University of California College of Agriculture Agricultural Experiment Station Berkeley, California FARM MANAGEMENT SURVEY, TULE LAKE AREA by R. L. Adams and Chester 0. McCorkle June 15 - August 15, 1948 uNlVtKSUY Of- CALIFORNIA Contribution of the Giannini Foundation of Agricultural Economics Mimeographed Report No. 94 L.iBRAR CULUiCL Oh AGK1CULTURF DAVIS i * i ESTIMATED PRACTICES, PRODUCTION, COSTS AND RETURNS FROM ALTERNATIVE CROPS i TULE LAKE . TABLE OF CONTENTS Page INTRODUCTION (Request for the Study) . 1 DESCRIPTION OF THE AREA ' 1 Irrigation ♦ * Soils and Topography • Climate ITeeds and Pests • *« 4 Water Fowl ♦ * « 4 Rodents and Deer » »•»..» Plant Diseases and Insects ...... i REQUIREMENTS OF HOMESTEADERS AND METHOD OF ALLOCATING HOMESTEADS 5 Size of Farms • ■ PURPOSE AND METHOD OF THIS SURVEY 7 PRODUCTION, PRACTICES, COSTS, AND RETURNS FROM PRESENT CROPS ..... ONIONS ALFALFA • BARLEY . CLOVER ...» POTATOES SUGAR BEETS 28 COMPARISON OF 1948 VERSUS 1935-1939 DATA 3 * 9 10 16 20 24 39 42 CARROTS IRRIGATED PASTURE • LIVESTOCK IN TULE LAKE DIVISION - FARM ORGANIZATIONS 60 CROP ROTATIONS ••• FINANCIAL NEEDS OF HOME S TEADERS AND CREDIT SOURCES 68 ii Page THE ROLE OF TENANCY 7 2 Nature of Government Leases , 73 Areas Leased and Rentals 74 ■fcffiFTISG OUTLETS AND FACILITIES 76 LABOR CONDITIONS 80 CONCLUSION 81 iii TABLES Table number Page Calendar of Operations for Onions (20 Acres with 300 92-Pound Sacks Yield) i 1 U Onion Costs (20 Acres 300 92 Pound Sacks/Acre) (Compiled July-August, 1946) 2 12 Calendar of Operations for Alfalfa (20 Acres with 4-Ton Yield) Mature Stand 3 13 Expense of Establishing an Alfalfa Stand of 20 Acres (Data as of July-August 1948) 4 14 An Example of the Cost of Alfalfa Production (Compiled July- August 1948) 5 15 Calendar of Operations for Barley (80 Acres) 6 18 Barley Costs (80 Acres - Average Yield of 32.16 Hundredweight) (Compiled July-August, 1948) .... 7 19 Calendar of Operations - Clover (20 Acres) 8 21 Alsike Clover Costs (20 Acres - 400 Pounts/Acre) (Compiled July-August, 1948) 9 22 Clover Costs (including Depreciation of Stand) 10 23 Carlot Shipments of Potatoes From Tule Lake, 1935-1939 11 24 Calendar of Operations - Potatoes (20 Acres) 12 26 Potato Costs (20 Acres - 300 Sacks/acre) (Compiled July-August, 1948) 13 27 Calendar of Operations - Sugar Beets (20 Acres) Yield of 12 Tons 14 29 Sujtar Beet Costs (20 Acres - 12 Tons/Acre) (Compiled July-August, 1948) 15 30 Comparison of 1935-1939 Costs: Net Returns 1935-1939 and 1947 for Selected Crops in the Tule Lake Division 16 32 Onion Costs 1935-1939 (20 Acres with 300-92 Pound Sacks Yield). 17 33 Alfalfa Costs 1935-1939 (80 Tons) 18 34 Barley Costs 1935-1939 (80 Acres - 32.16 Hundredweight Yield).. 19 35 Clover Costs 1935-1939 (20 Acres - 400 Pound/Acre Yield) 20 36 Potato Costs: 1935-1939 (20 iusres - 300 Sacks/Acre) 21 37 t • « • • i ,e^eJ;«£sfJ. Trot/? « 90**^05 ^piefysnqiiiig Wfn^CJ (i-riH^p-JnaP. fifi*. . >«mi fie \ 9 -f 9n n ^+0-^0 • • ». * Table number Page Sugar Beet Costs: 1935-1939 (20 Acres— 12 TonsAcre 22 33 Cabbage, Expected Yield - 10 Tons or 200 Crates Inputs Per Acre 23 40 Cost Per Acre for Cabbage Production 24 41 Calendar of Operations - Carrots (20 Acres with Yield of 14 TonsAcre 25 Typical Costs of Producing Carrots (20 A.cres - 14 TonsAcre) (Compiled July-Aup-ust, 1948) (Current Costs Rather Than Estimated 1935-1939 Costs) 26 44 Cauliflower, Expected Yield - 300 to 350 Crates (6 to 7 tons) Inputs Per Acre 27 46 Cost Per Acre for Cauliflower Production 28 47 Celery, Expected Yield - 350 to 400 65-Pound Crates Inputs Per Acre 29 48 Cost Per Acre for Celery Production 30 49 Lettuce, Expected Yield - 150 Crates of 5 Dozen Heads Inputs Per Acre for Pall Lettuce Production to Harvest Time. . 31 50 Cost Per Acre for Lettuce Production to Harvest Time 32 51 Market Peas, Expected Yield - 75 Bushels (2,400 Pounds) Inputs Per Acre • 33 52 Cost Per Acre for Producing Market Peas 34 53 Market Spinach, Expected Yield - 500 Bushels (9,000 Pounds) Inputs Per Acre for Market Spinach 35 54 Cost Per Acre for Market Spinach Production 36 55 Wheat, Expected Yield - 24 Hundredweight Inputs Per Acre for Irrigated Wheat Production 37 56 Cost Per Acre for Irrigated '/Vheat Production * 38 57 Oats, Expected Yield - 21 Hundredweight Inputs Per Acre for Irrigated Oat Production 39 58 Cost Per Acre for Irrigated Oat Production 40 59 Livestock Inventories in the Tule Lake Division as of January 1, 1935-1939 and November 1, 1943-1947 41 61 Numbers of Livestock Per Farm 1935-1939 and 1943-1947 42 62 fti^AaooT SI — esioA Z**"} £3*1 ... : ■ '.ioisbptx acl ei9i ■ Livestock Numbers Compared 1935-1939 with 1943-1947 , Two Rotations - 80-Acre Farm 4 20-Acre Fields Rotations - 80-Acre Farm 8 10-Acre Fields • 1 Rotations - 80-Acre Farm 8 10-Acre Fields Designed for Dairying Tabulation of Capital Requirements - 80-Acre Homestead (Rotation - 20 Acres Each of Barley> Sugar Beets, Potatoes, and Clover) ...» • Public Lands Leased by the Reclamation Bureau in the Tule Lake Area • • Tenanting; of Homesteads in the Tule Lake Division Leasing: Program Tule Lake and Sump Area 1947 Price Returns Comparisons for Four Products 1937-1939, 1947 < Farm Management Survey, Tule Lake Area 3y R. L. Adams l/ and Chester 0. McCorkl June 15 - August 15, 1948 Int roduct ion On March 26, 1948 representatives of the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation, Region II met with representatives of the Giannini Foundation, College of Agriculture, University of Cali fornia, in con- nection with a number of questions for which the Bureau desired answers. As a result of this conference and subsequent correspondence, the C-iannini Founda- tion agreed to undertake a farm management study of the Tule Lake reclamation projects. This report sets forth our findings, based on a ten-weeks' study, and in- cluding collection, assembling, and analysis of much data (most of which had to be collected in the field). We know that this report does not answer all the questions proponded by Bureau officials but further study can appropriately be postponed until the material herewith presented has been weighed and digested. In gathering the basic data certain officials of the Bureau of Reclamation were especially helpful. Mr. R. R. Best aided in putting Bureau records at our disposal. Mr. E. L. Stevens shared his long-time experience with the Project in suggesting worth-while contacts and informative sources, as well as arranging for necessary maps and other materials. Especially helpful in contacting the newer homesteaders was Mr. C. Ault stationed at the Tule Lake Headquarters in the capacity of advisor for the last group of settlers. In checking and cor- recting much of the cost data included herein, Mr, La Verne Hemstreet, vocational agriculture instructor at Tule Lake High School, was of great assistance. Description of Area This survey was confined to the area designated as the Tule Lake Division of the Klamath Project, Oregon-California administered by the United States Department of the Interior, Bureau of Reclamation. Lying in the southern end of the Klamath Basin the Tule Lake Division is almost entirely in California though the natural basin extends northwestward for roughly another twenty miles. Near the state line the basin narrows to three or four miles and then opens again near Klamath Falls, The division between Modoc and Siskiyou counties di- vides the Tule Lake Division into two almost equal parts, the majority of the farm land being in Modoc County, however. Irrigation . --Plans call for an ultimate of 63,000 acres of agricultural lands under irrigation in this division, the largest single division in the project. The Main Division, lying to the northwest, comprises 41,000 acres. The purpose of the Tule Lake Division was to reclaim the bed of Tule Lake by l/ Professor of Farm Management and Agricultural Economist in the Experiment Station and on the Giannini Foundation. Z/ Research Assistant on the Giannini Foundation, College of Agriculture, University of California. btiB \£tsH7J8.bA ,sl »5I vE X*ac5/*fioov iM^Mtf 'ianffJd >»3 X/Jii/.J'Xt'p'i'xjiA f>cii-* &ri9m$£Bii&¥, tn&'i-lo upeseloifl \X 2. evaporation, then to prevent inflow, and finally to provide for irrigation, of about 33,000 acres which lay in the lake bed, from water stored in Upper Klamath Lake Reservoir supplemented by Lost River water. This involved extensive drain- age and canal construction best visualized by looking at Map No. 45-52 titled Klamath Project, Oregon-California. Viewing this map it will be noticed that "J" canal is the main source of water for the Tule Lake Division running parallel with the state line across the north portion and finally flowing south down the eastern border of the basin and across the lower end. Upper Klamath Lake provides the principal water supply for the project, its capacity being 524,800 acre-feet. In addition, Clear Lake and Gerber reservoirs, with capacities of 538,000 and 94,000 acre-feet, respectively, furnish an addi- tional and adequate water supply for the entire project. Water for a portion of Tule Lake Division is diverted from Link River, the outlet at the south end of Upper Klamath Lake. Additional water during the season of irrigating is diverted from the Klamath River through the Lost River Division Channel to furnish the necessary water for the remainder of the Tule Lake Division. This can be under- stood readily by viewing map 45-52 cited earlier. Soils and Topography. — Though the surface of the division slopes south at the rate of between one and five feet per mile, the land is very smooth. Land planing is usually needed on individual farms but no extensive soil moving is required. On either side of the basin the hills rise sharply and some of the homesteads on the periphery tend to slope more steeply. All of the division homesteaded to date is irrigated by gravity. The soil is similar to other lake- bottom lands in that it is a loam varying from a sandy loan to a peaty loam. Some peat soils are found in the area. Because of the character of these soils, breaks in canals and dikes are very serious since the soil "melts" away when in contact with water, This is especially true in the upper end of the basin where the lighter soils are located. These soils are deep, well drained, and very fertile, being rioh in organic matter and nitrogen when in their natural state. Continued cropping with little or no attention to proper rotation has resulted in making some of the land harder to work and more subject to "puddling" and "clodding." Where proper rotations have been maintained and where livestock has been included in the farm organization the soils are friable and produce good to excellent crops with a minimum of operations and little use of commer- cial fertilizer. Climate. -rClimatic conditions are the principal limiting factors in the choice of enterprises in this area. Since this is an irrigated area the amount and occurrence of rainfall is not much of a factor except insofar as it affects the water supply for irrigation. The average annual rainfall is 8.83 inches and while the wettest months are December to April inclusive, rainfall occurs during each month of the year. The tabulation below is indicative. Average Rainfall by Months (Tule Lake Station) January February March April May June 0.94 July 0.24 0.86 August 0.04 1.03 September 0.45 1.10 October 0.95 0.80 November 0.74 0.56 December 1.12 Annual 8.83 inches Source of data: U. S. Weather Bureau, Climatological Data, California Section, Annual Reports, XeJ ' r?£i ib'^ioto th$3W "onf «b»d o3taI fti" y ad IXiw *J ©rid "tol: I no i^^t^iroa . Ism^o bee. ajst-fl tr&uoz niiipj sriif- ax* Lpcuna ' aa'noa- Qftxl ' e*a*? erf* rf*iw nXaAd orf* !o "tsftnod m&*c&e becHevib ai oitt rfaiv t . , £l9vi'*oeqs9n «*f©el'«e«foa OOG^e bn^ 090^955 lo e< »i-©ilxae faoiio qa&- gniwehr yd dtfaoa- 3©qoi*s ncrfsxvlb ©dtf l-o ©oatnifa ori> rigi/oxfr-^vrfqa-t^oqoT bx*c a-Xio< bnej .iirtoorca y-iov ai bnaX ed* ,elta i©q ;t©©l ©vx^i bna »?*o n jswtfed' lc &ij Mi noia/vib arfrt *io XXA ♦ylq'syd-a 0 sufct 1( J- o;t b.isrf ^T-rte[^*;5q oitt no abs i yd bad^i-wl 3jf stfab o4 bebi lav naof a ai $i *sd* ni abod isifl ©d4 bnwdl ».*ib aXxoe Hi ad* Jfllq bonicnb illc? oaaifT «b©dacoX asa &Ifoa &na "arrjtifcbi *aaj-,d^a mom oi n*?b*ad bm nox jbs 0ti 3510 m«] an? r.l Dobxuqnx n sod sen lo founrinlm a iWvtvr Bqono JneXIfosai q* boQg ,flesiX ilfitft X/uo rii Xaqionxiq ©dtf Bnoid#»noo citfamiX^rfua-janiiXO son!" ^©"la ajdd- ni saaioq-i Xjt/arus ©3B"T0\ [J Xi^rA od- if 0*1 s kastetn y> w ox.'^ :>ffdi» b«jj n©jg .do.iis .^af'iub My 0 {noJW-fl*8 a^.^J «iirT) sd^no'.l yd lia^niaJI 9g«*io^rA 2iJ^l/A Hi -Barfoni ^S^B ifjeoctni .adnoq-Jfi X-oxmnA ^no'itfoog fiimoliX^s , t atf}Q 3. The figures are made up from 15 years of records, the station having operated only since 1933. Because of the interior location (150 miles from the coast) and the high elevation (around 4,100 feet) the temperatures vary widely during the seasons and even in each 24-hour period. Maximum summer temperatures as high as 105°F. have been recorded, however, temperatures during the summer months as high as 95°F. are uncommon. The winter temperatures drop to -25°F. on some occasions. Temperatures below zero are recorded frequently during the winters. Monthly mean temperatures are shown in the table below. It is apparent that the winter months are extremely cold when a monthly average falls below the freezing point. The ground remains frozen for several weeks during the winter so that all farm- ing operations are halted. Monthly Mean Temperatures January 29.3 July 65.3 February 32.7 August 63.3 March 39.4 September 56.9 April 45.5 October 48.5 May 51.8 November 36.0 June 58.3 December 32,3 Source of data: U. S. Weather Bureau Climatological Data, California Section, Annual Reports. . These low winter temperatures have an important bearing on the agriculture of the area. First, no crops can be grown during the period of cold, so one- crop production is the rule. Second, when livestock is kept, it must have feed in 6toracre for a period of five to six months and must be fed in a barn or on a paved feed lot as no pasture plants now known will grow in weather as cold as prevails in this area. Other less important factors will be mentioned from time to time which are results of this cold winter climate, A third, and extremely important climatic condition prevailing in this area, is the killing frosts. These have been the chief natural limiting factors to the enterprises which can be conducted. Frosts can and frequently do occur in any month of the year. Taking the available data from 1933 to date, the following chart was prepared to show the pattern of killing frosts clearly. It is appar- ent from this tabulation that frosts are not uncommon in any month and that no year has a period longer than about ten weeks absolutely free from killing frosts. It is an old saying among the farmers that late spring frosts are expected until July 4, and early fall frosts are expected after July 4. Record of Killing Frosts (Tule Lake Station) Last before July 15 First after July 15 1933 June 18 August 5 1934 June 25 July 31 1935 June 30 August 16 1936 June 28 September 13 1937 June 23 August 1 1938 May 22 August 23 1939 June 18 August 29 1940 June 8 September 5 (Table continued on next page) 8.W- Acquis- -HZS-l larfiiO 'Xi6-ii3 'ziAt'ni 'isiljsvatq b-ihB&lKt&'itlGtneriixa Sue-' .bi'lilf 4. Cont. 1941 1942 1943 1944 1945 1946 1947 Record of Killing Frosts (Tule Lake Station) Last before July 15 First after July 15 Mean June 7 June 11 No record June 13 No record July 9 June 28 June 16 August August 28 30 September 19 September 7 August 22 August 25 4 out of 5 not later June 28 Latest recorded July 9 4 out of 5 not earlier Earliest recorded August July 16 31 Source of data: U, S. Heather Bureau Climatological Data, California Section, Annual Reports, Weed s and Pes ts. — Prior to the extensive irrigation establishments, weeds were not a problem for the farmer in the Tule Lake Division. With the establish- ment of extensive irrigation works without adequate weed control on ditch banks and near the sources of water, it was only a short time until weed growth was abundant on all of the farm lands. Attempts have been made at weed control with sprays along the ditch banks by the Bureau of Reclamation but until this eradica- tion program develops to where it is all-inclusive, weed seeds will continue to be spread in the irrigation water. On individual farms weed eradication has been attempted by many producers with considerable success. Mustard can be cleaned out of the grain fields with 2,4-D very easily. Small patches of particularly noxious weeds such as Canadian Thistle, Russian Thistle, and White Top have been brought under control in iso- lated cases. Morning Glory is also a problem in the basin, Vhile individuals can eliminate these weeds for a period, as long as the weeds are allowed to re- main near the water sources and canals, no permanent relief can be had. A com- plaint is registered by the farmers against the Bureau of Reclamation on this item; however, weed assessments are made by the counties, not the Bureau, and apparently no large-scale effort has been made as yet to carry out an extensive campaign to eradicate weeds throughout the Division. Water Fowl, — In addition to weeds there are other adverse factors worth mentioning. One of particular importance is the damage wrought by wild fowl during the fall. Both the Lower Klamath Lake Sump and the Tule Lake Restricted Sump are in reserve areas. The former is in the Klamath Lake Bird Reserve, the latter is located in the Tule Lake Wildlife Refuge. In the late summer ducks and geese arrive in mass flights which darken the sky over the entire basin. These birds stop over in this area during the fall and spring and when the crops are not yet harvested they cause untold damage. Particularly with barley, they have been known to flatten an entire field of grain in an evening. Much the same tactics are used in this area as are used in the rice fields of the Sacra- mento Valley in trying to scare these birds out of the grain fields. Search- lights and sirens on trucks are used extensively by the large barley producers in an attempt to keep the geese and ducks out of the fields. .31 y^tft' -iwtf . . 81 efjcl total ■ 'I'll rfpn^i -tit St'l I M tcii*?-- vfi^a^ bnu sbs>sV? rci Mn eqc-r: 5* Rodents and Deer. — Rodents are plentiful, particularly rabbits, but their damage is slight compared with the wild fowl damage. The deer from surrounding hill country winter in the lava beds to the south but do little damage in that the crops are usually off before they arrive. Plant Diseas es and Insects .— As yet the entire basin is relatively free of plant diseases as is the case with most new agricultural areas. However, con- centrated and continuous planting of the same crop year after year can result in an increase of plant diseases. Virus diseases in potatoes are noticeable in some fields, especially those Where table stock is being grown and no roguing is done. Flea beetles have been observed in the area and dusting is practiced to keep these down. Aphids are the worst spreaders of virus diseases and the extent of virus disease spread could well be attributed to the prevalence of aphids in the field. Requirements of Homesteaders and Method of Allocating Homesteads When a person wishes to homestead in any Reclamation Project he must conform to an established procedure followed in ascertaining the eligibility of appli- cants. First, a notorized application form must be sent in. ?v r ith this must go certain other information as follows ;V (1) Certification from the bank or other financial agency familiar with the applicant's financial status that the applicant has $2,000 in liquid assets (cash or equipment usually). (2) Three letters as to his character from persons acquainted with the applicant for longer than five years. (3) A certification that the applicant's health is adequate to carry on the tasks of farming in the event the applicant has claimed physical disability. (4) Three letters from persons qualified to vouch for the applicant's farm experience which is to consist of i (a) two-years' experience since the applicant's fifteenth birthday, (b) college degree in agriculture substitutes for one year of experience, (c) other combinations of education and experience are acceptable. (5) Certification of service in the armed forces during World War II if veteran's preference is to be claimed, without which the chance of getting a homestead is small. In addition to this information being filed, a person to be eligible must not have theretofore perfected a homestead entry, or had an entry cancelled for noncompliance with the homestead law. No applications can be accepted before a given area of land is officially declared open to entry. When such official notice is given a deadline is set for the receipt of applications. All applications received prior to the deadline l/ These requirements were met by the two groups who settled since World War II. - For the group to settle in the Spring of 1949 items {?) and (4) will be com- bined necessitating the inclusion of only three (3) letters in total. [j6 Bln^boH -noo *' ra c-trf* (fart? rtc S) Tqt: enj Don! a e^noii .pnot&aTtidmiQO iet(; Orfj. til, 94) 2V 0 «f 0.* f$ \ .! .".flams ex IA jniiqS f»f|j ai &Xjff3» o» quotg ortf no 1 ? ".II ^Irfo to ttoizulonl eii* grriffjffiBZooan benld 6 and within the legal limit are considered as filed simultaneously and are then processed by a local examining board* When all of those meeting the qualifica- tions are determined, a drawing is conducted among those possessing necessary qualifications to select successful applicants for the various farm units. Veterans of World War II are given a 90-day preference period for filing applications for entry under auspices of Ptlblib Lavr 434, 78th Congress, dated September 27, I944j on all farm-unit plan openings of the Bureau of Reclamation, The lands in all of the divisions of the project other than the Tule Lake Division are in private ownership. That portion of the Division not now in pri- vate hands will pass to private ownership when the post World War II homesteaders have "proved up." The last two entries were made in the Spring of 1947 and the Spring of 1948. In the 1946 group 86 were chosen in the drawing out of 1,305 who were found qualified to become homesteaders. All unentered lands in the Tule Lake Division are public lands and are opened to settlement when irrigation works are completed and when adequate flood protection is assured. From 1922, when the first homesteaders entered the area, until 1946, approximately 25,225 acres were settled. A portion of the Tule Lake Division Part" I composed of about 10,000 acres was opened in the period December 1946 to the Spring of 1948. The first opening was of 7,528 acres and went to 86 homesteaders. The remaining 3,522 was opened this winter and provided 44 ad- ditional farms. This was in the Tule Lake Division Part II. As soon as construc- tion is completed on remaining farm areas, plans will be made to open them to homesteaders, with the exception of those lands which are subject to flooding in those years when floods occur. The Bureau of Reclamation has set up a plan for the repayment by homesteaders for the irrigation works. This plan is outlined here roughly. The actual cost as found by an adjustment board appointed by the Secretary of Interior is $100.55 per acre, which rate is announced under provisions of the Extension Act of Au- gust 13, 1914, and would have to be repaid in annual installments extending over a period of twenty years. The Act of May 25, 1926 permits the government to re- duce this cost to $88.35 per acre with payments extending over a period of forty years, without interest, provided the water users will organize an irrigation district and enter into a so-called "Joint Liability Contract" with the United States for the repayment of the reduoed cost of the irrigation works. The lands are being opened to settlement on a water-rental basis and each approved appli- cant agrees when executing his water-rental application to the inclusion of his land in an irrigation district whenever the Secretary of the Interior sets a date for such district organization. An annual operation and maintenance charge is levied on all irrigation lands, the charge varying from year to year depending on the amount of mainte- nance work performed. It is this charge which has been shown at the rate of $3.00 per acre in the cost charts presented below. Size of Farms.— In general the attempt is made to keep the sizes of farms near 80 acres less roads and ditches, however, adjustments are made for better and poorer soils. The following chart shows for the two most recent settlements, the frequency distributions of size of farm, and the mean, mode and range in farm sizes. »9 n&ds one bnei vXarooitdvIumia boin aa ben^bl anoo TJj-JJTTSI tivlb e u6 ar(T' 7. Acres 1946 Settlement Coppeck Bay Settlement (1947-48) 60- 63*9 2 — 64- 67.9 2 — 68- 71.9 3 7 72- 75.9 30 13 76- 79.9 10 6 80- 83,9 3 6 84- 87*9 3 6 88- 91*9 2 1 92- 95.9 2 0 96- 99.9 7 2 100-103*9 4 1 104-107*9 2 1 108-111*9 7 0 112-115.9 3 1 116-119.9 0 MM* 120-123 .9 2 124-127*9 2 128-131*9 0 132-135.9 0 136-139.9 1 140-143.9 1 Mean 87.5 80.0 Mode 74 74 Range 60.8-141.3 68.8-113.2 Source of data; Bureau of Reclamation Ovmership Maps. In the 1946 settlement data the farms of large size are located on the east edge of the basin next to the hills. This is not irrigable, could provide some feed and could be dry farmed if desired. The Coppeok Bay homesteads are more uniform in size because the area is far more uniform in character than is that settled two years ago. The modal size is the same in the two settlements though the mean is dif- ferent. This results from the large number of farms with greater acreage in the 1946 settlement. Purpose and Method of This Survey The over-all objective of this study is to point out the possible factors involved in financial success and to show possible reasons why certain individuals succeed and others fail. Specifically, an attempt has been made to point out the following: 1. Characteristics of the Tule Lake area 2. Characteristics of the Reclamation Project 3. Costs and returns for present crops grown 4. Production and practices involved with these crops 5. Cost, return, production and practices data for possible alternative crops 6. Data in 3, 4, and 5 above in terms of 1935-1939 costs and prices e*sa D 901*1 . >. .• t' ; . . ■<■ • . . . ■ r .. . ■ .. r. (■.-. - • .. . ■ . « tfm>3a«iq ,iol sff^o^gi bos ataoO ,8 ■ r* 8, 7. Desirable rotations 8. Role of livestock in the agriculture of the region 9. The role of tenancy in the division 10. Marketing outlets and facilities Hi Labor conditions and their effects on farm organization 12. Financial needs of settlers for farm and family. Credit facilities 13. Eurnings of farms 14. Conclusions, recommendations, and suggested improvements The basic data were collected in the area primarily from growers. Certain information, because of its character, was of necessity taken from other sources such as weather reports, labor and wage reports, price and production reports, etc. In putting together the cost data actual figures collected in the field were used for current costs but for costs of the years 1935-1939 it was neces- sary to lean heavily on R. L. Adams' Crop Manual (1941 edition). Much of the cost data are based on growers' experience, their answers being the sole source of information since little bookkeeping pertinent to the farming operations could be found. Thus, these financial statements are typical examples of reason- able costs of production put together from information gathered from many pro- ducers. Certain of the items in the tables may need some clarification. The data in the cost tables are taken from the calendars of operation. It is merely put into money terms to get at the cost per acre and per unit. Under the miscella- neous items, taxes have been included universally at the rate of $3/acre. Tfhile the new settlers are not as yet paying taxes, this was included because it is an expense they will have to meet shortly. Management charges were included at the rate of $18/acre for row crops and $9/acre for field crops such as barley and alfalfa. Interest was oharged at the rate of four per cent on $200. The land value was arbitrarily established at $200. per acre realizing that in present times it would sell for more than this amount and has been selling for much more than $200. per acre. Compensation insurance is figured on the wages actually paid out, not on the total wage bill because that portion going to the operator, while it is justifiably charged against the farm business, is not paid in actual cash to the operator each month. The rates on this compensation insurance vary widely from task to task but for the sake of simplicity $1.24/$100. of payroll was used. Equipment costs appear to be very high but where equipment is used for such a short period of time each year and fuel costs are a few cents higher than in more accessible areas, it is not difficult to account for the high per- day rates for operating farm equipment. Production, Practices, Costs and Returns From Present Crops Currently, the list of crops grown in the Tule Lake Division is quite lim- ited primarily because of two factors: (l) the environmental conditions are such as to be a limiting factor in alternative enterprises as discussed earlier; and (2) the outlets for possible alternative crops are undeveloped. Some un- fortunate events have occurred in past years because of these two limitations, particularly the second. In this section, one truck crop and five field crops will be discussed. These are onions, alfalfa, barley, clover, potatoes and sugar beets. These are not the only crops grown but they are the principal cash crops at this time. The cost data here presented are based on conditions prevailing during 1947 for the most part, with, however, certain adjustments of 1948 when 1947 data were lacking. Table 18 contains some interesting figures for comparison with other data contained in this section. Here, prices and earnings pertain ffOiT-JJITf otaj no x sot* 0*1 • • Pi i-i .. .... H bft/3 B^2o0 .1 f . , 9 . to the period 1935-1939 and are offered as more typical of farm earnings than was 1947. Much of the 1935-1939 data has been estimated from other figures because local information was not available. Onions ■While never reaching a position of equal importance with potatoes, barley, or alfalfa as cash crops % onions have been grown for almost two decades. Seldom has there been more than a total of 50 acres planted to onions in any one ;^ear with the exception of the current postwar period. At present there are at best ten persons producing commercial onions with plantings ranging from slightly less than 10 to over 30 acres. Yields in this area vary widely with a low of 175 ninety- two pound sacks to a reported high of 1,052 ninety-two pound sacks which was obtained in 1936. In this same year the average yield was 496 sacks, indicating that very favor- able conditions must have prevailed. Because of this wide variation it is diffi- cult to make a meaningful estimate of the average yield; however, such an average would probably be about 300 to 350 sacks. The climate in the Tule Lake region is suited to onion production. Cool weather early in the growing season and a dry warm period later on favor the production of onions. In addition they are hardy to temperatures several de- grees below freezing. Onions are of the late varieties which require a longer period of warm weather to insure bulb formation. Soil requirements, important in onion production, are met by Tule Lake soils. They are friable enough to permit proper bulb growth, fertile, and for the most part well supplied with humus. Onion soils must be retentive of water near the surface to insure sufficient moisture about the roots. Though soils of the basin fall somewhat short of this requirement, as long as water is available in present quantities the surface can be kept moist. The plants will stand ex- cessive amounts of water with little injury but a. deficient supply causes a great deal of damage in the form of "doubles" or "splits." During the period from early maturity to harvest too much water is undesirable because the keeping qualities decline and the onions tend to become watery. To date there has been little or no fertilization of onions practiced in the basin. This year a few growers are experimenting with 0-10-12 at rates from 250 pounds to 300 pounds applied as side dressing. To the middle of July there was little visible evidence of gains as a result of fertilizer. No nitro- gen is needed as top growth already tends to be too luxuriant. The chief variety is Southport White Globe with a few Red Globes and Yellow Globe Danvers. These are particularly good storage varieties, however, few onions produced in the basin have been stored in recent years. About 90 per cent of the crop is contracted for dehydration by one of two companies. G. 3. Gentry of Gilroy is contracting this year at $1.75 per sack field run while the Basic Dehydration Company of Vacaville is contracting at $2.00 per 100 pounds with the farmer doing the sorting. About 5-7 per cent of dirt, trash, and grade onions is allowed by the dehydrators. They are also furnishing sacks this year and plan to haul from the field with their own trucks, thus eliminating the usual haul by the grower to a siding. None of the onions sold to dehydrators are stored. The other 10 per cent of the crop is sold as market onions to buyers such Is TO I bjfc rrl 10. as Crawford and Wolfe or Levy and Zentner. For these onions, storage is neces- sary, the fees running 10 cents per sack for" 90 to 120 days of storage* While in storage these onions are sorted at an additional average cost of 18 cents per 100 pounds* Tables 1 and 2 set forth examples of a calendar of operations and a cost of producing onions on twenty acres with a yield of 300 ninety- two pound sacks. In the cost data in table 4, certain inclusions need clarifying* The con- tract price for pulling, topping, and sacking varies from 20 cents per sack on good yielding fields to 50 cents on the poorest fields. Contract hauling costs were included because as yet no hauling by the processors from the field has been undertaken. Setting the computed cost of $.749 per ninety- two pound sack against the contracted price of $1.75 per sack in the field, the resultant net return amounts to $1.00 per sack. Figuring 300 sacks per acre would bring a net return of $300.00 per acre or $6,000.00 on twenty acres. If figures are to be obtained for those onions put in storage a cost of 18 cents per sack for sorting and 10 cents for storage must be added to obtain the total cost per 100 pounds. This would be about $1.09 per hundredweight. Alfalfa The acreage planted to alfalfa in the Tule Lake Division has shovm a marked decrease in the last decade. From 1935 to 1939 an average of 5,788 acres was in alfalfa, the largest acreage occurring in 1935 with 7,090 acres. By 1947 the total acreage declined to a 2,922 acres, a drop of almost 50 per cent. Total production dropped from a 1935-1939 average of 22,370 tons to a 1947 tonnage of 11,407. This decrease has been largely due to two factors. First, cash crops such as potatoes and barley have brought such high prices in recent years that many commercial alfalfa producers turned to these crops because of greater re- turns per acre. Also, many farmers using alfalfa in rotations changed to a rotation of barley and potatoes only during the war years or substituted clover in the rotation as a legume because of its high value for seed and its shorter occupancy of the soil. Second, livestock numbers have declined sharply as can^ be seen from viewing the livestock inventory figures presented elsewhere in this report. It is this combination of factors which has been the chief motivating force toward reduction of alfalfa production. Though only two cuttings are usually made per year the yield is high. An over-all average is 4 tons. Those producers growing for the market attempt to get 5 tons from the two cuttings and are often successful. For a 5-ton yield the first cutting will yield 2-3/4 tons, the second producing about 2-1/4 tons per acre. Some attempt a third cutting but there are several objections to this. Of first importance is the fact that a late cutting leaves the plants in too weakened a condition for the coming winter cold, causing considerable winter killing. Also the late irrigation necessitated by a third cutting leaves the ground too wet. For best results through the winter period it is better if the alfalfa planting goes into the winter relatively dry. Those who do not cut three times generally pasture off the last cutting. New plantings are made in a variety of ways. The two most common methods are (l) to plant under barley and harvest a barley crop the first year, and (2) to plant under an oat hay crop the first year. In recent years the most fre- quently followed of these methods was the planting with barley due to the high -Of o A. . • .1 i >9s , anoino oearltf io1 .tost&no^ bna yyod 10 •Jaoo 9,nai«>vfi tsstoltlbbt na 9b bsiioa Ml ar • *aoo s boe Bnoitfaioqo lo TSbfie£i3o a lo eeXqitiaxs rtf-icl .tea S bna X e^XdaT .aSoaa hr.aoq ow*-Y*?rfin..005 lo blotcy fl ddiw 3310a \9how9 no snoxno gniouboiq lo -noo &dT ♦gr/x?.MflX.o bsen arioisi/Joni nia;He» oXdach ni ecfab *aoo eri* ni no afoea i^q e*noo OS fRonl aeinav anjtafoaa bna «§niqqo* ^rtilli/q not soiiq 9oend a*8oo SnH^ri to^nod .ebXoil ^snooq erf* no 8*neo 05 o* abXail gnibXslv boo 8 t *on jhnatf-Xuaen orfi t bXo.iT srfif nl Sasrtoq ^nii>f bXuow cjio-j noq aioaa 'OOS' aniioai 1 ! , >tnbf£yri ioq eo.Xfc . dyoda otf bXuow a 17 o'rf* rti all alXa o* becfasXq,. ega-anaa oifT qonb a ,39-ioa SSe»S « o* bertiXoeb 9aae*ioa Xa*od -1 ',9 ^A9 Q9 ^n-iu9 : t"ror>e^oiq.^I,m.B rrtiiiWH I' • " ? •• ^^V».W^I»w. , SaHtf-W9.'rt'i ^ftaift.'.da'.XA. .jve^. * -*S V- 3 TCIT^' brfi! b*T«»R «tf\^ 0*1 f rsn^ r» I. Alt '-Av «Xr*A^ # r» J.'U ' _ . I /xq;l*3/t~ P- r ii^i.iQSj^. .-!/-V« l Jf>" io'i . .XulsaDo«i.« rttsdi-o &t* •Vna'-fcaiii^Q bw*" (ji^jmi . eo^.«|.^M oXefaq ioi3l erf* ai son uifH*p. '.inb jpXayi^f^-W^wian^i*.,^ ii^4j^i^3* l7'n»*Sd i>jp. ;to{r ob - -wtl fsof .cna-jv, ^ .-.^»^ .mft «» qdifg #aa na -xobiju innXq oi - li^iti-e^i 09 Vi/fir.xeXtad- rf*i*r %4t£>iq- arict 'aaV ■'ebdri^era ©a^nl* lo bowoXXol Yl^neup TABLE l Calendar of Operations for Onions (20 Acres with 300-92 Pound Sacks Yield) Crew and equipment Physical requirements , Labor Dates Operations Men I Tractor Equipment Acres per 9 hr. day Man days I Man days Tractor,; Truck j operator days I days works required^ ! Man days hired April 1-17 April 3-19 April 6-22 April 8-24 April 10-26 April 12- April 28 April 18- Hay 4 April 20- May 6 April 30- May 16 May 20- June 6 September 20- October 6 September 30- October 16 Plowing 'Disking (2X) Harrowing (2X) Dragging (2X) Making beds Preirrigation Rolling beds Planting Run ditches Irrigation (4X) Pre-emergent spray Sinox spray Weeding (hand)(2X) Cultivating (3X) Lifting Pulling, topping, sacking Hauling to siding 1M 1M 1M 1M 1M 2M 1M 1M 1M 2M 1M 1M 10M 1M 1M 20T 20T 20T 20T 20T 20T 14T 20T 14T 14T 14T 20T Piece work Contract i 3-14" 8' d.d. 12' spike h. 12' drag 3-row lister 12' wooden r. 4-row planter V-ditcher Sprayer Sprayer 4-row cultivator Bean knife on cultivator 8.0 20.0 30.0 20.0 27 .0 10.0 23.0 15.0 10.0 45.0 45.0 ig:-o 8.0 20.0 2.5 2.0 1.3 2.0 .75 4.0 1.3 .4 16.0 .4 .4 40.0 7.5 1.0 2.5 ! I 2.0 i j 1.3 2.0 ; i »?5| .9 1.3 .4 .4 7.5 1.0 2.5 2-0 1.3 2.0 ► 75 2.0 .9 1.3 .4 8.0 .4 .4 7.5 1.0 2.0 8.0 40.0 V ; i > ! Ont-f TAfffOt Beau KUTte °B I T r 'V i jtJfsqf lib (psruq)(cx) JOH 2bX»(?A6J. ?f>t?J 90- - TW 1 Ttfl y t? G ■ •yb|-| J so- jltjiikfiov (fx) ynp qjfcpea f i il^ 1 * ybx/jj jft- : • .- » ". . .. . • ; « - • i • ; « * f". tfblJT $-SS '. . ' . " -. . - ! • 3F *? " • Vbx-TT J-TA { " ' ■ ■ *0 c * ' "* * ■ « i TABLE 2 Onion Ccsts (20 Acres 300-92 Pound Sacks/Acre) (Compiled July-August, 1948) gallons $3.70/gallon nox at Materials Seed-3pound/acre at $3.40/pound treated Oil spray— 60 gallons/acre at $12.85/100 Sinox selective spray--l£ gallon/acre at Sulphate of ammonia-3 pounds/acre with si &0.265/pound Water-$3/acre Miscellaneous Taxes-$3/acre Management-$18/acre Interest-4 per cent of $200 Compensation insurance Growers Association dues Total cost Cost per acre Cost per hundredweight (5,520 hundredweight) Cost per 92-pound sack (6,000) 204.00 154.20 111.00 1.59 60.00 60,00 360.00 160.00 4.71 20.00 Days Rate/hr . Total . Labor Tractor driver 20.45 $1.25 \ ! 230.06 Irrigating 20.00 1.00 180.00 Weeding 40.00 .85 306.00 £ 716.06 Tractor Rate/day 20 H.P. wheel 10.85 13.78 149.51 14 H.P. wheel 9.6 9 .64 92 .54 Equipment 5.80 3-14" plow 2,5 2.32 8' double disk 2.0 3.28 6.56 12' spike harrow 1.3 .74 .96 12' drag 2.0 .10 .20 3-row lister .75 8.74 6.56 12' wooden roller .9 .35 .32 4-row planter 1.3 3.45 4.48 Sprayer .8 4.15 3.32 4-row cultivator 8.5 2.18 18.53 V-ditcher .4 6.85 2.74 49.47 Contract and piece work Pulling, topping, sacking-30 cent/sack 1,800,00 2,352.00 Hauling-$2/ton (276 ton) 552.00 530.79 604.71 4,495.08 224.75 .814 .749 9 ('9ioA\s'io3Z bnuol 2R ra-7. 60»0£2 $ 2S,X$ 2*. OS i9vxib ioJobiT 00.08X 00. I 00. OS gniJaginl xc,eti 8?.£i ea.oi ison* .i.h os 55i e. fiil-ot fiaboow 'Si • 62.81 81. S 2«8 fT . toJfivitluo woi-J^ .■ . 00,008., X _ to^sVrtso OS-sniiosa .gniqqoi ,sniXXu<3 00/S22 • " : . 1 *! 1 (aoi d?S) noJASg-aniluaH OO.^OS baJjBai* bnuoq\0i>.£jf aio&\bauoq£-b9a2 0S.£.2X , : .* SfioXXas Q0X\28.3Xf t& atofiXanoXXas 08— ^eiqa ffC 00:iXX noXXMOT.Si ^4 9lCB\noXj>a £X~*siqa avij-'oaXsa xoni2 92«'X ' : • . ' ice 3 nuoq -sinomnis lo ejflrtq .-. . .. . . • .fis.uD nozfsfio o&sA. • e'tswoiO. "' '" " ' ' Je'oo Xje^of " .... ..... ..... . .. . taq JeoO TABLE 3 to Calendar of Operations for Alfalfa (20 Acres with 4-Ton Yield) Mature Stand 1 Orew and equipment Physical requirements Labor required Dates 1 Operations Men i | l Tractor Equipment Here s per 9 hr . day Man days Tractor days Truck days Man days operator works Man days hired May 1-30 Repair ditches 1M t 20T V-ditcher • 5 .5 .5 June 1 Irrigate 2M 10 a r, 4.0 2.0 2 .0 June 25- Jul v S V Li J. J( *J 1M 20T 7' mower 1 A 1.43 1.43 1.43 July 6 Baking 1M 20T Side del. 12 1.67 1.67 1.67 f y 1 1L. \J\J~ July 10 Baling 3M 20T 2 wire pickup baler 12 5.0 • 1.67 1.67 3.33 July 2-12 Hauling Contract July 20 Irrigate 2M 10 4.0 2.0 2.0' September 1- 10 Mowing 1M 20T 7( mower 14 1.43 1.43 1.43 September 2- 11 . Raking f . 1M 20T Side del . r . • 12 1.67 1.67 1.67 September 6- 15 Baling 3M 20T 2 wire pickup baler 12 5.0 1.67 1.67 3.33 September 8- 17 Hauling Cc mtract — — — _ _ ;.\-V ■%>.-• ■ ■ : ■ »*0" 1 •".'JiW-'W''' ten ■ 14. prices for barley. Prom the standpoint of the alfalfa it is probably a little better to plant with oats (for hay) because the oats mature earlier, leaving a longer period of growth for the alfalfa before cold weather sets in. Also, oats do not grow as close as barley and the young alfalfa plants enjoy more light and air than when under barley. Currently about half of the alfalfa produced in the basin is fed locally, the other half being shipped to western Oregon dairy regions such as Coos Bay and Tillamook. All of the alfalfa shipped to outside areas is sold f,o,b. car at either Tule Lake or Hatfield (four miles north of Tule Lake on the state line). This procedure eliminates storage, freight, and insurance charges. Insurance is taken out on any alfalfa left in the fields or put in barns for feeding purposes. Almost all of the alfalfa grown is the common or Chilean alfalfa. TJhile this variety is not in itself too hardy to winter cold it tends to develop char- acteristics of cold resistance when grown continually in a northern region. For this reason it is considered good practice to purchase seed from an area with similar climatic conditions to Tule Lake. Grimm alfalfa has been suggested for this area because of its superior hardiness but it suffers if bacterial wilt is prevalent. Ladak alfalfa has also been mentioned as a possible variety for the basin. It is an extremely hardy and drought-resistant variety and has the fur- ther advantage of being somewhat resistant to bacterial blight. A calendar of operations for alfalfa is set up in table 3. on a twenty-acre mature stand yielding five tons per acre. This is based An example of the cost involved in establishing an alfalfa stand of twenty acres is contained in table 4. All costs for land preparation except land planing and check establishment are borne by the nurse crop. TABLE 4 Expense of Establishing an Alfalfa Stand of 20 Acres (Data as of July-August 1948) Land planing (20 acres per day) Labor— 9 M/H at $1.25 Tractor — 9 hrs. at $1.53 8-60 land plane — 9 hrs. at $.76 Seeding Seed — 10 pounds/acre at $.65/pound Seed attachment on drill--l day at $.82 Irrigation (fall) 4 M/D at $1.00/hr. Total cost Cost per acre 11.25 13.77 13.68 130.00 1.64 36,00 $38.70 131.64 36,00 j $206.34 J $ 10.32 ! The cost of producing a ton of alfalfa on the 20 acres yielding 4 tons has been calculated in table 5 . .. .1*5 15. TABLE 5 An Example of the Cost of Alfalfa Production (Compiled July-August 1948) Days Kate/ nr . l otai Labor Tractor driver 10 .1 $110 .DO Irrigation o .0 l on J. .UU / c. . UU Baler 6 .7 1 .00 60 .00 * .„ . ' ' ' b to »2 feM '•• • •' ' ■ - • • ! '' ' ' . - -i i , ..... ' ? " »•'. ■ \ •'. ' - i-.. , . - ' > ■ • ■: - • ^ M ■ kvkr ■>■ 1 s, ■ ■ • - • . • , ' ' ' ' " ' ' ' ■ •• • „ ' ^ '• '•" "- • • •:■ ■, > . . ,r ' 3 • ■ : '"■ ••••• • ■•* - • • •..>.-? • ■ •i ! •' . !• •••• , 17. airplane spraying with 2,4-D in that the spray tends to drift and often injures plants such as potatoes and sugar beets in nearby fields. Third, almost all of the harvesting on the smaller places is contracted out. T/hen the harvest sea- son arrives, many small pusher type combines are brought in to harvest the crop. Many farmers complain that these contract machines go too fast in heavy grain, resulting in losses from grain going over with the straw. Several new elevators are under construction at the present time, two of which are to be ready for use by this fall. The largest, Archer-Daniels-Midland, has a capacity of 270,000 bushels and is located at Stronghold. The other is about two miles south of Stronghold and is an Anheuser-Busch establishment. Table 6 is a model calendar of operations for a barley enterprise of 80 acres. This shows the app roximate dates for various operations, crews and equipment and work rates. a?-? ■ to I MM ??t\i til Hfflw 5mv«iqe '.-vT- f 5v j -. LfffcftB ~ ■ l "tit i : . H'bna fx$6d$k&ii?* ~;<* iiitiiii "'ia Lilt- Jwrrf ■ ■. ■ ■ -J I ■ . .-• , • •*.••'•' • ' ' :•.•-...•;•» •. ■•-!>■.■ TABLE 6 Calendar of Operations for Barley (80 acres) Crew and equipment Acres Physical Labor required per requirements Man days Man Dates Operations Men Tractor Equipment 9 hour day Man days Tractor days Truck days operator works days hired April 1-14 Establish borders Run ditches Irrigating (pre) 1M ±M 1M 20T POT Disk ridger V-ditcher « 3 .5 7.0 E .5 .5 K •V 7.0 * April 21- May 7 Disking (2X) Harrowing (2X) 1M 1M 20T 20T 8" tandem d^ 4 section 12' h.. 22 30 8.0 5.3 8.0 5^3 8.0 5.3 May 7-15 Seeding 1M 20T 10' drill d.d. 27 3.0 3.0 3.0 June 7-21 Spraying (contract) Sept. 15- Oct. 15 Harvesting and hauling (contract). i 19. Approximate costs involved in producing barley have been computed and are shown in table 7. The results in this table must be interpreted as results obtained from similar tables. TABLE 7 Barley Costs (80 Acres - Average Yield of 32.16 Hundredweight) (Compiled July-August,, 1948) Days Rate/h r. Totals I Tractor driver 17.3 $ 1.25 $194.63 ! Irrigating 7.0 1..00 63.00 | 1 257 .63 Tractor Rat e / day 20 H.P. wheel 17.3 13.78 238 . 29 238 .29 j Equipment 1 Disk ridge r .,5 V-ditcher ►5 6.85 3.42 j 8' tandem disk 8.0 3.28 26 ..24 12' harrow 5.3 ;74 3.92 1 1 ; 10* drill (d.d.) 3,,0 10.90 32.70 68 .03 (Contract i Amount Cost/unit 1 o aa HB.T*TTPS - hi tup find Vifml i nir 0 fiPiO entire • oo Ql A AA l , U ((J AA • UU Materials I 1 Irrigation water 80 acres 3.00 240.00 I Seed 115 pounds/acre 6.15/cwt.. 565.80 1 Sacks 2,200 272.50/1 ,000 599.50 1 Twine 12 pounds 1.85 22.20 1,427 .50 ' Miscellaneous i Taxes 240 ..00 i Management 720.00 i 1 Insurance--. 1 .45 per $100 at $150 per acre 54.00 1 Interest — 4 per cent of $200 640.00 j Growers assessment 12.00 1,666 .00 Total cost 4,727 .45 Cost per acre 59 .09 Cost per 100 pounds (2,573 hundredweight) 1 .84 This indicates that if barley sold for $4,85 per hundredweight and cost only $1.84 per hundredweight then the grower would net $3,01 per hundredweight. On 80 acres yielding 30 hundredweight per acre this would mean a net return of $7,224. over and above the return for the operator's labor,, management activi- ties,, and return on his investment. *■ 9 20. Clover One of the two important legumes used for rotations in the Tule Lake area, clover has steadily increased in acreage in the last decade. It has become popular particularly because of the shorter period of land occupancy as compared with alfalfa, however, many farmers feel the two years in legumes is not long enough and therefore favor alfalfa. Of the legume seed crops tried in this area, clover is most important both in acreage and net returns per acre. Alsike is the principal variety grown because of its hardiness and good yield. Some Strawberry Clover is grown but the price fluctuates through wider extremes than does Alsike. Yields for clover seed average about 6.5 bushels per acre or nearly 400 pounds. The lowest yield reported since 1935 was about 250 pounds, but yields as high as 15 bushels or 900 pounds per acre are on record. This year's crop appears to be in excellent shape (with the exception of a few weedy fields) and is expected to produce 450 or more pounds per acre. As with alfalfa, clover is planted with a nurse crop of barley, or less frequently with oats. VJhen the crop is harvested the straw is raked off and the clover irrigated once before winter. If oats are used and cut for hay, the straw problem is reduced and the clover gets an increased growth before winter. The weed problem in clover fields is frequently serious because the weeds germinate and grow faster than the clover. Some farmers lessen weed damage by clipping the stand back to seven or eight inches in the early part of June. This process retards the weed growth long enough to allow the clover to come up and smother out the weeds. There are some very clean clover fields in their second year because of proper management. For commercial clover seed this is important because such seed must be free from weed seed if it is to bring a fair market price. Weed seed can be taken out with cleaning and recleaning but these operations not only add to the costs of production, but lessen the quality and thus decrease the selling price. Table 8 shows the calendar of operations for 20 acres of clover yielding 400 pounds per acre. Some of the operations shown are for the barley crop used as a nurse crop. ■ In the cost data of table 9 the costs of land preparation have been borne by the barley crop rather than by the clover crop. Only the costs of clover production are included in this table. If we take the costs involved in the first year over and above the costs with which the barley crop was charged, this net difference could be referred to as the cost of establishing the stand. Taking this amount and charging it off over the two years the clover is planted, would give a cost table such as table 10. ■ - ; - : i ... / . j ■ • •J A TABLE 8 CM Calendar of Operations - Clover (20 Acres) 1 Dates M r\ v» 'i + "i /-\ m (~i upcrsti-io ns ( f\ tit A H% *4 epuipmc n l per 9 hr. /-loir Physical requirements Labor reauired l : - Men i ra,c lo r EouiDment Man days Tractor days Truck days Man days Operator worxs Man days hired, . A nt> i1 "I 1/1 TP S3 r ) ( ■ ■ ■ • ■ — ' 1 S r ' •<.- 22. TABLE 9 Alsike Clover Costs*/ (20 Acres - 400 Pounds/Acre) (Compiled July-August, 1948) Days Rate/hr. Total Labor iraci/or ariver 9.7 $1.25 $109-, 13 Irrigating 9.0 1.00 81,00 Harvesting 5.0 1.25 56,25 $246.36 1 ractor Rate/day 141 wneel 9.7 9.64 93,51 93.51 £i(juipmenu 1 2 ' dump rake .7 4.70 3.29 6 ' mowe r 4.0 4.29 17.16 6 ' combine 5.0 11.80 59,00 79,45 Materials Seed — 8 pounds/acre at 50 cents 80.00 uax»er*»—«jpo/ tic re 60,00 oacics— ou at; ou cents 40.00 180.00 Miscellaneous Taxes 60.00 Management 180..00 Interest — 4 per cent of $200 160.00 Insurance (fire) — 45 cents/$100 at $150/acre 13.50 Compensation insurance — $4-. 20/$100 payroll 2.36 Growers Association dues— 15 oents/ 'acre 3.00 418,86 Total expenses $1,018.20 Cost per acre 50.91 Cost per 100 pounds 12.72 Cost per bushel 7. 62 a/ Expense of establishing stand borne by nurse barley crop. 23. TABLE 10 Clover Costs (including Depreciation of Stand) Days Rate/hr . Total Labor Tractor driver 9.0 $ 1.25 $101,25 Irrigating 9.0 1.00 81.00 £238.50 Harvesting 5.0 1.25 56.25 Tractor Rate/day 14T wheel 9.0 9.64 86.76 86.76 Equipment 6' mower 4.0 4.29 17 .16 6' combine 5.0 11.80 59.00 " 76.16 Material Water 60.00 Sacks 40.00 100.00 Miscellaneous Taxes 60.00 Management 180,00 Interest 160.00 Insurance (fire) 13.50 Compensation insurance 2.36 Growers Association dues 3.00 464.70 Depreciation—Cost of $91 ,68--lif e of two years 45.84 Total Cost per acre Cost per 100 pounds Cost per bushel 966.12 48.31 12.08 7.25 .oaaaA Brti-iwcj 24. Potatoes The production of potatoes is the second most important cash crop enter- prise in the Tule Lake Division* While the acreage of other crops has increased many times over due largely to the increased area of land reclaimed and home- steaded, the proportion of the acreage planted to potatoes has held fairly con- stant over the years, but with a marked decline in 1947. The average acreage planted to potatoes from 1935 through 1939 was 8,000 acres but in 1947 the total declined to 4,547 acres* In total value the potato crop compares more favorably with barley* Last year's potato crop was valued at $2j 251,843. as compared with the value of the barley crop of $2,649,759. Both seed potatoes and commercial potatoes are produced. Almost every farmer in the basin raises potatoes in rotation. This is probably due to the high yields of high quality potatoes. Though the season is short, a crop is made every year even when unseasonable heavy frosts occur as was the case in 1947, The soil is ideal for potatoes, especially in the northern portion toward Malin, in that it is peatty, well drained, fertile, and remains porous during the growing season. The crop is a late one in this district, the majority of the potatoes be- ing shipped from September through May. Table 11 shows the pattern of shipping for the years 1935-1939. TABLE 11 Carlot Shipments of Potatoes From Tule Lake, 1935-1939. Month 1935 1936 1937 1938 1939 January 58 33 181 284 1 212 February 49 116 85 160 243 March 61 185 178 172 372 April 37 64 86 186 217 May 7 4 52 133 150 June 1 47 July 1 August 1 September 28 10 60 17 36 October 58 156 58 96 136 November 47 213 81 140 93 ; December 53 158 215 149 91 j Total 398 939 996 1,338 1,599 : : Source of data: California, Arizona and Nevada Carlot Shipments of Important Fruits and Vegetables. U.S.D.A. Agri- cultural Marketing Service, 1935-1939. This shows that almost the entire crop is stored for some part of the winter, the longest storage period being about nine months. This storage is mostly in potato cellars located along the railroad sidings, although some farmers have cellars on their own property. In addition, buyers such as Levy and Zentner, Crawford and Wolfe, and others maintain storage facilities. > bssneyionf sri* ot v.X«S"tflI o^b tpto aaar!;* vam f^T ii tl T Q"^ In 3 » < "ana VV{,M 25 The principal varieties of commercial potatoes grown in the basin are White Rose, Netted Gem, and Burbank. VJhite Rose occupies the greatest acreage but many other varieties are produced in small quantities, particularly for seed purposes. The Netted Gem is well adapted to the cool climate but the corky exterior of the tuber is not deemed as desirable as the smooth- skinned White Rose. Because of the nature of the soil, few of the potatoes have to be washed prior to marketing. This is especially true of those potatoes grown in the southern portion of the basin where the soil is lighter and whiter. Some po- tatoes grown in the northern portion in the darker soils are washed. An example of a calendar of operations for commercial potatoes, sometimes referred to as table stock, as opposed to seed stock, is presented in table 12. Attention is called to the fact that no allowance is made for the operations of roguing or inspecting as is done with seed stock. To determine the cost of pro ducing seed potatoes such operations would have to be included and current wage for roguing obtained. Generally, a field must be covered three times by a roguing crew and inspected three times at intervals during the growing season. Tables 12 and IS are computed on the basis of table stock only. Comparing the results obtained in table 13 with potato price data for the area shows the following relationships. Using the support price of .*>2«25 per hundredweight and the cost per hundredweight as computed to be $1.48 indicates a net return per hundredweight of $.77. Figured on an acre basis with a 300- sack yield the net return would be $231.00 per acre. .as .bs < no ■ sj I m TABLE 12 CM Calendar of Operations - Potatoes (20 Acres) Crew and equipment Acres Physical requirements ijauor rec ■111 V* A n per Man days Man 9 hr. Man Tractor Truck operator days Date Operations Men Tractor Equioment day days days days works hired April 15- May 1 Plow 1M 20T 3-14" plow 10.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Disk 1M 20T 8' d.d. 20.0 1.0 . 1.0 1.0 Harrow 1M 20T 10' s. tooth 24.0 .8 .8 .8 May 1-15 Cutting and dipping By 1 ,he hundred- seed weight May 15 Planting and 2-row planter fertilizing 2M 14T and fertilizer 10-0 4.0 2.0 2»0 2.0 attach. Cultivating 1M 14T 2 row 10.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Ridging 1M 14T 10.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Cultivating 1M 14T 10.0 2.0 2.0 2 .0 i Ridging 1M 14T 10.0 2.0 2.0 i Irrigating (6X) 3M 14.0 4.7 9.3 ! ! J uiy id Wee ding 11.0 11.0 ! Digging 1M 14T 2-row digger 6.0 2.3 3.3 3.3 Picking up By the sack Hauling to cellar By the hundred- weight Taking out of cellar; ."■ washing, grading, By the hundred- packing and load- weight ing — — i .... ■:M-> M IB 27, Based on a 20-acre field yielding 300 sacks, the following cost table has been prepared. TABLE 13 Potato Costs (20 Acres--300 Sacks/Acre) (Compiled July-August, 1948) Days Rate/hr . Total Labor I Tractor driver 17.1 $1.25 $ 192.38 Cutting seed .50/cwt. 160.00 1 1 Dipping seed . 25/ cwt . 80 1 00 Irrigation 14.0 1.00 126.00 i Planting 2.0 1.25 22.50 Weeding 11.0 .85 84.15 $ 665.03 Rate/day Tractor 20T wheel 3i8 13.78 52»36 14T wheel 13.3 9i64 128.21 180.57 Equipment Plow 3-14" 2..0 2.32 4.64 Disk 8' double 1.0 3.28 3.28 Harrow 10' spring tooth .8 . 1.58 1.26 Planter 2 row 2 .0 3.45 6.90 Fertilizer attachment 2.0 . 1.44 2.88 Cultivator 2 row 8 .0 . 1.26 10.08 Digger 3.3 4.65 15.35 44.39 Contract Amount Cost/unit Total Picking up 300 s/a .10 600.00 j Hauling to cellar 300 s/a ,08 480.00 . Taking out of cellar, grading, (.18 + .5) . j . - j loading 300 s/a .23 1,380.00 2,460.00 j Materials^' Seed 16 cwt./a 5.00 1,600.00 Corrosive sublimate 2£ oz. 4,00 12,60 1 Water 3. 00 /a 60.00 i Field sacks 500/a .05 500,00 Fertilizer 16-20-0 400 lb. /a $'83/ton 332,00 2,504.60 1 Miscellaneous Taxes 60.00 Management 360.00 Interest — 4 per cent of $2.00 160.00 Storage-- .10/hundredweight 600 . 00 Compensation insurance — $1. 24/1100 of $190.35 2.36 Inspection — .02/hundredweight 120.00 Growers assessment — $l/acre 20.00 1 ,322.36 Total cost 7,176.95 Cost per acre 358.85 Cost per hundredweight 1.20 ! j a/ Buyer furnishes the sacks usually. If support price is used, sacks are not in- cluded which would bring the cost up to $1 .48/hundredweight . .woliol ••'•vV I JO. • I '-.ftrrViS"' H isq Jaw -.v- 28. Sugar Beets This crop was introduced into the basin on an experimental basis in 1937, but was not grown commercially until the following year. Early successes caused an expansion of acreage with some reduction during the last two seasons. Currently the acreage planted to sugar beets has fallen off due to the high prices being paid for barley and other crops. Last year there were 2,030 acres planted and harvested but this year only slightly more than 400 acres are ex- pected to be harvested. Yearly average tonnages run from 13 to 16-g- tons per acre, according to local growers, with a low yield of 8 tons reported and a high of 20 tons. The Bureau of Reclamation publishes the figure of 11#2 tons as the average yield computed from two seasons' records. This figure may be low in light of information ob- tained from growers and the Spreckels representative at Tule Lake. Beets pro- duced here are small compared to those of other areas but the sugar content consistently averages very close to 18 per cent. Because of the texture of the soil, rolling of the land both prior to seed- ing and after seeding is a common practice though some roll only once. This is done to firm the seedbed and to keep the seed from blowing out of the soil. Cer- tain plantings this year are quite spotty because of wind which blew prior to the time the seed had sprouted and become established. Another practice which is gaining where possible, is the irrigating by subbing. At present about 50 per cent of the beets are irrigated by furrows and the other 50 per cent either subbed or sprinkled. Subbing is all right provided drainage is adequate to carry off the water as soon as the water has risen to the desired height. Some follow the practice of digging a hole in the middle of the field where they can check on the height of the water table. If drainage is poor, subbing is dangerous because of the tendency of the tap roots to rot if they are kept too wet. This in turn causes the beets to send out numerous small roots laterally and to fail to size properly. Bedding is not practiced to any extent in the Tule Lake Division, Only about 5 per cent of the beets are bedded up, the remainder being planted or flattened. The practice of fertilizing is increasing. Sugar beets have usu- ally been planted following potatoes and thus received better than half of the benefit of the fertilizer applied to the potatoes. This is still being prac- ticed but in addition three types of fertilizers are being used. None are heavy in nitrogen because top growth is already abundant. Those used are: 3-10-12, 5-10-10, and 0-10-12, all at the rate of 250 pounds/acre. Before fertilizing on a given farm it would be wise to discuss the individual fertilizer problem with the County Agent. Beets produced in this area are shipped to the Spreckels refinery at Wood- land for processing. Part of the cost of shipping is borne by the grower and part by the refinery. Last season the total cost of shipping beets was $2.15 per ton, the grower paying $.75 (little more than one third) while the refinery paid $1.40. To aid growers in the production of beets, Spreckels has a representative in the basin. Mr. Clarke Fensler, a homesteader and grower himself, has been their field representative for several years. An example of the operations performed in the production of sugar beets is shown in table 14. Rolling has been included twice, once before planting to firm the bed and once after planting to insure a tight bed and to cut down on loss of stand from wind damage. .83 -do vfol ©d . --b^se o:t noJfiq *dd . a 2 . aid? .enao \ "hrra gni boa. b:^ , ■•-'•'■6& •oJntbps'b'e pf ;3ijQrfo,ssrsb'" t |Ia a.j[ galdduS- v.^oi^rii-tqV-te -E f s.y ?d od* .oganrab bnxw moil b« J*3 TABLE 14 Calendar of Operations - Sugar Beets (20 Acres) Yield of 12 Tons Dates 1 Operations Crew and equipment Acres per 9 hr. day Physical requirements Labor required | Men Tractor Equipment Han days Tractor davs i 1 Truck days; Man days operator works Man days hired March 20-25 ! Chiseling 1M 20 T 1 2-6' .9 : .9 q March 25-31 Plowing 1H 20 T 3-14 * 8.0 2.5 2.5 A. o J April 1-7 Disk and harrow (2X) its 20 T 10' d.d. COm\J 1.6 1.6 1.6 10 1 spike Ap rx i. i»u JjtillQ pi tint; hi 20 T T J 1 Land plane 25.0 o . o Q • o Q .o Jvprii i.lom uen.peef 2*Q .*"o ,• i !••'■•; 1*1 : ... . - \ T*T - * j i • • ': • - T • v ' i • * • 1 ■ ; • ; * • ■ | T* *• 1 J;.^fc.;.l',-. - " ■ • ' .; 30 ♦ A budget of costs of producing 20 acres of sugar beets yielding 12 tons to the acre is illustrated in table 15, TABLE 15 Sugar Beet Costs (20 Acres--12 Tons/Acre) (Compiled July-August, 1948) Days Rate/hi Total Labol 4 Tractor driver Irrigation j Weeding and thinning : Digging jTractor ! 20 H.P. wheel ; 14 H.P. wheel jEquipment Chisel 2-6' Plow 3-14" 10' double disk 10' spike harrow Land plane 4-row planter V-ditcher 4-row cultivator Fertilizer attachment 12' roller (wooden) Contract Hauling — 75 cents/ton + 2g- cents/ton mile haul) Marbeet harvester (l row) — $7/acre 'Materials j Seed-5 pounds/acre at $,45/pound ; Water — $3/acre Fertilizer--250 pounds 3-10-12 at $68/ton Miscellaneous Freight charge — 75 cents/ton to Woodland (Company pays other $1.40/ton) Taxes — $3/acre Interest— 4 per cent of $200 Management Compensation insurance Growers association dues Total cost Cost per acre Cost per ton 15.8 $1.25 $177.75 5»0 1.00 45.00 60.0 ♦'85 459.00 4.0 1.25 45.00 $726*75 Rate/day 12.3 13.78 169.49 3.5 9.64 33.74 203.23 .9 4.42 3.98 2.5 2.32 5.80 1.6 3.48 5.57 2.4 .60 1.44 .8 15.00 12.00 1.3 3.45 4,48 .4 6.85 2.74 2.2 2.18 4.80 1.1 1.44 1.58 1.3 • .35 .46 42.85 (2-mile 192.00 140.00 45.00 60.00 170.00 180.00 60,00 160,00 360.00 6.25 20.00 332.00 275.00 786.26 ,366.08 118.30 9.86 This reveals that the cost per acre was $118.30 while records taken from the Bureau of Reclamation histories indicate a return on 15 tons to be $179,06 (approxi mately $143.25 with a yield of 12 tons). This indicates a net return per acre of $24.95. On a per ton basis the net return would be &2.08. I. I ■ 1 1 • *' .OS •A- v 1« 0.6 f3 .vv 80,d3£, . H 34.. TABLE 18 Alfalfa Costs 1935-1939 (80 Tons) Days s\ irftuiur urivcr 10. 1 $ 2»50 $ 25.25 Irrigation 8.0 2. 50 20.00 Baler crew 6.7 3.00 20.10 Tractor 20 H.P. wheel 10.1 11.10 112.11 Kfliji rvm prif V-ditcher .5 c • 10 2.55 7' mower 2.7 A OO 4. 28 11.56 Side delivery rake 10' 3.4. A OA 4.80 16.32 2 wire pickup baler 3.4 18.90 64.26 Contract Hauling— $1.25/ton 100.00 M ate rials Water— $1.80/ac re 36.00 ivire— ~ 7. Oft) SSfil etftr>3 allot/ A . - fn 1 • 35. TABLE 19 Barley Costs 1935-1939 (80 Acres - 32.16 Hundredweight Yield) Days Rate/day~ Total Labor Tractor driver Irrigating Tractor 20 H.P, wheel Equipment Disk ridger V-ditcher 8' tandem disk 12' narrow 10' drill Contract Harvesting and hauling- 17.3 7.0 17.3 .5 .5 8.0 5.3 3.0 $ 2.50 2.50 11.10 3.45 5.10 3.84 .69 12.90 $4.00 acre harvesting $1.20/ton hauling 128.5 tons Materials Water— $1 . 80/acre Seed — 115 pounds/acre at Sacks— 2,200 at 10 cents Twine — 12 pounds at 90 cents ..05 Miscellaneous Taxes — $3/acre Management — $4.70/acre Interest — 4 per cent of $100 Total cost Cost per acre Cost per 100 pounds (2,573 hundredweight) $ 43.25 17.50 192.03 1.72 2.55 30.72 3.65 38.70 320.00 154.20 144.00 96.60 220.00 10.80 240.00 376.00 320.00 $2,211.72 27.65 .8 : 3J6A? — ■- P*£g«^«Jty >, rr — r- 6/W , ct* 1 -. afw TABLE 20 Clover Costs 1935-1939 (20 Acres - 400 Pound/Acre Yield) 36. Days Rate/day Total Labor Tractor driver 9.0 Irrigating 9.0 Harvesting 5.0 Tractor 14 T wheel 9.0 Equipment 6 1 mower 4 . 0 6' combine 5.0 Materials Water— $1.80/acre Sacks — 80 at 10 cents Miscellaneous Taxes— $3/acre Management — $4 . 70/acre Interest — 4 per cent of |100 Insurance (fire) Depreciation — first cost $22— life 2 years Total cost Cost per acre Cost per 100 pounds Cost per bushel $2.50 • 2.50 3.00 7.42 4.28 10.40 $22.50 22.50 15.00 66.78 17.12 52.00 36.00 8.00 60.00 94.00 80.00 7.50 11.00 499.40 24.97 6.24 3.72 37. TABLE 21 Potato Costs: 1935-1939 (20 Acres— 300 Sacks/Acre) Days Rate/day Total Labor Tractor driver 17.1 $2 .50 I 42. 75 Cutting seed and dipping 20.0 2.00 40. 00 Irrigation 14.0 2 .50 35.00 Planting 2.0 2.00 4.00 Weeding 11.0 2.25 24.75 Tractor 20 H.P. wheel 3.8 11.10 42 . 18 14 H.P. wheel 13.3 7.42 98. 68 Equipment Plow 3-14" 2.0 2.74 5. 46 8' double disk 1.0 3.84 3. 84 10* spike harrow .8 .60 4. 80 2-row planter 2 .0 1.62 3.. 24 Cultivator 8.0 .64 5. 12 Digger 3,3 4.59 15. 14 Contract Picking up — 5 cents/sack 300. 00 Hauling to cellar — $1.00/ton 30. DO Taking out of cellar, grading, loading 24. 00 Materials Seed — 1,600 pounds/acre at 2.5 cents /pound 800. 30 Corrosive sublimate — 45 ounces at $2.25/pound 6. 39 "Water — $1.80 acre 36. 00 Field sacks — 500/acre at 2-g- cents each 250. 00 Miscellaneous Taxes--$3/acre 60. 00 Management— $9/acre 180.00 Interest — 4 per cent of |100 80.00 Storage — 5 cents/hundredweight 300. 00 Inspection — 2 cents/hundredweight 120. 00 Total cost $2,511.35 Cost per acre 125,57 Cost per hundredweight .42 38 TABLE 22 Sugar Beet Costs: 1935-1939 (20 Acres— 12 Tons/Acre) Days Rate/day Total Labor Tractor driver 1D.O &9 cin

row duster 60.0 .3 .3 .3 Cutting 30 M/hrs 30.0 50.0 Trimming, packing, and loading By the crate Hauling to siding Contract • . 1 • - • ; f ** t T 1 i i ... < : • ■ » ■ * .~. i ■ _ ' ■ : ". 41. TABLE Z4, Cost Per Acre for Cabbage Production Hours Rate/hour Total cost Labor ueneral 1.8 .50 .90 Tractor driver 6.7 .75 5.03 Irrigating 12.0 .50 3.00 Hoeing .50 j 2.50 Frame labor and pulling plants 1 f »u .50 ; 3.50 Harvesting 30.0 .50 15.00 Tractor 14 H.P. wheeled 4.0 .82 5.20 20 H.P. wheeled 2.7 1.23 5.32 Equipment 10' spring tooth harrow .8 .16 .12 4-row duster .3 .54 .16 2-row transplanter .9 .25 .22 Fertilizer attachment n .7 .23 .16 2-row cultivator 2.8 .07 .20 8' double disk 0.9 .43 .38 uold. irame lob sq.it. tyco ior o years 1.62 "m rj t a \\ Plow 3-14 1.0 .90 .90 Amount Cost/unit T Dtal Contract .12/crate Trimming, packing, and loading 200 crates 24.00 Hauling to siding 200 crates ,05/crate 1 D.00 Materials Manure iu tons 3.00 3 D.00 Irrigation water 5.00 Nicotine dust 50 pounds .18/pound | 3.00 Calcium arsenate 50 pounds .07-g/pound 5.75 Ammonium sulphate 400 pounds 50.00/ton 10.00 Seed 200 l.OO/lOO h 2.00 Crates 200 .16-1- 3 3.00 Miscellaneous 3.00 Taxes — $3/acre Management — $9/acre 9.00 Interest — 4 per cent of $100 1.00 Compensation insurance — $1.24/$ 100 payroll .50 Total cost per acre 192.16 Cost per 100 pound crate .96 Return per crate Average return per 100 pound crate of cabbage 1935-1939 at |il5/ton or .75 Net loss per crate .21 — I- ■ ..... .. 42* Carrots Carrot production in the Tule Lake area is in its first year on a commer- cial basis. Prior to 1948 carrots were confined to garden plots with the ex- ception of a few scattered plantings of stock carrots, While only on an experimental scale this year, those who have attempted this enterprise have hopes of building carrot production of this type into another profitable commercial crop for the Tule Lake Basin. Campbell»s Soup Company has been the main promotional agency behind this carrot production. They are seeking a supply of a 2" carrot for dicing pur- poses as a constituent in their soups. For this purpose the Red Core Chantenay seems to be the best variety because of its color and size. Its desirable char- acteristics are its short length, thick body, and deep red color throughout. Carrots are resistant to frost and hence should do well in the Tule Lake Basin. Planting should be attempted as near the fifteenth of April as possible in order to take fullest advantage of the short growing season — an absolute necessity if 2" carrots are to be produced. Some persons are of the opinion that the carrots can be left in the ground in the fall to size, but experience shows that field mice are an added hazard when this is done. Unfortunately, the carrot crop this year has been almost a complete fail- ure due largely to the late planting date and lack of experience in carrot pro- duction on the part of those attempting to grow them. The stand was very patchy and seemed to dry out toward the end of June, Another contributing factor may have been the lack of adequate planting equipment. Both the soil and climate are conducive to good carrot production and fertilization thus far has not been practiced to any extent. - The peat soil of this area is high in nitrogen content and the danger of too much top growth be- cause of an oversupply of nitrogen is ever present. Applications of phosphorus may be beneficial but local experimentation is needed to determine the right answer. Irrigation has been accomplished by both furrow and sprinkler systems, the former being the most widely accepted. In irrigating carrots the main needs are a three-foot penetration and a top soil not too wet during hot weather, es- pecially if the soil is inclined to bake. An oversupply of moisture causes root rotting; however, in the Tule Lake area with its light soil the greater damage is liable to occur from lack of sufficient moisture and resultant mis- shapen roots. In spraying for weeds, care should be taken in using stove oil (not diesel oil) particularly as to time of use. Application of stove oil should preferably be made prior to the four-leaf stage. If the cost of hand weeding is nearly the same as oil spraying, it is preferable to hand weed. Note should be made of the method of handling carrots for Campbell's Soup Company. They desire carrots topped and sacked rather than bunched for ship- ment to their processing plant at Sacramento. The following table sets forth a sample calendar of operations for pro- ducing 20 acres of carrots. These figures are not intended to be precise but are averages in some cases and in other cases are only estimates as explained in the introductory portion of this paper. 1 : ....... ■ - b- ... 'V ■ : ■ TABLE 25 to «i Calendar of Operations - Carrots (20 Acres with Yield of 14 Tons/Acre) 1 Crew and equipment Physical requirements Labor required ! i Dates Operations Men Tractor Equipment Acres per 9 hr. day Man days Tractor days Truck days Man days operator works Man days hi red March 20-25 Plowing i 1M 1 25T 3-14 plow O.U o C 2.o o c o c March 25-30 Disk and harrow Float 1M 1M it.! OCT 25T OCT 1 o ' IJJ 1?' SH o ■ x ^ v/ *» ... -j . » L >liM 44. Table 26 is an example of the cost of producing carrots on a 20-acre field using 14 tons per acre as an estimated yield. This yield is possibly higher than would be a long-time average yield for carrots in this area, but the yield expected by producers of this crop was somewhat higher (20 tons). TABLE 26 Typical Costs of Producing Carrots (20 Acres - 14 Tons/Acre) (Compiled July-August, 1948) (Current Costs Rather Than Estimated 1935-1939 Costs) Labor Tractor driver General (hauling) Irrigating Tractor 20 H.P. (wheel) Truck 1,000 miles at 7.8 cents Equipment 3-14" plow 8 1 double disk 12' spike harrow Float 3- row lister 4 row planter 30' boom sprayer 4 - row cultivator Carrot lifter Piece work Pulling, topping, Materials Seed — 2 pounds/acre at #1.10 Oil spray— 3,600 gallons at $.12 Water— $3/ac re Sacks — 11,200 at $.15 (used) Miscellaneous Taxes — $3/acre Management — $18/acre Interest— 4 per cent of $200 Compensation insurance — $1. 24/$100 Growers Association dues Total cost Cost per acre Cost per ton (14 ton yield) Days Rate/hr. — — ■ ■ ■ — Total 15.2 $X. 25 $171.00 i C, f • d 1 .UU 244. 80 47.0 1.00 423.00 1 ! 838.80 Rate/day 15.2 13.78 208.96 2 38.96 78.00 78.00 2.5 2.32 5.80 1.8 3.28 5.90 1.4 .74 1.04 1.0 .10 .10 .75 8.43 6.32 2.0 3.45 6.90 .75 2.07 1.55 2.7 2.18 5.89 2*5 5.18 12.95 * 16.45 sacking— 11, 200 sacks at 15 cents/sack payroll 44.00 432.00 60.00 560.00 60.00 360.00 160.00 5.60 20.00 1,680.00 1,096.00 $ 605.60 ! I 4,553.81 j 227.691/1 16.98 I a/ If the freight charge to Sacramento is included as a cost, the cost per acre is $311,69 and the cost per ton $22.98. It is probably desirable to include the $6/ton charge because the price offered by Campbell's Soup Company was an f.o.b. Sacramento price. i 15 d S409 e fid' j i " • 06.3 3s'.5 -8.1 eXd-wob""*8 | ■ " "• S-t\#8 -3V.. *i©iai:X Vo l £ ■ .■ • ' . ' "' ' '' .e8*,S V.,? •no'tfa^.W'Xuo wi * 3*,3> a'OjX .8.1.. 3 Wfil *o«n*0 00,08a, I 3i*ca\a*nao d.I |ii 8*>ae 00S ,J X— anitfone .^gitKpfoJ vS^'Xi'^ , "j A- e-Xi*'f , i< :! dijM £oU?.£ 51*1 *a ano-He^ 0<1a<,S*-«-ijittq'8 XiO 00**560.1 OOVo33 s("&?afl2 006 Growing plants 6 M/hrs. 6.0 6.0 Transplanting 3M 14T 2-row transplanter 13.0 2.1 .7 .7 1.4 i Irrigating (6X) 2 M/hrs. 12.0 6.0 6.0 1 Cultivating (3X) 1M 14T 2-row cultivator 13.0 2.1 2.1 2.1 Applying fertilizer 1M 147 2-row cultivator and fertilizer attachment 13.0 .7 .7 .7 Hoeing 5 M/hrs. 5.0 5.0 Dusting (2X) 1M 14T 4-row duster 60.0 .3 .3 Cutting 30 M/hrs. 30.0 30 .0 Trimming, packing, and loading By the crate Hauling to siding Contract 47. TABLE 28 Cost Per Acre for Cauliflower Production Hours Rate/hour Total c ost Labor General 2.1 .50 1.05 Tractor driver 7.1 .75 5.33 r • Irrigating 12.0 .50 6.00 Hoeing 5.0 .50 2,50 Plant bed labor 6.0 .50 3.00 Harvesting and packing 30.0 .50 15.00 Tractor 14 H.P. wheeled 3.8 .82 3.12 20 H.P. wheeled 3.3 1.23 4.06 Equipment rlow o-i4 1.0 , yo .90 8' double disk .9 .43 .39 10' soring tooth harrow .8 .16 .13. 2-row lister .6 .62 .37 2-row transplanter .7 .25 .18 2-row cultivator 2. 0 .0 I .20 Fertilizer attachment .7 .23 .16 4- row duster .3 .54 .16 Amount Cost/unit Tota 1 Contract .12,/crate Trimming, packing, loading 300 crates 36.00 Hauling to siding 300 c rates .05/crate 15.00 Materials Seed 5 pounds .80 4.00 Irrigation water 3.00 Nicotine dust 50 pounds .18 9.00 • Calcium arsenate 50 pounds iGfk 3.75 Ammnni \ itti q i i 1 riH ft 4"! A f*f^ y*i~ i "I i 7 0 y» TUU UUUtlUfi FiO OO/t-nn 10.00 Crates 300 crates 49.50 Miscellaneous Taxes--$3/acre 3.00 Management — $9/ac re 9.00 Interest — 4 per cent of $100 4.00 Compensation insurance — #1.24/$100 c f payroll .90 Total cost per acre 189.70 Cost per crate .63 Return per crate Average return per crate of cauliflower 1935-1939 .55 1 Wet loss per crate .08 3 1. TIL' I rS . ,..„ . i.^ .i , i i- todal bed tfital^ 1 ■-- , - ■ ■ i « ■ » . • . • ^ . ■ . . . ■ > ■ * < 03 to tfne-r! ieq (y— ;^3.08/crate Cost of crates— . |. 27/c rate Cost of packing, Icing , and loading on cars — s ^.70/crate Total harvesting costs per acre 172.50 ' Total cost per acre Total cost per crate 246.35 1.64 Return per crate Average return per crate of lettuce 1935-1939 Net loss per crate 1.55 ►09 S8 3JSAT ■ — ■ -i • 1 - i • •■ ••: • * * ■ • woXcj {•!— S isih oXdi/oh '01 1 19*8 il wo*i- • •" ■ ■ ■- • " 4. -- ' y , . ' ' jjjj j * ■ - J3 TABLE 33 Market Peas, Expected Yield - 75. Bushels (2,400 Pounds) Inputs Per Acre Acres per j Man Tractor M/hrs . Required hired Operations Crow and equipment day j hours hours operator works labor M/hrs. Plowing 1M 20T 4-14" plow t 7.0 i 1.3 I ■ - 1 1.3 , 1.3 Disking (3X) 1M 20T 10' double disk 20.0 1 1.4 1 1.4 1.4 Floating 1M 20T 12* float 15.0 o.6 ; 0.6 C.6 • Furrowing 1M 20T 4- row fur rower 20.0 0.4 0.4 0.4 Irrigating 2 M/hrs. 2.0 ' ! ' 2.0 i Planting 30" rows 1M 10T 3-row planter 15.0 0.6 . 0.6 0.6 i Irrigating (6X) 2 M/hrs. j 12.0 6.0 6.'0 Hoeing 9 M/hrs. i 9.0 9,0 Cultivating and i furrowing (5X) 1M 10T 3-row cultivator and 1 fur rower 15.0 3.0 5JD ' 3.0 Cultivating and fertilizing 1M 10T 3-row cultivator with fertilizer attachment 15.0 0.6 0.6 0.6 ! Dusting (3X) 1M 10T 3-row duster 25.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 Distributing picking equipment 111 10T trailer 8.0 1.1 1.1 1.1 Picking By the pound Inspecting, weighing, sacking 3 M/hrs. 3.0 3.0 Hauling to packing shed Contract Grading and packing By the hamper Hauling to market By the hamper 5 n\ph*> mBBsnsi 5«< 1 9 I * '*' ' • *.• -.5*9 «5 ■> TABLE 34 Cost Per Acre for Producing Market Peas ~ Hours Rate/hour 53. Total cost Labor Tractor driver 10.1 .75 7.58 Irrigating 14.0 .50 7.00 Hoeing 9.0 .50 4.50 Inspecting, weighing, sacking — ~- — 3.0 .50 1.50 Tractor 14 H. r. wheel 6.4 .82 3.25 dO H. r» wheel 3.7 1 .23 4.55 Equipment 4-14" plow 1.3 1.36 1.67 ■ 10' double disk 1.4 • .43 .60 12' float . .6 . .02 .01 4-row furrower .4 .85 .34 3-row planter .6 .17 .10 3-row cultivator and furrower 3.6 .16 .58 Fertilizer attachment .6 .23 .14 3-row duster 1.1 .54 .59 Trailer 1.1 .05 .06 Contract or Piece Work Picking Hauling to packing shed Grading and packing Hauling to market Amount Cost/unit Total 2,400 pounds .Ol/pound 24.00 1.2 tons .75/ton .90 80 hampers ,05/hamper 4.00 80 hampers .05,/hamper 4.00 Materials Seed Nicotine dust Dusting sulphur Ammonium sulphate Irrigation water Hampers 60 pounds .ll/pound 6.60 20 pounds .18 /pound. 3.60 40 pounds ,04/pound 1.60 300 pounds 50.00/ton 7.50 3.00/acre 3.00 80 .18 14.40 Miscellaneous Taxes--$3/acre Management--! 9/acre Interest — 4 per cent of $100 Compensation insurance — $1.24/$100 payroll 3.00 9.00 4.00 .62 Total cost per acre for producing market peas 119.69 Cost per pound ' .05 Return per pound Average return per pound for peas 1935-1939 .058 Net profit per pound .008 '7- 1 rr r n 1 ' 1 ■ : . i ... . f • •■ - * — •I. • . ■> 1 ... t ■ ■ - .... ■ ■ lO TABLE 35 Market Spinach, Expected Yield - 500 Bushels (9,000 Pounds) Inputs Per Acre for Market Spinach fl p c n >* IV. _X I i 1 Trflf't nr 1*1 / Hi u • Reouired hired Operations Crew and equipment ds.y DUUI b XlUUl b Anoyat fty u/nrVc! Upt I d lUi AUI Kb J. d U vv i in / 1 i i O • Plowing 1M 20T 4-14" plow X • o J. • O 1 ^ X • »J Disking (2X) and Harrowing (2X) 1M 20T 10* double disk and 10' spike harrow n 7 n 7 Floating 1M 20T 12' float 15.0 0.6 0.6 0.6 Planting 1M 14T 4-row planter 12.0 0.8 0.8 0.8 Cultivating (2X) 1M 14T 4-row cultivator in n 1 . c X • O 1 ft X • 0 Fertilizing 1M 14T 4-row cultivator with fertilizer attachment 10.0 .9 .9 .9 Irrigating (5X) 4 M/hrs . 20.0 10.0 10.0 Hoeing and thinning 30 M/hrs. 30.0 30.0 Pulling, bunching, cutting dead leaves, trimming roots and packing in 40-pound crates 83 M/hrs. 83.0 83.0 Distribute crates 1M 14T trailer 8.0 1.1 1.1 1-1 . Hauling to market Contract : TABLE 36 Cost Per Acre for Market Spinach Production 55. Hours Rate/hour Total cc )St Labor Tractor driver 7.2 .75 5.40 Irrigating 20.0 .50 10. ( )0 Hoeing and thinning 30.0 • ou 15.00 Pulling, bunching, cutting dead leaves, ^rimming rooxs ana pacicing oo . yj • ou 41. £ 30 Tractor cu xitr • wncei c < o 1 . • oc O • — ; Equipment 4--14 plow . 1 . O 1.36 X • 10' double disk 0.7 .43 • •- iu splice narrow 0.7 .08 • C )6 lc noax 0.6 0? • v n JX. 4— row planter 0.8 3fi J • c >q *y 2.7 9 d O J rerTjiiizer a ucacnmen u .9 • CO 4 ] Trailer 1.1 .05 ( • > Contract or Piece Work .05/crate Hauling to market 225 crates li.: 25 Materials Seed 25 pounds .18 4.! 50 Irrigation water sJ DO Crates 225 crates .20 55. ( DO Ammonium sulphate 400 pounds 50.00/ton 10. < )0 Miscellaneous Taxes 3.( DO Management 9.( DO Interest — 4 per cent of $100 ft* DO Compensation insurance — $1.24 per $100 payroll 76 Total cost per acre 182.68 Total cost per bushel (18 pounds) .37 Return per unit Average price per 18 pound bushel for market spinach (1935- 1939) .30 Net loss per bushel .07 CO TABLE 37 Wheat, Expected Yield - 24 Hundredweight Inputs Per Acre for Irrigated Wheat Production Operation Crew and Equipment Acres per 9 hr. day Man hours Tractor hours M/hrs . operator works Required hired labor M/hrs. Establish borders 1M 20T disk ridger 60.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 Irrigating 2 M/hrs. 2*0 2.0 Plowing HI 20T 3-14" plow 9.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Disking and harrowing (2X) 1M 20T 10' double disk and 10' spike harrow 27.0 .7 .7 .7 Seeding 1M 20T 10' grain drill 18.0 .5 ..5 Harvesting Contract Hauling i Contract - , - ■ .1 C - - -•■ i *— ■ ■ - -1 - 1 ■ 57. TABLE 38 Cost Per Acre for Irrigated Wheat Production Hours Hate/hour Total cost Labor Tractor driver 2.4 .75 1.80 Irrigating 2.0 .50 1.00 ■ Tractor 20 H.P. wheel 2.4 1.23 2.9 5 Equipment Disk ridger .2 .38 .0 3-14 ■ plow 1.0 .90 .9 10' double disk .7 .43 .3 10' spike harrow .7 .08 .0 10' grain drill .5 1.43 .7 8 0 D 6 2 Amount Cost/unit Total Contract or Piece Work Harvesting 3.00/acre 3.00 Hauling — $1.25/ton 24 hundredweight 1.25/ton 1.50 Storage-- 3 months at $.75 a ton first month, $.25 per ton thereafter 24 hundredweight 1.50 Materials Irrigation water 3.0 Seed 100 pounds 1.25/cwt. 1.2 Sack and twine 21 .10 2.1 ) 5 ) Miscellaneous Taxes 3.0 Interest — 4 per cent of $100 4.0 Management--$1.87/acre 1.8 Insurance — $1.50 per $100 per season insured at $32.00 per ton .5 0 0 7 8 Total cost per acre $29.6 Total cost per hundredweight 1.2 1 3 Return per unit Average price per hundredweight for wheat 1935-1939 1.3 5 Net return per hundredweight $ .1 2 CO to TABLE 39 Oats, Expected Yield - 21 Hundredweight Inputs Per Acre for Irrigated Oat Production Operations Crew and equipment Acres per 9 hr. day Man hours Tractor hours M/hrs* . operator hours Required hired 1 labor M/hrs.. Establish borders 1M 20T disk ridger 60.0 0.2 0.2 0.2 Irrigating 2 M/hrs. 2.0 2.0 Plowing iU 20T 3-14 M plow 9.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 Disking and harrowing (2X) 1M 20T 10' double disk and 10' spike harrow 27.0 .7 .7 .7 Seeding 1M 20T 10' grain drill 18.0 .5 .5 .5 Harvesting Contract Hauling Contract • . f ■ ; ; ■ » - i • • t ! f i * j - • | . . . ■ . I ' ' " ^ '■ • • ! . . . : ■ - - . . ■ . * r - • ,- ^. . . ■ ■ ' r - ■ " • ' ' 59 TABLE 40 Cost Per Acre for Irrigated Oat Production Hours Rate/hour Total cost Labor Tractor driver Irrigating 2.4 2.0 .75 .50 1.80 1.00 Tractor 20 H.P. wheel 2.4 1.23 2.95 Equipment Disk ridger 3-14" plow 10' double disk 10' spike harrow 10* grain drill .2 1.0 .7 .7 .5 .38 .•90 .43 .08 1.43 .08 .90 .30 .06 .72 Contract or Piece Work Amount Cost/unit Total Harvesting Hauling Storage — 3 months at $.75 a ton first month, $.25' per ton thereafter 21 hundredweight 21 hundredweight 3. 00 /acre 1. 25/ton 3.00 1.31 i Materials Irrigation water Seed Sacks and twine 70 pounds 21 1.75/cwt. .10 3.00 1.22 2.10 Miscellaneous Taxes Interest Management Insurance — $1.50 per $100 per season insured at $32.00 per ton 3.00 4.00 1.87 •50 Total cost per acre Total cost per hundredweight 29.1 1.3 2 9 Average price per hundredweight Return per unit of oats 1935-1939 1.2 8 , Net loss per hundredweight .1 i buff's* • '* ' ,%r.ij rjr.. j -riV.-r-- •■-a. !?-«-< .-^«>i . - — ' *•*"»" li * l«l lit K M wn^ J. ■ i 08 VI" 6V ** -3' •- .. - / ■ •■ t . ■ - « - t • *«.■"' is £ . J woXt? -^X^c* • 1 . -■ ** * *|i ' i ' '-. ' ' " .i) , ,L_ .3. ^.-J'." — - .it. Irrigated Pasture 60 ( While irrigated pastures have gained importance in the valleys of Califor- nia, their usefulness in the Tule Lake Division is limited. During the cold weather pastures grow very little and according to agronomists in the Experiment Station, the usual pasture plants would make little if any growth during the five winter months. For this reason only 5 to 7 animal-unit months of pasture could be obtained compared with the usual 10 or 11 animal-unit months obtained in the valley. Plants which would probably be used would be Alsike clover, Palestine clover, domestic rye grass, orchard grass, tall fescue, and possibly timothy. Usually permanent pastures are seeded with some mixture of these to produce a full growth for as long as possible during the growing period. There are at present a few pastures in the basin but these are principally clover pastures with few excep- tions. In addition alfalfa stands are pastured off in late summer in some cases. Costs of irrigated pastures vary widely depending on the land preparation required, the seed mixture used, and wage rates in the area. Irrigation is the main cost item in most areas but would be relatively insignificant in the basin where water is much less expensive. The Agricultural Extension Service summa- rized the results of several pasture management records collected in four valley counties during the years 1944 and 1945 finding that the average total cost of producing an acre of irrigated pasture was #29.11 in 1944 and #33.52 in 1945. In these same years the total cost per animal-unit month was $2.92 and #3.09 respectively. Because of less necessary land preparation and smaller water costs it is believed that the total cost of irrigated pastures per acre would be less but that any gain would tend to be offset by the reduced number of animal-unit months of pasturage obtained because of the cold winter. Vfith the small numbers of livestock on farms, permanent pastures have little to offer as a substitute for the present cash crops but when and if it becomes more profitable to sell grains in the form of meat, permanent pastures may become important in the basin. An irrigated pasture should yield as large a tonnage per acre as alfalfa but in addition it should have the advantage of being more eco- nomical to harvest and feed. The Experiment Station has come to the conclusion that pasturage from ir- rigated pastures is usually more expensive than natural range pasture but is a cheaper source of nutrients than most other livestock feeds. It may well be used in place of a considerable proportion of the more expensive feeds for dairy and other livestock where irrigation is present but irrigated pastures, unless supplemented with dry matter, tend to bloat cattle and sheep. Livestock in Tule Lake Division - Farm Organizations In examining the relative importance of livestock in farm organizations in the Tule Lake Division, an illustration of inventories of livestock is useful* Table 41 compared livestock inventories for the years 1935-1939 with 1943-1947. While this comparison shows the absolute differences in numbers, the general decline is more clearly shown by introducing the factor of increased number of farms. This item has been added to the table and the average number of eaoh class of livestock per farm computed, this information being shown in table 42. "v n . . r. HP WpTV\ CUKVG10. •Jo :^!ed . sv.erf . aeniXoftb ■ n.o^irfQ -so ibl t*wo--o* . HXdifotJtu darim,' bp'd Wia a'ffeaioirib' sKirtJ- aJtarwtft ^o. dnaq..a,dd no., abi/didda bn a n'oftaod a ar*r>rf. .^ui: ; ;.,f< l.p .pb'ion arid fXil' MuoW za -itotiz.-Vf^Smm- /JiancB &| vljlaipafc -aviX rfriri '-^im .fcnfi -.sofn o ,dB^o ^b baofflq •s'iaaViqftte' X ; at sjMg add fma .trfjgt£l/|kut aa.jo arid nl . ,tZ'V}yji t .-t.ii£>6i»% r £ir &ri&£'!Winr\' tfa nood esri ri-qidw aaBijcqriadnV ; 3fo6#a .. fj.'c- iaof? odd ©\J dd- sfrn^os' aauuo^dart I>l.. ; ^rid .^.aniXo^'b Waidlri?) -ioqo*rq aXdaiobianop.. to ..fuu' .aio.oi'eav/X ni .tot a/fay n3ad aari.janiXftgb . sirtd. aJirfW . cton arii ni" iiTrf >eop.ji);sT. 'Bcioiioffb - 7 : ?diV BSStSSs — , » *" C JOAOt gTKeri. peeps IVi J ^ " ' » ■ CD CO TABLE 45 Rotations - 80 -Acre Farm] 8 10-Acre Fields Fields ! Years A ! j C D E F G H 1 i ■ Alfalfa Carrots Carrots Alfalfa Barley and clover Clover Barley and clover Clover I i Alfalfa Barley and alfalfa , 1 Barley Alfalfa Clover Carrots Clover Carrots : 1 U Alfalfa , Alfalfa , , Carrots , Carrots Clover Barley and pin TTO t* Clover Barley j and c lover : 4 1 Alfalfa Alfalfa Barley and alfalfa Barley Carrots Clover V Carrots — Clover . 1 ■ ■ I Carrots Alfalfa Alfalfa Carrots L — Barley and clover . Clover Barley and clover Clover 1 « ! Barley- Alfalfa , Alfalfa 1 Barley and alfalfa i Clover i Carrots , Clover i ... Carrots j , 1 1 j 7 l Carrots Carrots Alfalfa Alfalfa Clover Barley and clover Clover Barley and clover 1 3arley and alfalfa Barley Alfalfa Alfalfa Carrots Clover Carrots Clover a/ Each year: 20 acres — alfalfa; 20 acres — barley; 20 acres — clover; 20 acres — carrots. p Xeei.1 bO polg8 — FJ^Jtar* SO WMMW — psrljakl SO trcfcoa — cjOAtt! so oolgs — cpttoj'e* "*' : j ■ «•-_■ - — SLill — OJOA3L ■ "' ' ■'• 1 • • » table 46 Rotations - 80-Acre Farnfi/ 8 10-Acre Fields Designed for Dairying Fields Years 3 3 c n D j T? r XI 1 Pasture Barley ' 1 Pasture i Sugar beets Barley and i alfalfa j Alfalfa Alfalfa Sugar beets , l Sugar beets rus ture , , .da r ley ah ai i a Jii i a i xa Sugar beets 1 tjariey 1 1 1 3 1 Barley Pasture Pasture beets 1 r Alfalfa | Alfalfa Barley beets 4 S 1 1 era r* beets Pasture 1 Pasture Barley Alfalfa j i u Alfalfa Sugar beets Barley and alfalfa 5 oariey i raST/UrS Sugar beets r^asiiure A 1 -fc 1 fa Aiiana : h Sugar beets Barley and alfalfa 1 Aiiana 6 Pasture 1 Sugar beets , , Barley Pasture 1 Sugar j beets i j Barley Alfalfa 1 1 Alfalfa 7 Pasture 1 Barley Sugar beets Pasture Barley ! j I L I Sugar Alfalfa beets Alfalfa i 8 - Pasture i Sugar beets Barley 1 Pasture Sugar beets Barley and alfalfa ! Alfalfa i Alfalfa a/ Each year: 20 acres — barley; 20 acres — alfalfa; 20 acres — pasture; 20 acres — sugar beets. •\ E BG P ^©ffti SO > (B yjjn » ■■ P» J#3H SO pcwe — 3Tt»Jt,tri So irct*a— i»tr2^rri.ei bQ eroi.63— an&ri. peeps* _ ;- ' i , i v r ur j t» 1 . •* *» .* * • f VJVJV- P JX.8J TJET L . ■ ., ' . ■' .... . . ■ ... ..j. - ........ - 68. Financial Needs of Homesteaders and Credit Sources Yfttile capital needs for acquisition are not a factor in the Tule Lake Divi- sion, capital requirements for operating, proving-up, and personal living are of prime importance to the homesteaders. Capital requirements differ widely with the kind of farm business to be financed. In general, the farms in the Tule Lake Divi- sion at present are almost entirely involved in the production of field crops with little livestock included in the farm organizations — a condition which cuts down the capital requirements. To evaluate more adequately the capital needs of the homesteader, a table of capital requirements is a useful device in that the needs are placed in cate- gories according to the type of requirement (i.e., investment, operating, replace- ment, personal, etc.) and according to periods of time when the money is needed. The following table has been set up to show the typical capital needs of a new homesteader on an 80-acre farm planning to produce barley, potatoes, sugar beets, and clover in a four-year rotation. The figures contained in this table are based on more near normal conditions than are had at present. The results of this table indicate very clearly the difficulty involved in the first year of farming on a homestead. The Bureau requires the prospective homesteader to have $2,000 in liquid assets as was mentioned previously. This amount would supposedly reduce the amount which must be borrowed to roughly $2,000, however, in order to get the crops off the first year, nearly $10,000 will have to be borrowed. All but about $2,000 of this can be repaid at the end of the first year and after the second year the income will more than cover all expenses. This analysis is predicated on one assumption of utmost importance. It as- sumes that crops will be forthcoming each year and that yields will be average or better. This is a limiting assumption in that severe frosts would occur during the growing season in at least one out of four years. If damaging frosts should come during the first year the homesteader may find himself in a precarious finan- cial position; however, with his land clear and two years of good crops and favor- able prices he could again free himself of debts other than current production expenses . Borrowing money always introduces the question of sources of credit. In the Tule Lake area the Bank of America has established itself almost as the entire source of credit. It has placed itself in the farmers favor in the past because of its policy of loaning to the homesteaders during the depression years, provided proper budgets and financial statements were submitted to support loan requests. Through wise loaning and good service the Bank of America branch at Tule Lake has built a very large trade. Just prior to the war and during the war years an ex- cellent manager was present at the bank who knew conditions in the basin and knew how to satisfy the homesteaders. Outsiders feel this has had a large part to do with the bank's popularity among homesteaders. Production loans are also available through the Production Credit Association of the Farm Credit Administration office at Klamth Falls and in the Tule Lake Divi- sion of California some production credit loans are made. .83 1 a6io 'fti .,i«&v: -5A n 03*0 a- ow* f>n£>, iseXo bifaX Biri'-rttiw ■^•x^ypvo^ ^ctol&lznq ,lo 85»^T.U03 *t< . .ate [ rttg-^XX J ' oifl anaoi axioms ^irtnfyqoq a'alnatf art* sisitr 3 x*> oijD o"xq oi^oq /sxmoTxiiSo xc noxa TABLE 47 69 Tabulation of Capital Requirements - 80-Acre Homestead (Rotation - 20 Acres Each of Barley, Sugar Beets, Potatoes, and Clover) , Periods Capital requirements jFirst year^./ 'Second year ; Third yoar ! Fourth year T dollars B« D. _ . 1 1 i Tractor 1,100 I Truck 850 House (rebuilding : barracks ) 1,500 Storage shed - implements '; (out of bar recks) 500 Drilling well and installing pump for household water 250 iviacnincry . ?40 12* harrow (spike) 40 10» drill 285 7* mower (tractor) 155 12' dump rake 75 3-14" plow 216 2-row planter 140 2-row cultivator 90 Digger 310 i/xsiC rxoger 67 Operating Items Hired labor 500 500 500 500 Seeds 950b/ Contract work 1,500 1,250 1,250 1,250 Sacks, twine, etc. 350 300 300 300 Pest control materials 6 6 6 i b Fuel for equipment 250 250 250 250 Water 240 240 240 240 Miscellaneous 100 50 50 50 Replacement and Maintenance Repair and parts for implements and machinery 10 25 50 75 Replacing worn imple- ments 100 Personal Items Total 2,600 1,800 1,800 1 | 1,800 (Table continued on next page) • • • BnaoaefniBlA brio JfrKwrooalqefl ■ (agpc J-xsn no b&imiinoo oldsT) 70. Table 47 Continued. 1 Periods \ Capital requirements . First year&/| Second yeari Third year j Fourth year dollars E. Recapitulation ! ! ;*»•- 1 I Investment items Ooeratinp' items Replacement and maintenance Personal items Safety factor (5 per cent of operating needs ) 5,521 3,576 10 2,600 180 295 j 2,596 26 1,800 j 1 130 — mm 2,596 ! 50 1,800 130 mmmm 2,596 175 1,80C 13C ) Gross Totals 11,887 4,846 4,576 4,701 Less estimated re- ceipts from sales of farm products i / , yciooe>? e/fl ,1Iesnirf*f>aa*8e» bria'-stbl j g^orf ^georftfJoT agej;c3 •••erWieO '• baqqcno fasr or\f* ^ T fit • • X€! • TVVi B.TTtirt bBbea^c^roH no ijon erf* ^q»3t 8 3ino*Biil art ".aw noiJBtmotte].- arfT rfT «* 73. TABLE 49 Tenanting of Homesteads in the Tule Lake Division ! Year Number of farms Operated by owner or < manager Operated Kir by- tenant Per cent operated Kir owner or manager Per cent operated by tenant 1936 317 230 87 7.2.5 27.5 1937 341 255 • . 86 74.7 25.3 1938 412 310 98 75.2 24.8 i 1939 408 306 102 75.0 25.0 1940 405 325 80 80.2 19.8 1941 404 306 98 75.7 24.3 1942 416 324 92 77.9 22.1 1943 407 317 90 77.9 22.1 : 1944 t 406 317 89 78.1 21.9 1945 406 300 106 73.9 26.1 ' 1946 406 311 95 76.6 23.4 1947 449 357 92 79.5 20.5 Nature of Government Leases. --Public advertisement is made by the Bureau when lands are available for lease. Such advertising is carried on sufficiently far in advance of a given growing' season to facilitate the making of necessary arrangements for farming. Sealed proposals from honorable discharged veterans of World War II with the proper qualifications who are not leasers of public lands on the Klamath Project are accepted up to the date when they are publicly opened. If sufficient bids are not received from veterans to lease the entire acreage, the general public is allowed to submit sealed proposals on the area not taken. Usually leases run for one year with the lessee having an option to extend the term for successive additional periods of one year each for a total leasing period of not more than five years. This was the plan followed in the 1947 leasing program of 7,826 acres opened in March of that year. With the proposal submitted by the prospective lessee must be a certified check, cashier's check, cash, or money order made payable to the Treasurer of the United States covering the amount of the bid. Any person eligible to bid may make bids on as many lots as he wishes, his accompanying payment being made to cover his highest bid. - ■'j o Bsi-rwf- 74. Land to be leased is to be used for grazing and agricultural purposes only, and lessees are prohibited from making any other use of it. Subletting is il- legal and the lessee must actively participate in the farming of the land. On the last leased lands additional provisions were added to the effect that no buildings of a permanent nature could be erected nor crops stored on the lands during the period December 1 to April 1. Stringent regulations regarding cultural practices are set up and must be strictly observed unless written permission to deviate therefrom is secured from the District Manager. These regulations are as follows: (1) None of the land included in the lease shall be purposely burned over at any time. (2) The land leased must be cropped to a soil-conserving crop for two years at a minimum during the period of five years the lease may run (one year plus four years' extension) and at least 50 per cent of the acreage of each lease must be planted to a leguminous crop for a period of any two successive years, the remainder being cropped during any two years of the lease term to a green manure crop which must be at least six inches in height when turned under. (3) A proposed cropping program must be submitted to the District Manager each year to get approval on praotices to be followed and to allow the checking of compliance with other regulations stated above. (4) Any fences built or already on the property must be maintained in satisfactory condition and remain and become the property of the United States on expiration or termination of the lease. (5) As a soil erosion and weed control measure the lessee must seed all lateral and drain banks to grass and all berns to grain. The Bureau furnishes the grass seed, the lessee the grain seed. (6) All lessees are required to evenly spread or remove, by means other than burning, all straw or other crop residues in the fall of the fifth year after the removal of the crop thereon. An approved form of lease containing various conditions not set out above and including those relating to fissionable materials, stock running at large, rights of way for roads, posting of lands against hunting, etc., must be properly entered into with the United States. Areas Leased and Rentals . --Eleven separate areas were leased in 1947, each being given an alphabetical designation. The following table shows the area designation, the number of units in each, the total acreage in each, the average unit acreage, the average per acre rental and total return. - . . '. IJ ■ : ■ . - : . ! s>.. 1 1- • 75. TABLE 50 Leasing Program Tule Lake and Sump Area 1947 Area Total acreage 1 Number of units Average unit acreage ! Average per acre rental Tota] ! . return 1 1 I ' • ' r* " - - . *■ dollars B-l 2,179 Off do 77 63, ?91 71 •• D-2 OO 32.35 168, 914.45 A 6 ,02b 110 20 1 110 5,10 7 561.00 •• C 876 2 438 8.02 7 024.77 D 8,148 32 254 15.54 126 322.69 6 7,158 5 1,431 16.70 119 ,502.00 H 2,375 1 2,375 7.63 18 ,121.25 r J 2,626 4 656 16.2.5 42 ,719.45 N 79 1 79 3.00 237.00 • 0 45 1 45 8.05 362,25 1 P 102 2 51 23.40 2 ,386.80 Source of data: Bureau of Reclamation, Klamath Falls, Oregon. It is apparent that areas G and H are composed of large single leases, particularly barley leases. It is in areas such as these that holdings such as Tulana Farms (2,676 acres) and Winema Farms (5,526 acres) are found. In view of the possible returns from farming operations outlined previously the rents averaged per acre are only nominal, particularly on the larger hold- ings. This has been one of the reasons for the success enjoyed by the big op- erators on the west side of the basin raising barley year after year. However, there is reason for these large leases with low terms. For one reason many of these leases were made six or seven years ago and were seven-year leases. Sec- ondly, these large areas are subject to flooding occasionally and the risk of flooding is borne by the lessee. Thirdly, certain dike and ditch construction was required to be made by these lessees when they first leased the land, such construction costing a considerable amount of money. ■ - * » ' • V' '■ " i •• • ■*'" ■ t' « * Marketing Outlets and Facilities 76. While some discussion of outlets for particular commodities was given in the portion of this paper dealing with specific products a more general picture of the marketing outlets and facilities with special reference to transportation, locations, and prices is herewith presented. If the two factors which limit most the actions of growers in the Tule Lake Division were to be picked, one would certainly be the weather, the other the lack of available markets. The marketing of many products which could be grown is the main factor at present in accounting for their absence. This can be ex- plained in two ways: (l) the location of this basin is such that freight charges to key markets are almost prohibitive, and (2) the production of many of the com- modities of the area are already well established in other farming sections of the state, closer to markets and producing such quantities of products that the entry into the market is difficult for Tule Lake growers, at least at prices favorable to local producers. This is especially true- with vegetable crops.. The basin lies equidistant from Portland and San Francisco being about 350 miles from Portland and 380 from San Francisco. Distance alone does not show the true pic- ture for the terrain is extremely mountainous toward both cities. In this posi- tion, effective competition with the truck garden areas around the San Francisco Bay and south through the Santa Clara and Salinas valleys in California and the similar areas near Portland is nearly impossible. Celery, mentioned above, is a case in point. Some persons feel the solution lies in enticing processing plants into the basin to take care of alternative products. While this would be .possible if the acreage were very large for a given vegetable crop, as is the case in the Salinas Valley for example, it would be difficult to persuade a business firm to locate a plant in an area where it can operate for maybe two months out of the year and even then not be sure of a supply of products to process. Peas for freezing have been suggested, but experience in recent years shows that surpluses in frozen packs are not uncommon. With certain commodities now produced the problem of marketing is minor. Barley is probably the surest crop from the standpoint of an available market of any grown. Brewers are constantly competing with one another for the barley pro- duced in the basin, this condition being present even during the periods of less prosperity. Barley has always brought a premium price over and above what it brought in other areas. Potatoes have an established market, and at present are under the government price-support program. If and when this support is discon- tinued prices are expected to drop. Onions are grown almost entirely on contract because of past experiences with onions produced, sacked, and stored with no buyers interested. In the case of sugar beets the sugar company (in this case, Spreckels) contracts for the crop. Transportation out of the basin is taken care of either by truck or train. Onions today are almost all shipped out by truck, however, up to this year rail shipment was most common. Alfalfa and potatoes are mostly shipped by rail, though some potatoes, especially seed potatoes, are moved by trucks. Railway service for freight is available but rates are high. Southern Pacific has a line from San Francisco through Klamath Falls to Portland. They have another line called the Central Pacific Railway running from Klamath Falls through Tule Lake to Fernley, Nevada, and which connects at that point with eastern lines. The Great Northern Railway Company's line from Bend, Oregon, to Bieber, California, passes through Klamath Falls and through the basin. This line offers r ... •■ • .. . - - " ■. .... ■ he ■ ■ ■. ■■i f ' ■ ■ >::-. , ■: _ , ... .... -. .:••')' i : - : ■ i v. •: ■ : ' • • <"- •, . : .: . ■ ■:.:fi ■ ■ • ■ ' : -v • ■ ■ • 1 • | ■ :■ • . ■■■■■■■ - ' ■ - ■ ' )»2ttwn 'rxnZ 'Bbme'I a aari' o/ilbi 1 ■ r -IAm *.a '4 ■^rf'? •'■'■•Si* *■ ; 77. a second rail connection with San Francisco and other California markets as well as another line to the east via Western Pacific connections. Three paved highways lead from the area. One runs southeast to Alturas and Reno; one northwest to Klamath Falls, Bend, Eugene, or Medford; and the newest addition runs along the state line from Hatfield over to Dorris and down to Weed. All are good roads but are mountainous and vory slow for truck travel. The types of buyers and agencies which purchase specific crops have been discussed in some detail elsewhere in this report. However ; some price compari- sons are interesting. First, prices paid for barley have usually been higher in this region than in other western areas because of qualities. Potatoes have not been so fortunate in that the crop is the late potato crop and is sold in the winter usually after a considerable period of storage. Sugar beet prices run close to the state averages. The following table gives data of relative prices of four products for the Tule Lake Division. State average prices are used for comparison with Tule Lake products. While this is only a rough comparison the data do illustrate the dif- ferences. Value per unit produced is obtained by dividing total value by acreage planted (not harvested) and average yields tend to be less than the state average price paid producers. .t. J . i+lHi fc- : ■ . •- : i 79» As long as the difficulty in marketing these alternative cash crops exists, other endeavors should be examined carefully. Both alfalfa and permanent pas- ture do well in this area indicating that a diversified agriculture including livestock enterprises would be a possible solution. There are three problems which must be faced with livestock in the area. There is no natural grazing land on these homesteads to supplement feed crops. The nature of the soil is such that when wet the handling of livestock is very difficult; The inclusion of livestock in the organization means more work and constant attention on the part of the operator. Overshadowing the disadvantages are such factors as better utilization of crop residues such as straw and hay, sugar beet tops, and cull potatoes, the maintenance of soil fertility with manure and reduction in native fertility hauled away in cash crops; In addition the care of livestock, especially dairy herds, provides more gainful employment for the farmer and his family — an impor- tant item during periods of recession. Livestock and livestock products find a ready market; A large volume of livestock is produced in Modoc and Siskiyou counties according to the Census of Agriculture for 1945. In Modoc County 49,652 cattle and calves were reported and 25,383 cows and heifers two years or older were listed, representing a total value of almost 5-g- million dollars. In 1940 the number of cows was about the same but the number of cattle and calves was almost 10,000 greater. In Siskiyou County the number of cattle and calves was reported at 61,205 while the number of cows and heifers two years and older was 31,858. The total value of these animals was slightly over 6-g million. Both cattle and c ow numbers were greater by roughly 20 per cent in 1945 than 1940 according to the census figures for Siskiyou County. In the section on livestock is contained further data on num- bers of livestock in the Tule Lake Division from the period 1935-1947. Up until the period shortly before the end of World War II dairying was a major enterprise in the basin. The cheese factory at Malin is closed down but should dairying again gain importance it would undoubtedly reopen; The six milk routes from the two creameries in Klamath Falls would undoubtedly be re-established should raw milk again become available. Viewing the marketing problem from the standpoint of cash crops, especially vegetables, from a longer time viewpoint a possible alleviating element enters the picture. Should the population of the west, particularly California and Oregon, continue to expand at current rates for the next three, four, or five years, buyers of foodstuffs might become more interested in the products of this region; •tflHit Fit" *j9i^ ; ... jf . r) . X 9 ' , • SI • • - If bfl ... | «4 fr*S© -ieIa^C»A,£>'jft- 81 Conclusions This report emphasizes a number of matters worthy of special consideration. Those selected as of particular importance are: (1) Statistics of price returns to growers, costs of production, and net earnings for 1947 present a very favorable picture. These prices (and costs) may not continue and hence future plans should give full consideration to the lower basis as reflected in the 1937-1939 figures. (2) Selecting settlers. The present method appears inadequate. 'Why not prepare a searching test and require prospective settlers to take this test, to show their knowledge of farm practices and of farm management, grading their answers, and making selections from those at the top of the list. The staff of the Giannini Foundation would, we are sure, help in the preparation of questions. This method would be far more searching than the present one of relying solely upon letters from parties not likely to be known to the Reclamation Service. (3) Some method of more adequate planning of farming operations to help new settlers for the first year or two. A resident advisor (perhaps under the auspices of the California College of Agriculture, Extension Service, or an employee of the Bureau of Reclamation) who knows the area and its problems could render a highly useful service and should cut down the number of newcomers who fail to do a good job. At present the Bureau of Reclamation has a representative to handle problems for each group of settlers but his activities are directed toward administrative details to such an extent that little time is available for helping new settlers in the planning and management phases of their operations* The thought might be extended to put all newcomers on a probationary period (say of two or three years) and not give title to the land until fitness and capability have been adequately demonstrated. (4) Speculation and leasing should be discouraged. This could be done by not permitting sales or leasing out by settlers during a fixed proba- tionary period (say three to five years). Provision would be needed for the Bureau when retaking such properties to reimburse the settlers for their original investment plus a reasonable price for any improve- ments they may have brought about, provided the improvements are neces- sary, suitable, and economical* Bear in mind that the government (using tax payers' money) is "staking" each settler in an average amount of about $20,000. No well-established agriculture can be expected until those who live and farm in the area do so with the firm conviction that they intend to settle permanently in the area and make farming a lifetime career. (5) More experimental work is needed, particularly along the lines of weed control (both in the fields and in the canals and ditches)V, in the use of fertilizers, better strains of seeds, new crops, and especially in developing new and better marketing outlets. l/ Perhaps a series of strainers can be invented, both in the main canals and at the outlets of the individual farms. - *:. 5 o$ sen vi so iiff iv ??>i *»♦.-.»• ?. OS ■ . s: ■ flfl *f o i