of impure foods and drugs can work mthout hindrance-—because the ' i i f |