AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION
of the ALABAMA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE
M. J. Funchess, Director Auburn, Alabama
SPECIAL LEAFLET JUNE, 1950
AGRICULTURAL OPPORTUNITIES and
PROBLEMS of the SOUTH from the
RESEARCH POINT of VIEW
1
M. J. FUNCHESS, Director
T HE DIRECTORS of Experiment Stations,
the directors of Extension Services, and
the men responsible for the work of the
various bureaus of the USDA together
make up the most important group of men
that are dealing with the problems of
Southern Agriculture with the aim of open-
ing up new and larger opportunities for
farm people. It is a great honor, a great
opportunity, and a great responsibility that
I have in speaking to you on the problems
and potentialities of the area. In dealing
with this very broad assignment, it is
recognized that there are few, if indeed
any, persons who know the South so well
that such a discussion by one man can
be full, complete, and comprehensive for
all the different agricultural regions of
the Southern States. It must be under-
stood at the outset, therefore, that your
speaker is drawing on his experience in
a certain part of the region, and that the
suggestions, discussions, and examples will
be of most value if they stimulate all of
us to give careful and sustained thought
to the solution of similar problems in the
respective areas we serve.
Before dealing specifically with the as-
signed topic, it should be profitable to
consider some of the fundamental changes
that are taking place on farms of America.
Hybrid corn has added hundreds of mil-
lions of bushels to the American crop. Corn
planted on 99 million acres in 1929 pro-
1 Presented at the conference of Experiment
Station Directors, Extension Service Directors,
and Bureau Chiefs of the USDA in Oklahoma
City, Oklahoma, May 15, 1950.
duced 2.5 billion bushels. Twenty crop
years later, there were 12.9 million acres
less and 1.1 billion bushels more corn.
From the crop year of 1929 to the crop
year of 1949, cotton acreage declined from
43.2 million to 22.7 million acres, but the
crop of 1949 was 43 thousand bales larger
than that of 1929. Tractors on farms in-
creased from 1,567,000 on January 1, 1940,
to 3,250,000 by May 1, 1948, an increase
of 107 per cent in 8 years. During the
same period, the number of mules and
horses on farms decreased from 14.5 mil-
lion in 1940 to 8.3 million in 1949. This
decrease in number of workstock on farms
released several millions of acres of land
that should be used for commercial crop
production. The enormous increase in use
of power and machinery on farms is shown
by data in Table 1.
No picture of changes in agriculture
would be even reasonably complete with-
out considering fertilizer consumption. In
1935-39, there were 523,000 tons of ferti-
lizer used in Alabama. Consumption in-
creased to 900,000 tons in 1946. For the
same years, American consumption rose
from 7,585,000 to 16,087,000 tons. There
has been an enormous increase in use of
fertilizer in the Middle West during recent
years. And while these changes and ad-
justments were taking place, the American
farm population decreased from 30,269,000
in 1940 to 25,190,000 in 1945, a loss of
about 5 million people at a time when war
industries and armed forces had absorbed
a maximum number of farm people. By
1948, when the immediate postwar adjust-
__I__________
TABLE 1. NUMBER OF TRACTORS AND OTHER SPECIFIED MACHINES ON FARMS IN THE
UNITED STATES - JANUARY 1, 1910-19491
FYer Farm Farm Grain Corn Milking
Year tractors 
motor- auto- 
combines pickers 
machines
traetors trucks mobiles
Thousands Thousands Thousands Thousands Thousands Thousands
1910 1 0 50 1 -- 12
1920 246 139 2,146 4 10 55
1930 920 900 4,135 61 50 100
1940 1,545 1,047 4,144 190 110 175
1941 1,675 1,095 4,8330 225 120 210
1942 1,885 1,160 4,670 275 130 255
1943 2,100 1,280 4,350 320 138 275
1944 2,215 1,385 4,185 345 146 800
1945 2,422 1,490 4,152 374 168 365
1946 2,585 1,550 4,150 415 200 465
1947 2,800 1,730 4,520 450 225 580
1948 8,150 1,920 4,930 520 300 640
1949 3,500 2,000 5,250 590 365 685
* Changes in American Farming, Sherman E. Johnson, BAE, USDA, Dec. 1949.
ment of population was apparently com-
plete, the number of farm people was
estimated at 27,440,000, still nearly 8 mil-
lion below the 1940 level. These are
samples of the great changes that have
been taking place in American Agriculture
during the past 10 to 20 years.
PROBLEMS
The foregoing general background pic-
ture of American Agriculture shows that
great progress has been made in recent
years. Frequently southern agricultural
workers use the generalized picture and
confuse the listener as to the progress -
the rate of progress that is being made in
the South. It is fitting, therefore, for us
to consider southern agricultural problems
if we are to have a really clear picture of
what our situation is and what we need
to do about it.
Low Income. Southern farmers receive
the lowest per capita income of all farmers
in the United States. The following tabu-
lation sets forth some comparisons:
UN=r Income per Farm Person
in Dollars
1924-28 1944-48
Alabama 146 333
Georgia 155 486
Oklahoma 3839 841
Iowa - 742 2,330
Thirteen Southern States 211 573
United States 370 1,073
The reason is simple. Southern farmers
produce too little for sale on a per capita
basis. If this statement is correct, then the
most important of all farm problems is
increased production of farm products.
About 49 per cent of all American farm
people live in the 13 Southern States. How-
ever, it is estimated that in 1948 southern
farm people received as cash receipts the
following percentages of the total cash
sales from the commodities indicated:
COMMODITY Cash Receipts as
Per Cent of Total*
Corn --- - 14
Wheat - 15
Oats r.- -- 10
H a y -..... . ........................................... 1 5
Cattle and Calves 23
H o g s - . ------------------------------------------- 1 4
Dairy products 14
Eggs .--- 17
Chickens and broilers 46
* Farm Income Situation (FIS-109). June 1949.
If these data mean anything at all, they
mean that southern farmers must produce
more to sell or continue to be poor. Until
we understand this to be the paramount
problem in Southern Agriculture, we as
agricultural workers and leaders are not
in position to render to Southern Agricul-
ture the best possible service from the
agencies that we represent. And the need
of southern farmers for a better income
is so great that we mist not let the appar-
[2]
ent oversimplification of this fundamental
problem mislead any of us or permit us to
fail to put first things first.
The Place of Cotton. It is absolutely
essential that all agricultural agencies that
would serve the southern farmer have a
clear picture of the place of cotton in the
southern farm program. At the risk of
offending those who consider cotton senti-
mentally, emotionally, or promotionally, let
me say that the South can never be pros-
perous on cotton as long as it takes 200
hours and more of human labor to produce
and pick a bale of the crop. Horne says,
"Cotton is the leading source of income in
the poorest section of the United States.
More than 1,500,000 families normally de-
pend for a living on the farms that grow
it. No other economic group in the nation
is so large and so poor." From the begin-
ning, it took about 70 hours of labor to
pick a bale of cotton. It takes that same
amount of labor today. Improvement has
been made in cotton production programs
but not in harvesting where the crop is
hand-picked. The labor charge against
most other crops of importance has been
greatly reduced as a result of the adoption
of improved methods of production and
harvesting.
8 
Exceptions will be found in
Table 2.
This brings me to a subject on which
I wish to put special stress. Cotton can
be harvested rapidly by use of relatively
inexpensive strippers, but the "stripped"
cotton is quite "trashy." At present there
is no ginning equipment that will clean
well stripped long-staple cottons adapted
.2Cotton's Way Forward, 
M. K. Home, Jr.,
Univ. of Miss. 1949.
3Changes in American Farming, Sherman E.
Johnson, USDA, Dec. 1949.
to the Southeast. The development through
research of ginning equipment that 
will
clean cotton harvested by inexpensive
strippers is the most important research
problem that might be tackled in the inter-
est of Southeastern Agriculture. The Ala-
bama Station has stripped cotton at the
rate of a bale per hour, using a machine
developed by one of the machinery manu-
facturers. Let's reduce labor by 65 hours
per bale in harvesting, and save 650 mil-
lion hours of backbreaking human labor!!
Shall we say it can't be done and let it
go at that? We have not taken that atti-
tude toward other difficult agricultural
problems. What would it cost? One million
dollars per year for 20 years to support
research on a comprehensive scale to
develop cheap, efficient cotton strippers
and gin equipment to clean the trashy
product is as nothing compared with the
saving annually of 650 million hours of
human drudgery. This is no small prob-
lem, and it should not be tackled in a
small way. The development of a gin that
will clean stripped cotton will mark just
as great a change in the handling of cotton
as did the invention of the cotton gin. As
leaders in agriculture, we should make a
concerted effort to have something done
immediately about a matter of so great
importance.
There is an old experimental gin plant
in the Delta. When there was an oppor-
tunity to establish a new one, it was lo-
cated at the Agricultural and Mechanical
College in New Mexico. The problems
of the cotton producer of the Southeast
did not weigh heavily enough to have this
new plant located in that area. To help
farmers in the Southeast, we need a com-
prehensive program that might well cost
a million dollars a year, including very
TABLE 2. AVERAGE HouRs OF LABOR PER UNIT OF PRODUCTION
Crop Unit 1910-14 1925-29 1935-39 1945-48
Corn 100 bu. 135 
112 67
Oats ---- -100 bu. 53 85 
23
Hay i1- - - --- - - ton 10 9 
9
Sweet potatoes 100 bu. 140 137 
123
Cotton ---------------------- 1 bale 277 210 
182
S. E. Cotton*--- 1 bale 289 
209
Tobacco 100 lb. 44 47 
48
* For Florida, Georgia, North Carolina and South Carolina- by private correspondence, 0. 
V.
Wells, Chief, iBAE, USDA.
[31
large storage space for a bulk supply of
cotton on which the gin might maintain
continuous operations from year to year.
Our area cannot be prosperous on hand-
picked cotton. Homrne, in his publication
"Cotton's Way Forward," states, "The
surest way to measure the income of cot-
ton farmers is to examine the actual ex-
perience of areas in which cotton growing
is highly concentrated. Such an area is
roughly defined by the boundaries of
Mississippi. No other state depends on
cotton so heavily. Mississippi grows cotton
in 80 of its 82 counties and gets more
than half of its entire cash farm receipts
from cotton and cottonseed. The great
majority of the farms in this state are
distinctly cotton farms.
"In 1947, the average cash receipts from
all farm sources, per person living on a
farm in Mississippi, were about $397. In
1948, with the most valuable cotton crop
on record, the figure was $435 per person.
These figures reflect gross receipts, out of
which had to come the costs of seed,
fertilizer, poison, ginning, taxes, deprecia-
tion and repairs, rent, interest, manage-
ment, and wages to non-farm-dwelling
laborers. The net cash income per person
on a Mississippi farm was a great deal
lower than these figures. And yet these
gross receipts were little more than one-
fourth of the average net income per per-
son in the whole population of the United
States.
"Such was the situation in 1947 and
1948, when the prosperity of cotton f arm-
ers was actually a subject of much com-
ment. In relation to the past, the average
cotton farmer was indeed prosperous, for
the wide-swinging price of cotton rises
higher than other prices in good times just
as it drops lower than other prices in hard
times. But in comparison with anything
in this country except his own past, the
cotton farmer was not prosperous, even in
1947 and 1948."
Cotton Statistics. This subject has been
before the public so much that it will be
dealt with briefly here. Horne
4 
presents
figures to show the increasing production
of rayon. In 1920, it was equivalent to
24,000 bales of cotton, but, by 1949, if
was equivalent to 2.9 million bales.
The American cotton farmer was losing
Horne, op. cit.
out in the world cotton market before the
last World War. In the period of 1925-30,
exports amounted to 8,250,000 bales. Ex-
ports dropped to 5,306,000 bales in
1935-40. There are those in official posi-
tions who firmly believe that our cotton
export market will dwindle to still smaller
figures as funds from the Marshall Plan
are reduced. If, finally, the cotton farmer
finds only the American market for his
cotton, income from the crop will have
shrunk to relatively small proportions, in-
deed. At best, it has represented only
from 6 to 8 per cent of the American farm
cash income. In this same period of
1935-40, foreign mill consumption of cot-
ton rose from 18,460,000 to 21,600,000
bales. Also, in the same period, foreign
production increased from 10,660,000 to
16,780,000 bales. Increase in the world
crop came from foreign production.
Cotton is a sick crop and there is
nothing in sight to indicate that it will get
well in the near future. In the good year
1950, the acreage planted to cotton will
be roughly half of that devoted to the
crop 25 or 30 years ago. And, if this
proves to be a good crop year, the acre-
age may be cut still further in 1951. In
the whole history of American Agriculture,
no other major crop has had such a record.
In research programs dealing with cot-
ton, much emphasis should be placed on
improvement of quality of the fiber and
reduction of the cost of production. The
crop is too important to Southern Agricul-
ture for us to ever slacken our effort to
help the farmer produce good cotton at
as low cost as possible. Research work
that contributes to the solution of these
problems will always be important.
Under conditions that have forced and
are still forcing a decline in both planted
acreage and marketable crops, cotton
farmers have faced and must continue to
face drastic changes in their whole pro-
gram. Their success or failure will de-
pend in large measure on their choice
of changes. As agricultural leaders, it is
our job to help them make the right kinds
of changes in their program.
Possible Changes in Southern Agricul-
ture. Clear thinking is needed when we
come to consider the possible changes and
improvements in the farm program of the
South. It is important that we understand
well that increased production of any
[4]
TABLE 3. CASH RECEIPTS FROM FARM MARKETINGS BY COMMODITY GROUPS IN THE
UNITED STATES IN 1948.0
Commodity 1,000 Dollars Per cent
M eat anim als ...............
Dairy products . ----------
Poultry - - - - - --. . .
O th e r ... ....... ............ .
Total from livestock-----
Food grains ----.-------------
Feed crops -. ---------- ------
Cotton lint and seed --------
V eg etables ---------------------------------
Fruits and tree nuts .................
Tobacco
Oil bearing'crops
Other crops
Total from crops
TOTAL FROM MABKETINGS
FIS-109, June 1949.
..................- 9,358,893
--- --------------- 4,432,986
------..--.-------- 3,071,440
------------------ 197,459
---- -------------- 17,060,778
------------------ 2,585,916
---------------- 2,126,520
----------- .2,492,343
------------------ 1,976,184
------------------ 1,173,509
----- 975,304
1,069,639
1,085,301
13,484,716
30,545,494
farm commodity is dependent on a market
outlet for that commodity. Therefore, let's
spend a little time considering the pos-
sibilities of disposing of increased quanti-
ties of certain commodities, or types of
commodities, that might be produced in
our area as we change and improve our
program.
The American consumer spent more
than 30 billion dollars for farm products
in 1948. Fifty six per cent of this was
for animal products and 44 per cent for
cotton, food grains, vegetables, tobacco,
fruits, nuts, etc. Detailed data are set out
in Table 3.
Cotton brought only 8.1 per cent, tobacco
3.2 per cent, and peanuts 0.7 per cent of
the total cash income. These are the
chief cash crops of the South. All vege-
tables, fruits, and nuts brought in only
10.3 per cent of the total. Since cotton
now occupies millions of acres less than
Sformerly, and since there is a probability
of the acreage being still further reduced,
it is imperative that cotton farmers use
for other productive enterprises these acres
that have been vacated by cotton. And it
should be mentioned at this point that
there are already several million acres of
idle land in some of the southern states,
even though some of us continue to ex-
plain our low income as being due in
part to the fact that there is so little land
per capita available to southern farmers.
To be even moderately prosperous, south-
ern farmers must have a farm program
that calls for the use of all of their avail-
able land, with each acre producing at
the highest level compatible with economic
production. Agricultural leaders of the
South have never had a more important
or a more difficult task than that of trying
to help meet the severe problems of ad-
justment that must be made on southern
farms. To what extent can this problem
be solved by including annual harvested
crops in the program? The prospect is
dim. Between 1929 and 1946, total acre-
ages of apples, peaches, pears, grapes,
plums, prunes, figs, cranberries, and straw-
berries declined.
5 
However, the acreage
of commercial truck crops increased by
948,000 from 1929 to 1948. Acreages of
commercial truck crops for 1948 are shown
in Table 4.
During this period, 1929-1948, Alabama
alone lost 2,060,000 acres of cotton. Ala-
bama may lose half as many acres of cotton
between 1949 and 1950 as the total acreage
gained by commercial truck crops in the
preceding 20 years in the entire United
States. From the year of maximum cotton
acreage to the year of lowest acreage,
5 Agricultural Statistics, USDA, 1949.
[5]
30.6
14.5
10.1
0.7
55.9
8.5
7.0
8.1
6.5
3.8
3.2
3.5
3.5
44.1
100.0
TABLE 4. ACREAGES OF COMMERCIAL TRUCK CROPS IN THE 
UNITED STATES IN 1948"
Crop
Artichokes
Asparagus
Beans-
green lima
Beans - snap
Beets
Cabbage
Cantaloupes
Carrots ---
Cauliflower
Celery
Corn - sweet
Cucumbers
Eggplant
Escarole
Garlic
Fresh Process- Total
market ing
7,450
S42,760
S14,450
173,950
10,450
179,500
122,360
75,400
38,300
40,330
61,200
54,050
6,680
3,100
3,020
7,450
80,870 123,630
86,010 100,460
94,500 268,450
12,990 23,440
19,270 198,770
122,360
75,400
38,300
------ 40,330
474,420 535,620
122,420 176,470
----- - 6,680
8,100
8,020
Crop
Honeyball
melons ...
Honeydew
melons
Kale
Lettuce ....
Onions .....
Peas - green
Peppers
Pimentos
Shallots
Spinach
Tomatoes
Watermelons
TOTAL ....
Fresh Process- Total
market ing
1,100
11,700
1,800
202,000
127,510
37,250
33,450
4,800
59,060
238,780
255,990
372,830
14,300
21,550
410,500
1,100
11,700
1,300
202,000
127,510
410,080
33,450
14,300
4,800
80,610
649,290
255,990
1,805,940 1,709,660 3,515,600
a FIS-109, June 1949.
either of the states of Georgia, Alabama,
or Oklahoma lost nearly as many cotton
acres as the total acreage devoted to com-
mercial truck crops in the entire United
States, which was about 3,500,000 acres
in 1948. Comparative acreages of major
crops and crop groups are shown in the
following tabulation:
CROP 1949 Acreage
Corn 86,735,000
Wheat 76,751,000
Hay 72,835,000
Oats 40,560,000
Cotton 26,898,000
Commercial truck crops 3,515,600*
*1948 acreage, latest available
Considerable time has been devoted to
this phase of the production problem be-
cause many people in high places - pro-
fessional and political - apparently do
not understand at all well the relative im-
possibility of utilizing much land or labor
in truck crop enterprises. When farmers
overproduce perishables, the surplus is
practically lost, after having depressed the
market for that part of the crop that may
be sold. The lack of adequate marketing
research by experiment stations is the usual
explanation of the farmer's troubles when
this kind of situation develops. Some of us
fail to or refuse to understand that no
amount of time and money spent on mar-
keting research will find a nonexistent
market. In the light of the difficult prob-
lems involved in marketing perishables and
in the light of the fact that the demands
of the American market are met by the
use of a relatively small amount of land
and labor, it does not appear at all possible
for the southern farmer to devote more
than a tiny fraction of his released cotton
acres to the production of commercial acre-
ages of fruits, nuts, vegetables, or other
more or less perishable products.
Most of the staple crops may be in
surplus production in the immediate future
also. There is little possibility for addi-
tional farmers to grow tobacco. Southern
farmers would find it very difficult, if not
impossible, to grow commercial corn,
wheat, oats, or hay in competition with
midwestern states. Soybean acreage and
production have expanded rapidly in re-
cent years, but this crop may be in surplus
production this year. It is quite unneces-
sary to expand this further, since all
agricultural workers probably understand
this situation already. Then, you ask, is
there any hope for the improvement of
their farm programs by southern farmers?
The answer is YES.
OPPORTUNITIES
Southern farmers have the opportunity
to greatly improve their programs and in-
crease their incomes by adding livestock
production enterprises to their farm pro-
gram. This will be no easy job. Therefore,
let's consider briefly some things that must
be taken into account when we attempt
[6]
to introduce livestock production on a real
commercial scale in the South.
We must meet competition. There is
no waiting market of consequence for any
farm produce. If we are to meet competi-
tion, we must have efficient production.
Competition forces efficiency, or a lower
standard of living if it can't be met, and,
finally, if it is keen enough, abandonment
of the enterprise.
There are markets for livestock and live-
stock products. In most sections of the
South, there are auction markets available
that handle all forms of livestock. To a
less extent, there are outlets for process
plant milk. As of March 25, 1950, a Car-
nation milk plant at Dadeville, Alabama,
was receiving 40,000 pounds of milk per
day but could handle five times that
much. The price paid was $8.05 per
hundred, 4 per cent base. On the same
day, a Grade A handler in Opelika, 25
miles away, was paying $5.81 per hundred,
4 per cent base.
There are markets for forest products.
A new paper mill that started operations
in Alabama this year needs annually
230,000 cords of wood. This is an addi-
tional demand on the timber lands of
Alabama for forest products, and the de-
mand should be met by a production
program that will insure a supply of wood
from this time on. There is need for
greatly expanding the research program on
forest production if the farmers who own
millions of acres of land that should be in
productive forests are to receive the help
they need in dealing with this problem.
Cotton still brings in more income in a
number of southern states than anything
else. But should it? Some of us appear
to boast of the large cotton sales. But
when we recall that the crop usually oc-
cupies 20 per cent or less of our available
cropland, should we not really be ashamed
to state that cotton brings in more money
than all other products 
combined? Any
state is a poor state where this relative
condition exists. What a sad commentary
on our farm program when a fifth of the
land brings in half the income, or more!
We have no obligation to avoid compe-
tition with other sections. Nevertheless,
when groups are advised to increase their
income by producing livestock of some
kind, almost invariably someone brings up
the question of possible overproduction in
that field. But few southerners have com-
plained because the soybean crop of the
Midwest has captured their old market
for cottonseed meal and depressed the
market for cotton and peanut oils. Nor
has anyone said much about the competi-
tion by the far West for a large share of
the cotton market. California ranked fourth
last year in cotton production. Do we fear
overproduction in other things more than
we do in cotton?
An increase in production of livestock
in the South means a greater share of the
consumer's dollar for the area. No one
could logically claim that such an increase
would not cut into the income of other
sections. It would. If we can produce
farm commodities cheaply enough to cap-
ture and hold a part of the existing market,
it is our right to do so. It has been done
before. Witness what has happened to us
by the enormous increase of soybeans in
the Midwest, and the expansion of cotton
in the far Southwest.
The South has no obligation to maintain
an uneconomic type of farming simply to
avoid displacing labor. As agricultural
leaders, we have an obligation to do what
we can to develop programs suitable to
our area that will improve our economic
status; in all probability, as this is done
there will be a surplus of farm labor in
most of the Southern States. Much of the
dense farm labor population now finds
employment only because we use hand
labor to chop, hoe, and pick most of our
cotton crop.
In Alabama, 85.7 per cent of cotton
farmers had 14 acres or less in cotton, as
of 1944. There were 128,659 farms in this
group. It is reasonable to assume that all
of these were relatively small farms. Con-
sequently, we must seek ways and means
whereby both the small and large farmer
may improve their lot. And this is going
to be a difficult job, especially for small
farmers.'
Then there is the problem of adequate
credit of the right kind. When farmers
try to change from the old, simple cotton
and corn program, they may need credit
in greater volume and of more flexibility
than they have ever had before. There will
be needed new fencing, lime, fertilizer
and seed, farm machinery, broodstock, etc.,
Data supplied by 0. V. Wells, Chief, BAE,
USDA, by private correspondence.
[7]
all of which call for cash outlays at one
time. Returns on these kinds of expendi-
tures may be spread over 5 to 10 years.
Loans on these types of outlay may not
be repaid in one year, as was expected
from production loans in the old days.
Both agricultural workers and credit agen-
cies need to study this problem and try
to develop credit practices adequate to
meet the needs 
of farmers.
And, finally, as one of the most im-
portant background discussions, let's under-
stand that both surpluses and competition,
which surpluses surely increase, as well as
the changing type of Southern Agriculture,
call for an ever-expanding program of re-
search and education if our area is not
to lose out in competition for market out-
lets for its farm products. If we do not
produce any particular commodity, some-
one else will. Midwestern farmers will
gladly suppjy us with milk, cheese, etc.
Synthetics are already taking a large share
of the old cotton market, and, according
to news stories in the papers, there may
be vast improvements in the rayon manu-
facturing process in the immediate future.
Midwestern farmers can and will also
supply meat to the South, as they have
done in the past, unless we capture the
market and hold it. Those who stand still
or move too slowly in both research and
education are bound to lose the contest
for market outlets for their products. Eter-
nal effort in these fields is the price of
economic success.
A little while ago it was stated that
southern farmers might increase their in-
come by adding livestock enterprises to
their farm program. Today we are the
guests of a state that has materially
changed its farm program, and has a per
capita farm income that is nearly twice
as great as that of farmers in such states
as South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, and
Mississippi. Yet, from 1929 to 1949 the
Oklahoma cotton acreage dropped from
4,275,000 to 1,300,000, a loss of 2,975,000
acres. From 1924-28 to 1944-48, sales from
livestock in Oklahoma increased from 96
million to 290 million dollars. With about
65 per cent as many farm people as has
Alabama, Oklahoma is producting 200 mil-
lion odd dollars worth of farm produce
more than Alabama. From 1924-28 to
1944-48, the increase in sales of livestock
in Oklahoma was just about $200,000,000.
Reducing the cotton acreage in Oklahoma
has certainly not hurt the State's farm in-
come.
Now, I am again presenting some infor-
mation about farm-size production experi-
ments in Alabama to try to prove to you
that there are still grounds for hope for
a much better and more productive farm
program in at least our part of the Cotton
Belt. And again I begin this consideration
by presenting to you the basic figures for
a 12-year-old cotton-hog unit. This report
is for the year 1949.
This 96-acre farm is entirely typical of
the Sand Mountain area of Alabama, ex-
cept that it is larger than the average.
There were planted or used in 1949, 17.2
acres of cotton, 40.3 acres of corn, 7 acres
of grain sorghum, 10 acres of alfalfa, and
7 acres of annual clover for grazing. Cash
expenses for fertilizer, feed ($256.40),
extra labor, seed, taxes, insurance, repairs,
gas and oil, etc., amounted to $2,257.19.
Cotton and seed sales amounted to
$2,672.40. Hog sales totaled $3,687.65.
Cull milk cows, clover seed, hay, eggs, and
cull hens brought in an additional $540.59.
The total cash sales were $6,900.59. From
this 96-acre farm, after taking out all cash
costs, there was left $4,643.40 as returns
for operators' labor and return on invest-
ment. Two men do all of the regular work
on the farm. This has always been a
2-man farm and it still is. The difference
now is that it produces pretty good yields
of corn, which is fed to hogs in a simple
production program. In each year of op-
erations, above average yields of cotton
have been produced. But there has been
more cash sales of hogs than of cotton,
from year to year.
We now have in its third year of opera-
tion a 30-acre cotton and poultry unit at
our Sand Mountain Substation. In size
and soil type, it is representative of many
thousands of farms of the Sand Mountain
area. Here is a brief financial statement
covering operations for 1949. There are
6 acres in cotton, 16.5 in corn, 5 in oats,
and one in alfalfa. Cash expenses were
as follows:
F ertilizer ------------------
F eed -- ----------------
Extra labor
(picking cotton chiefly)
S e e d ------------------------------------
$ 309.50
1,951.50
110.50
50.50
[8]
Taxes and insurance
Repairs
Gas and oil
Miscellaneous (chicks, chiefly)
Total
There were the following casl
Cotton and seed
Eggs
Cull hens
Feed sacks
Total -- - - - - -
In this year's operations, ther
$2,420.47 to pay for operato
management, depreciation, etc.
farm will produce nearly as mi
as the average of its size, but it h
better income than cotton farn
the sale of eggs in addition to
There will be no better pla
discussion to again emphasize t
tance of adequate credit for tho
who try to improve their farm
If there were nothing but cotton
on this farm, its credit problems
simple. But when chickens are
the program, and a small tract
to make more efficient use of ti
the one man who does the maj
the work on this unit, the cr
of this little farm are greatly
Without adequate credit, a far
find it extremely difficult to c
small low-capitalized farm to o
type here described.
In all probability, the Piedmc
of the Southeast is more of a
lem area than any other. In g
of the land is rolling to hilly, an
fered seriously from erosion. A
ago a substation was establish
Alabama Piedmont as part of thi
Agricultural Experiment Station
cotton-dairy unit was established
the program of the substation, a
a brief report on the third yee
tions. Before presenting the da
stress the point that this unit is
on badly eroded, gullied land
which had been abandoned b)
owners. Now, here is the si
financial statement for a year
tions. The following shows tI
use of the 75 acres that support
operation:
47.80
37.70
93.04
518.95
$3,119.89
h receipts:
$ 964.86
Crimson clover - sericea
Crimson clover - ryegrass
Oats-
Alfalfa
Kudzu
Grain sorghum
Permanent pasture
Acres
25
11
5
9
13
4,011.13 Last year's sales amounted to $2,487
519.37 for milk, $1,540 for cotton from 11 acres,
45.00 and $181 from miscellaneous items, or a
total sales of $4,208. Total cash charges
$5,540.36 against operations, such as fertilizer, seed,
,e was left 
hauling milk, 
etc., amounted 
to $2,076,
)r's labor, leaving 
a cash balance 
of $2,132 plus
Again, this 
$815, the value 
of replacement 
heifers
ach cotton produced 
in the meantime, 
or a total of
las a much $2,947 
to pay for farm labor 
(2 men),
ns due to depreciation, 
management, 
etc. This unit
was started on land that was in such bad
condition that two men could not possibly
ce in this make a decent living by row crop produc-
he impor- tion. And the cows were of the 
quality
se farmers that could be bought in the community.
programs. At present prices for milk and cotton, and
L produced with improvement 
of both herd and land,
would be this unit should produce double the above
added to returns to labor, management, etc., in 3
or is used to 4 years.
he time of At 
the Black Belt Substation, 
80 acres
or part of of land 
are devoted to production 
of milk
edit needs to be 
sold to a cheese plant. 
This area
increased, supports a herd of 25 cows and 
5 replace-
ner would ment 
heifers. There are 
no row crops.
Shange his Each 
year, about $100 worth 
of cottonseed
ne of the meal is 
fed. For the 3-year 
period ending
March 15, 1948, average annual income
)nt section from milk was $3,547.72, with a cash
real prob- charge of $929.32 against the operations 
for
eneral, all fertilizer, cottonseed meal, farm machinery
d has suf- hire, hauling milk, etc. For labor, 
man-
few years agement, depreciation and the use of 80
ed in the acres of land, there was a balance above
e Alabama cash outlay of $2,618.40. Both 
the herd
system. A and the land are steadily improving, and
as part of it is believed that the program that 
has
nd here is been developed will make it possible to
ar's opera- produce milk as economically as can 
be
ta, let me done elsewhere.
established At the Gulf Coast Substation, a milk
, some of production unit has been in operation for
y previous 8 years. Approximately 95 acres of land
ummarized are used for improved pastures, temporary
of opera- pastures, and a varying acreage of alfalfa,
he present corn, and kudzu, with a limited acreage of
t the dairy sudan grass following the temporary crim-
son clover-ryegrass pasture.
[9]
The dairy herd includes 82
heifers, 2 yearling heifers, 4
one bull, and are all suppo
land and crops listed. In 19
lay for all fertilizer, seed, et
to $1,265.46. The herd was
pounds of cottonseed meal
$741.75, or a total of $2,0
sales were:
201,330 pounds of
Grade A milk
12 calves and cull cows
Seed
Total
This leaves $11,991.88 to
labor involved, depreciation
taxes, and management. The
received for milk was $6.49
pounds. This unit is located
Mobile Bay and about 20 mi
Gulf. It is about as far south
unless it is moved to Florida.
might have been better in
climate, but the Alabama
that the foregoing record d
grace us. Even at Grade B
these 95 acres would make a
showing.
Another of the production
Alabama Agricultural Experi
system is the dairy-hog unit op
Tennessee Valley Substation.
of land are used in the progra
cropping system is changed
time, no effort is made to giv
here. At the moment, we ar
ested in the possibilities of suc
In 1949, the tenth crop year o
ment, there were sold from
$3,171.80 worth of hogs, $3,
of milk (Grade B), $756.C
oats, $2,025.00 worth of cr:
seed, and $945.88 worth of c
surplus calves. Cash charges
erations, for land preparati(
harvesting of crops, concei
amounted 
to $3,276.65. 
ForI
this leaves a balance of $7,125
of milking, use of land, depr
management.
Most of the feed requirem
out the year are supplied f
temporary and permanent pas
1,500 pounds of home-growr
per animal during bad weath
cows, 4 bred
calves, and
rted by the
49 cash out-
age crops cannot be grazed. The only
bought feed was 2,966 pounds of concen-
trate fed the entire herd of about 25 cows
or about 120 pounds per head.
.Even though this is not the time and
at a cost of place for a detailed discussion of the
07.21. Cash production program, a word of explana-
tion regarding the program should be
helpful. The cows get all winter feed
(except in very bad weather) from tem-
$13,052.55 porary pasture of crimson clover-ryegrass
518.89 or from oats that are used for temporary
427.65 grazing. The crimson 
clover-ryegrass mix-
ture furnishes grazing from October to
$13,999.09 April. The oats 
furnish grazing from
October until March. By allowing a graz
pay for the ing-free period of 3 to 4 weeks in May,
, insurance, a clover 
seed crop is matured. 
After the
average price 
seed are combined, 
the land is planted 
to
per hundred grain sorghum, which 
in good seasons has
3 miles from 
produced 50 
to 75 bushels 
per acre. Here
les from the is the basis 
for cheap hog production.
as it can be 
Consequently, 
what started 
out to be 
a
The results 
milk production 
program was 
almost of
some other 
necessity changed 
to a milk and 
hog pro-
oes not dis- gram. The 
production of grain 
from the
temporary 
winter oats 
grazing crop 
also
milk prices, 
came in almost 
incidentally, since 
it was
pretty good 
found to be 
easy to produce 
50 to 75
bushels of oats per acre by stopping the
units of the grazing in March 
and applying a good top-
ment Station dressing of nitrogenous 
fertilizer. Here we
erated by the have a program 
that omits cotton entirely,
Ninety acres but one that produces a good 
income.
m. Since the 
The Tennessee 
Valley Substation 
is also
rom time to
fro the details 
operating a new 
beef production 
unit in-
e msthe detaisinter- volving the 
purchase of steers that are
.e most ter- pasture-fattened 
and sold directly from
fh a program. the grazing area. 
Most of the grazing is
f this experi- available 
during the late fall, winter, 
and
the 90 acres early spring 
months. One of the newest
503.58 worth features of our grazing program is the
imson clover production of winter forage. As a matter
l and of fact, it now 
appears to be easier to 
pro-
ull cows and vide adequate grazing for cattle in Ala-
against op- bama 
during the period from 
October to
on, planting, May 
than it is to provide 
grazing from
ntrates, etc, May to 
October. This steer-fattening 
unit
the 90 acres, is supported by 182 acres of land that are
.00 for labor devoted 
to improved pastures, 
temporary
eciation, and pastures, 
etc. In 1949, 123 steers 
were
bought on the local auction markets, fat-
ents through- tened on the 182-acre unit and sold 
on
rom grazing the same local markets through which
stures. About they were bought. These 123 steers gained
a hay is fed 30,615 pounds while on the grazing unit.
er when for- After paying all cash expenses for seed,
[10]
fertilizer, labor, machinery hire, drugs, and
verterinary services, there was a cash
balance of $4,902.76 to pay management,
use of land, depreciation, etc. According
to the actual labor records for this unit,
it took only about half of one man's time
to handle it. This type of beef produc-
tion program has a number of hazards in
it, but it also offers promise of fitting into
the program of both small and large
operators.
This paper has been extended in order
to present a number of different types of
production units now in operation by the
Alabama Station. The 30-acre poultry-
cotton unit at the Sand Mountain Station
is an example of an intensive program ap-
plicable to small farms. In contrast, the
182-acre steer unit at the Valley Station
uses only about half of one man's time and
is an example of an extensive enterprise.
The other units fall in between these two
in labor requirements per unit of land.
And each of these units indicates that
there are opportunities for a vastly im-
proved agricultural program in our area.
To be sure, a farm program that is pat-
terned after any one of these units will call
for more total hours of work than a cotton
farm requires, and it will call for careful
and intelligent management by the opera-
tor. But if the income is to be better, a
better job is required. There is no easy
way to earn a good living on a farm.
Throughout this paper, there are re-
search implications. Let me bring this
discussion to an end by specifically indi-
cating certain lines of research activity
that should yield results of much impor-
tance to southern farmers as they attempt
to change and improve their farm pro-
grams. The whole field of plant breeding
is inviting. There is great need for high-
yielding, disease-resistant grain and forage
crops. In pasture research - for both
permanent and temporary grazing - there
is also great need for more research on
the compatibility of grasses and legumes.
We hear much of such new crops as
Ladino clover and fescue grass, but we
know little about soil adaptation and com-
patibility of these two crops. Pasture
management studies are expensive, but are
necessary if the livestock man is to know
how to get the best results from his
grazing lands.
As the emphasis on livestock increases,
so must there be an ever increasing em-
phasis on research on animal breeding and
animal diseases. Breeding for disease re-
sistance in animals should be a particularly
inviting field. The Auburn strain of disease-
resistant poultry is a good example of the
potentialities of such research. There may
be very great opportunity for production
of animals that make more efficient use
of feed and forage. Progress in animal
breeding may be accelerated if we put
more emphasis on utility and less on form
and show ring characters.
Practically all soils in the South are
poor. Nevertheless, there is abundant
evidence that these poor lands may be
made quite productive under good systems
of management and with proper fertiliza-
tion. Soil fertility problems, then, should
have a prominent place in the research
programs of our area. When each acre of
land is made to produce as much as is
economically feasible, and when each man
day of labor is as efficient as possible
through the use of adapted machines,
southern farms will produce several times
more than at present. All research work
that adds to our information in these two
broad fields will be important, since they
will aid the farmer in his effort to produce
more commodities for sale.
It should be understood that these are
merely samples or suggestions as to the
research program that needs to be de-
veloped. No one should infer that these
are the only important lines of research
needed in our expanding program of agri-
culture for the southern area. Nor should
it be inferred that these are absolutely the
most important lines of research. Possibly
they are. However, these particular sub-
jects have been mentioned because they
follow so well along the lines of potential
improvement that have been presented.
Southern farmers must have for sale
several times as much produce as now
comes from our area. However, 'at the
risk of undue repetition, it should again
be emphasized that it is absolutely es-
sential that when we attempt to increase
our production for sale on the American
market, we must understand that the pro-
duction program must be based on the
best established facts so that the products
of our farms may be produced economi-
cally enough for us to meet competition.
When these conditions are met, and not
until they are 
met, will southern 
farmers
be as prosperous as they can and should be.
[11]