CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE CIRCULAR 24 January, 1929 Enterprise Efficiency Studies on California Farms A Progress Report L. W. FLUHARTY and F. R. WILCOX PUBLISHED BY THE COLLEGE OF AGRICULTURE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA Cooperative Extension work in Agriculture and Home Economics, College of Agriculture, University of California, and United States Department of Agriculture cooperating. Dis- tributed in furtherance of the Acts of Congress of May 8 and June 30, 1914. B. H. Crocheron, Director, California Agricultural Extension Service. UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA PRINTING OFFICE BERKELEY, CALIFORNIA 1929 V J FOREWORD The farmers of California realize that farm efficiency is a pre- requisite to any real solution of the farm problem. Volume of production per unit of area, cost of production per unit of product, quality of product, and efficiency of marketing, all go hand in hand to make up the economic return of the farmer. This circular presents some of the results of the large study of farm enterprises now under way in California. Most farmers keep some sort of account. The value of such accounts is vastly enhanced, however, when they are kept upon a uniform basis, when they are analyzed and segregated, and when they are compared with the records of neighboring farmers or competing districts. Much of the public discussion regarding the records given in this circular has been concerned with the average costs or returns per acre or per unit. Such averages are, however, the least valuable aspect of the work. The meat of the matter is for the farmer to be able to compare his detailed costs with those of others operating under similar conditions, and, by such comparison, to learn wherein his business may be improved through lowering costs or increasing yields. Every farm enterprise is made up of a series of small operations. A failure in efficiency in one or more of these operations may increase the total cost or lower the final yield. It is only by comparison between the detailed operations of various farms and groups of farms that a view may be gained of their comparative efficiency. Limitation of space prohibits the presentation here of the segre- gations and comparisons made upon the seventy-four studies given in this circular. However, examples are presented of some tabulations with apples (page 68), oranges (page 70), walnuts (page 72), dairy- ing (page 75), and poultry (page 78). Special attention is called to these pages. The farm advisors in the various counties have prepared detailed tabulations bearing upon all the studies under their charge. B. H. Crocheron, Director of Agricultural Extension. LIST OF TABLES PAGE Table 1. Extent of enterprise efficiency studies in California 8 DECIDUOUS FRUITS Table 2. Apple cost account data, Santa Cruz County — 1927 12 Table 3. Gravenstein apple cost account data, Sonoma County — 1927 13 Table 4. Late apple cost account data, Sonoma County — 1927 14 Table 5. Apricot cost account data, Alameda County — 1927 15 Table 6. Apricot cost account data, Eiverside County — 1926.... 16 Table 7. Apricot cost account data, Stanislaus County — 1927 17 Table 8. Thompson grapes (all sold dried) cost account data, Fresno County— 1926-1927 18 Table 9. Thompson grapes (sold fresh and dried) cost account data, Fresno County— 1926-1927 19 Table 10. Thompson grapes (all sold fresh) cost account data, Fresno County— 1926-1927 20 Table 11. Muscat grapes (all sold dried) cost account data, Fresno County— 1926-1927 21 Table 12. Muscat grapes (sold fresh and dried) cost account data, Fresno County— 1926-1927 22 Table 13. Muscat grapes (all sold fresh) cost account data, Fresno County— 1926-1927 23 Table 14. Malaga grapes cost account data, Fresno County — 1926-1927 24 Table 15. Emperor grapes cost account data, Fresno County — 1926-1927..- 25 Table 16. Cornichon grapes cost account data, Fresno County — 1926-1927. 26 Table 17. Juice grapes cost account data, Fresno County — 1926-1927 27 Table 18. Tokay grapes cost account data, San Joaquin County — 1926-1927. 28 Table 19. Raisin cost account data, Tulare County — 1927 29 Table 20. Peach cost account data, Stanislaus County— 1925-1927 30 Table 21. Peach cost account data, Tulare County— 1926-1927 31 Table 22. Pear cost account data. Lake County— 1926-1927 32 Table 23. Pear cost account data, Mendocino County — 1926-1927 33 Table 24. Prune cost account data, Napa County — 1927 34 CITRUS FRUITS Table 25. Grapefruit cost account data, Imperial County — 1927 35 Table 26. Lemon cost account data. Orange County — 1926-1927 36 Table 27. Orange cost account data, Orange County — 1926-1927 37 NUT CROPS Table 28. Walnut cost account data, Los Angeles County — 1927 38 Table 29. Walnut cost account data, San Joaquin County — 1926-1927 39 'kable 30. Walnut cost account data, Santa Barbara County — 1926-1927.... 40 FIELD CEOPS PAGE Table 31. Alfalfa cost account data, Merced County — 1927 41 Table 32. Bean cost account data, Santa Barbara County — 1927 42 Table 33. Cotton cost account data, Kern County — 1926-1927 43 Table 34. Potato cost account data, Kern County — 1927 44 Table 35. Wheat cost account data, San Luis Obispo County — 1927 45 Table 36. Summer fallow cost account data on grain land, San Luis Obispo County— 1927 46 DAIRY Table 37. Dairy cost acount data, Imperial County — 1926-1927 47 Table 38. Dairy cost account data, Kern County — 1927 48 Table 39. Dairy cost account data, Marin County — 1925-1927 49 Table 40. Dairy cost account data, Eiverside County — 1927 50 Table 41. Dairy cost account data, San Bernardino County — 1927 51 POULTRY Table 42. Poultry cost account data, Fresno County— 1925-1927 52 Table 43. Poultry cost account data, Humboldt County — 1927 53 Table 44. Poultry cost account data, Imperial County — 1927 54 Table 45. Poultry cost account data, Kern County — 1927 55 Table 46. Poultry cost account data, Monterey County — 1927 56 Table 47. Poultry cost account data, Napa County— 1926-1927 57 Table 48. Poultry cost account data. Orange County — 1927 58 Table 49. Poultry cost account data, Placer County — 1927 59 Table 50. Poultry cost account data, Sacramento County — 1927 60 Table 51. Poultry cost account data, San Joaquin County — 1925-1927 61 Table 52. Poultry cost account data, Santa Cruz County — 1927 62 Table 53. Poultry cost account data, Sonoma County — 1925, 1927 63 Table 54. Poultry cost account data, Tulare County— 1926-1927 64 Table 55. Poultry cost account data, Ventura County — 1927 65 Table 56. Turkey cost account data, San Bernardino County — 1927 66 METHOD OF RETURNING DATA TO COOPERATORS Table 57. Comparison of cost and efficiency factors in Gravenstein apple production: Sonoma County, 1927. Grouped according to net profit per acre 68 Table 58. Comparison of cost and efficiency factors in orange production: Orange County, 1927. Grouped according to net profit per acre 70 Table 59. Comparison of cost and efficiency factors in producing walnuts: Los Angeles County, 1927. Grouped according to yield per acre 72 Table 60. Extremes of cultivation practices showing four groves for com- parison with your grove. Walnut cost account study, Los Angeles County— 1927 74 Table 61. Comparison of cost and efficiency factors in the dairy industry: Imperial County, 1927. Grouped according to net profit per cow 75 Table 62. Comparison of cost and efficiency factors in egg production: Sonoma County, 1927. Grouped according to net profit per hen 78 Enterprise Efficiency Studies on California Farms A Progress Report L. W. FLUHAETYi and F. R. WILCOX2 INTRODUCTION Since 1925, farmers of the State of California have been keeping efficiency and cost records on various farm enterprises in cooperation with the Agricultural Extension Service of the University of Cali- fornia. During 1925, 142 farmers located in 5 counties completed records on 3 different commodities. From this small beginning the work has spread to all parts of the state. At the close of the 1927 crop year 74 separate studies were completed, 5 in 1925, 20 in 1926, and 49 in 1927. Records were obtained from 1,713 farmers. These 74 studies were made in 28 counties and included 22 different farm commodities. During 1928 the number of studies has increased to 80 for the same 22 commodities. A total of 1,833 cooperators located in 33 counties are supplying the original data (see table 1). These studies were organized to continue over a period of five years. Because of the seasonal variation in yields, costs, and returns, it is impossible to draw definite conclusions from data collected over a shorter period of time. The material in this circular is, therefore, presented as a progress report dealing with the 74 enterprise efficiency studies conducted to date. It is obviously impossible to include in the pages of one small publication all of the efficiency factors involved. There are herein presented only general summaries of costs, returns, and small amounts of other information, together with methods of returning to the individual cooperators results from each type of study. Although the data cover only a period of from one to three years, it is presented as the best and most reliable information obtainable at the present time. It should not, however, be considered as final and conclusive. The tables presented in this circular show in tabular form the cost of production and efficiency factors involved in the studies carried on throughout the state. These tables fall naturally under six general groups, namely : deciduous fruits, citrus fruits, nut crops, field crops, dairying, and poultry raising. It will be noted that the factors for 1 Extension Specialist in Farm Management. 2 Extension Specialist in Farm Management. 6 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 the tree crops and field crops are practically the same and the forms used in tabulating the data are all very similar. The cost and efficiency factors considered in the dairy and poultry studies are very different from those considered in tree and field crops. The last five tables are representative examples of summaries for five of the main groups of cost account studies illustrating the methods of presenting the cost and efficiency data to the cooperators. METHOD OF CONDUCTING ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES The enterprise efficiency and cost studies are carried on under the direct supervision of the farm advisors in the various counties of the state. Records are kept on standard forms. The cooperator (farmer) keeps a daily record of labor and cash costs for the enterprise, which record he sends to the farm advisor at the end of each month. This record includes the number of man, horse, and tractor hours involved in each cultural operation, and the wage rate per hour. When. received, the record is checked for errors or omissions by the farm advisor. If errors or omissions occur the farm advisor makes corrections by telephone, letter, or personal call on the cooperator. The material from each individual record is then entered on a monthly accumulation sheet in the farm advisor's office. During the course of the study the farm advisor takes the necessary inventories of land, improvements, and equipment used in the enterprise. In order that the material may be of immediate and practical value, the cost of production and the management factors which influence these costs are worked out for each cooperator at the close of the year. The cost of production and management factors are also compiled for the entire study. The data are so arranged as to show contrasts between cultural methods followed on the most profitable, the average, and the least profitable farms. A comparison is made between these groups and each cooperator 's record which enables him to detect management methods that may be improved. RETURNING INFORMATION TO COOPERATORS When the enterprise efficiency study has been completed and the data analyzed, a meeting of the cooperators is held. At this meeting each cooperator is given a completed copy of his own record, together with a copy of all other data and conclusions drawn from the entire study. As the meeting proceeds results and conclusions of the study are discussed, so that each cooperator may make comparisons of these results with his own record. Such a comparison enables the cooperator 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 7 to find the 'management leaks' in his business. After such a meeting the farm advisor visits each cooperator for the purpose of further interpreting this record and making suggestions for improvement in management or cultural practices. A memorandum of proposed changes is often left with the cooperator. PURPOSES OF ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES These studies are carried on primarily for the purpose of aiding the individual cooperator with his management problems. A careful analysis of the summaries enables him to make the following more important uses of the data: 1. As an index to the relative efficiency of his own management practices as compared with all other cooperators who are operating under similar conditions. 2. To compare management practices and the relative profitable- ness of his enterprise with high, low, and average of the district in which he is farming. 3. As a guide for determining the most efficient standards of man- agement. 4. To learn whether or not his costs of production per unit are above or below the current or probable market price. 5. As an index to the relative profitableness of his enterprise as compared with the same enterprise in competing sections of the state. 6. As a basis for a more effective enterprise layout and program. The farm advisor is interested in an effective program for the improvement of agricultural conditions. It is impossible for him to build such a program without a thorough knowledge of the cultural and management problems with which the farmers of the county must deal. The enterprise efficiency and cost studies furnish him a method of studying these problems. From the data secured it is possible to measure the efficiency of various cultural and management practices in money value. The studies also provide a basis upon which the farm advisor may judge the relative importance of various extension projects. CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 1 Extent of Enterprise Efficiency Studies in California County Alameda- Butte... Colusa. Fresno.. Humboldt. Imperial.. Kern. Kings Lake Los Angeles.. Madera.. Marin Mendocino.. Merced Monterey. Napa Orange. Placer Riverside. Sacramento San Benito... San Bernardino.. San Diego San Joaquin. Enterprise Apricots Poultry Oranges Prunes Dairy Grapes Poultry Poultry Alfalfa Dairy Grapefruit.. Poultry Cotton Dairy Potatoes Poultry Turkeys Dairy Pears Walnuts Poultry Apricots Beef cattle. Grapes Dairy Alfalfa... Dairy Poultry. Poultry. Prunes... Beans Lemons .. Oranges... Poultry- Poultry... Apricots.. Dairy Poultry... Prunes Citrus Dairy Poultry... Turkeys.. Oranges.. Poultry... Dairy Grapes.... Poultry.. Walnuts.. Number of records 1925 1926 36 18 1927 10 127 7 17 31 1928^ 15 25 18 24 14 100 8 22 12 18 9 22 17 15 15 23 8 18 27 30 40 12 16 22 9 28 18 22 24 18 22 20 10 25 87 16 17 8 15 26 20 36 16 50 12 12 9 8 22 24 * The enterprises included for 1928 are under way. Summaries have not been made. The number of records are estimates based on latest available information from the farm advisors. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS TABLE 1— (Continued) County Enterprise Number of records 1925 1926 1927 1928* Dairy 16 Wheat 15 19 18 28 21 6 32 15 Summer fallow 15 20 Walnuts 40 24 30 Poultry 30 30 Sonoma Dairy 14 PoultryJ 38 35 58 69 15 > Almonds 10 14 25 Beans 34 19 Grain 14 60 18 83 81 50 Poultry Peaches ... 18 Sutter . . 24 j 20 Peaches 7 16 Turkeys 8 30 Dairy 18 33 24 Tulare . \ Oranges . ... 40 21 18 34 28 11 24 Poultry 28 Ventura Poultry 18 Walnuts 23 Total 142 5 28.4 495 20 24.7 1,076 49 22.0 1,833 Number of studies 80 23.0 * The enterpiises- included for 1928 are under way. Summaries have not been made. The number of records are estimates based on latest available information from the farm advisors. t The apple study in Sonoma County includes Gravenstein and late varieties, making two separate reports. t The 1926 poultry study in Sonoma County includes only production records. 10 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 EXPLANATION OF TERMS USED IN COST TABLES In order that the reader may correctly interpret the tables pre- sented in this publication the following explanation of terms is sub- mitted for those items which are not self-explanatory. 1. Terms used in all tables. Labor: the cost for all family and hired labor. The family labor is computed at the wag-e rate for which the same class of lalbor could have been hired. AVhen labor cost items appear in the tables on fruit or field crops the total cliarge includes man, horse, and tractor labor. Interest and depreciation on improvemeiits and equipment: this item includes interest on investment at 6 per cent on capital invested in improvements and equipment and an annual depreci- ation charge based on inventory value. Trees are considered an improvement in the fruit cost account projects. Interest on investment in land: a charge of 6 per cent on the estimated sale value of bare land for the farms on which the records are kept. 2. Terms used in cost tables on fruit and field crops. Materials: a cost item which represents materials used in the enterprise. Cash overhead: a cost which includes taxes, interest on operat- ing capital, and incidental expenses' which cannot be charged directly to a cultural operation. Average income per acre: the total income divided by the number of acres in the group of farms under consideration. The total income is based on farm price of the product, that is, the market price minus cost of marketing. Average net profit per acre: the difference between total cost and average income per acre. Ave7'age income per ton: the total receipts divided by the total tonnage produced on the farm groups under consideration. Average net profit per ton: the difference between total income and total expenses per ton. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 11 3. Terms used in cost tables on poultry and dairy data. Gross income: the cash receipts from dairy or poultry products, the value of these products consumed in the home, and increase in inventory of stock. Total expense: all cash expenses, family labor, depreciation on buildings and equipment, and interest on investment at 6 per cent. Net profit: the gross income minus total expense. Farm, income: the net profit, interest on investment at 6 per cent, and the value of the family labor. This figure is the income derived from the enterprise by the operator for his own labor and the use of his capital after a deduction has been made for depreci- ation on buildings and equipment. Labor income: the farm income minus interest at 6 per cent on invested capital. This figure represents the amount received by the operator for his own labor. 12 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 2 Apple Cost Account Data, Santa Cruz County — 1927 1927 Number of records 21 Acres in study 328.7 Total amount produced (tons) 1,895.28 Average yield per acre (tons) 5.77 Highest yield per acre (tons) .• 13.49 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 14.87 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 1.44 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 46.51 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 83.04 Materials 12.48 Cash overhead 20.52 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 31.19 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 19.22 Total 166.45 Average income per acre 209.97 Average net profit per acre 43.52 Average cost per ton dollars Labor 14.41 Materials 2.16 Cash overhead 3.55 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 5.41 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 3.33 Total 28.86 Average income per ton 36.42 Average net profit per ton 7.56 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Santa Cruz County under the direction of Paul S. Williamson, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 13 TABLE 3 Gravenstein Apple Cost Account Data, Sonoma County — 1927 1927 Number of records 32 Acres in study 301.3 Total amount produced (boxes) 63,876 Average yield per acre (boxes) 212 Highest yield per acre (boxes) 666 Cost per box on highest yield (dollars) 0.29 Lowest yield per acre (boxes) 25 Cost per box on lowest yield (dollars) 4.58 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 63.72 Materials 10.80 Cash overhead 7.70 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 48.19 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 16.45 Total 146.86* 146.86 Average income per acre 172.00 242.31 Average net profit per acre 25.14 95.45 Average cost per box cents cents Labor 30.1 Materials 5.1 Cash overhead 3.6 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 22.7 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 7.8 Total 69.3* 69.3 Average income per box 81.1 114.3 Average net profit per box 11.8 45.0 * The 1927 Gravenstein prices were 41 per cent higher than the average for the five previous years. The income figures in this column are based on this five-year-average price. This estimated income was placed on each record in addition to the actual income because it was felt to be a sounder basis for studying each enterprise by the owners. Based on 1927 income 23 cooperators made a profit; 9 a loss. Based on the five-year-average income 18 cooperators made a profit; 14 a loss. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Sonoma County under the direction of H, P. Everett, Assistant Farm Advisor. 14 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 4 Late Apple Cost Account Data, Sonoma County — 1927 1927 Number of records 9 Acres in study 39.0 Total amount produced (boxes) 16,887 Average yield per acre (boxes) 433 Highest yield per acre (boxes) 946 Cost per box on highest yield (dollars) 0.25 Lowest yield per acre (boxes) 21 Cost per box on lowest yield (dollars) 5.27 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 93.10 Materials 13.42 Cash overhead 9.44 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 45.91 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 16.44 Total 178.31 Average income per acre 311.03 Average net profit per acre 132.72 Average cost per box cents Labor 21.5 Materials 3.1 Cash overhead 2.2 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 10.6 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 3.8 Total 41.2 Average income per box 71.8 Average net profit per box 30.6 The high and the low yields were both obtained on 18-year-old orchards. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Sonoma County under the direction of H. P. Everett, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 15 TABLE 5 Apricot Cost Account Data, Alameda County — 1927 1927 Number of records 10 Acres in study 160.5 Total amount produced (tons) 548.72 Average yield per acre (tons) 3.42 Highest yield per acre (tons) 5.04 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 50.00 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 0.22 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 408.00 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 88.32 Materials 10.76 Cash overhead 14.14 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 30.03 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 38.16 Total 181.41 Average income per acre 228.92 Average net profit per acre 47.51 Average cost per ton dollars Labor 25.82 Materials 3.15 Cash overhead 4.13 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 8.78 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 11.16 Total 53.04 Average income per ton 66.94 Average net profit per ton 13.90 The above tabulations were compiled, from individual cost records kept by farmers in Alameda County under the direction of J. Murray Davison, Assistant Farm Advisor. 16 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 6 Apricot Cost Data, Riverside County — 1926 1926 Number of records 8 Acres in study 83.5 Total amount produced (tons) 385.70 Average yield per acre (tons) — . 4.62 Highest yield per acre (tons) 13.66 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) : 18.64 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 2.65 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 54.78 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 88.10 Materials 17.85 Cash overhead 9.44 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 44.80 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 20.12 Total 180.31 Average income per acre 237.74 Average net profit per acre 57.43 Average cost per ton dollars Labor 19.07 Materials 3.86 Cash overhead 2.04 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 9.70 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 4.35 Total 39.02 Average income per ton 51.46 Average net profit per ton 12.44 Material costs are made up largely of water costs with certain miscellaneous supplies. The returns per acre and per ton which are included in the above table are materially increased in several instances by the high price received for pits by growers who dried their fruit. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Riverside County under the direction of M. M. Winslow, Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 17 TABLE 7 Apricot Cost Account Data, Stanislaus County — 1927 1927 Number of records 14 Acres in study 98.3 Total amount produced (tons) 352.73 Average yield per acre (tons) 3.59 Highest yield per acre (tons) 16.20 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 22.46 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 0.87 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 157.33 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 89.20 Materials 9.83 Cash overhead 15.57 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment, risk,* etc.) 51.70 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 21.00 Total 187.30 Average income per acre 221.50 Average net profit per acre 34.20 Average cost per ton dollars Labor 24.85 Materials 2.74 Cash overhead 4.34 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment, risk,* etc.) 14.40 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 5.85 Total 52.18 Average income per ton 61.70 Average net profit per ton 9.52 This table includes orchards from four years up to twelve years of age. * The charge itemized as 'risk' was arrived at by taking 15 per cent of all expenses except interest on investment in land. This item amounted to $20.48 per acre and $5.57 per ton in 1927. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Stanislaus County under the direction of A. A. Jungerman, Farm Advisor. 18 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 8 Thompson Grapes (All Sold Dried) Cost Account Data, Fresno County— 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 24 20 Acres in study 482.3 305.8 Total amount produced (dried tons) 824.46 534.90 Average yield per acre (dried tons) 1.71 1.75 Highest yield per acre (dried tons) 3.00 3.38 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 38.50 38.94 Lowest yield per acre (dried tons) 0.90 0.94 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 136.37 106.03 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 51.94 53.65 Materials 6.79 6.09 Cash overhead 12.91 14.40 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment)..- 28.40 28.88 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 9.76 9.23 Total 109.80 112.25 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 30.37 30.66 Materials 3.97 3.48 Cash overhead 7.54 8.24 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 16.62 16.49 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 5.71 5.28 Total 64.21 64.15 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton Income and net profit are not reported because complete returns were not available at time of making summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor, 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 19 TABLE 9 Thompson Grapes (Sold Fresh and Dried) Cost Account Data, Fresno County— 1926-1927* 1926 1927 Number of records 10 9 Acres in study 195.0 246.5 Total amount produced (tons) 1,374.70 1,895.12 Average yield per acre (tons) 7.05 7.68 Highest yield per acre (tons) 10.00 10.40 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 15.28 14.05 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 5.08 6.00 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 19.68 18.21 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 61.14 61.73 Materials 7.43 8.24 Cash overhead 13.96 16.14 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 27.72 28.16 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 11.29 10.90 Total '. 12L54 125.17 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 8.67 8.04 Materials 1.05 1.07 Cash overhead 1.99 2.11 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 3.93 3.66 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 1.60 1.42 Total 17.24 16.30 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton * The report is given on a fresh tonnage basis. That portion of the crop sold as raisins was converted into green tonnage on a 1 to 4 ratio. Income and net profit are not reported because complete returns were not available at time of making summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor. 20 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 10 Thompson Grapes (All Sold Fresh) Cost Account Data, Fresno County— 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 7 1 Acres in study 26.2 4.0 Total amount produced (tons) 197.90 49.64 Average yield per acre (tons) 7.56 12.41 Highest yield per acre (tons) 8.94 12.41 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 18.27 14.94 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 6.55 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 16.54 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 55.37 101.97 Materials 4.78 9.59 Cash overhead 15.09 8.36 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 25.65 53.44 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 9.97 12.00 Total 110.86 185.36 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 7.32 8.22 Materials 0.63 0.77 Cash overhead 2.00 0.67 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 3.40 4.31 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 1.32 0.97 Total 14.67 14.94 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton Income and net profit are not reported because complete returns were not available at time of making summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 21 TABLE 11 Muscat Grapes (All Sold Dried) Cost Account Data, Fresno County 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 9 8 Acres in study 356.2 218.5 Total amount produced (dried tons) 522.50 408.32 Average yield per acre (dried tons) 1.47 1.87 Highest yield per acre (dried tons) 2.78 3.00 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 40.64 37.83 Lowest yield per acre (dried tons) 0.81 0.83 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 29.78 98.26 Average cost per acre . dollars dollars Labor 44.70 52.09 Materials 2.36 1.99 Cash overhead 12.96 14.80 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 29.38 23.69 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 9.97 9.43 Total 99.37 102.00 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 30.41 27.80 Materials 1.61 1.06 Cash overhead 8.82 7.91 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 19.99 12.67 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 6.78 5.05 Total 67.61 54.55 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton Because of the various methods of selling and of deferred payments, income figures are not included in this study. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor. 22 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 12 Muscat Grapes (Sold Fresh and Dried) Cost Account Data, Fresno County— 1926-1927* 1926 1927 Number of records 7 9 Acres in study 231.5 353.7 Total amount produced (tons) 1,534.80 3,258.00 Average yield per acre (tons) 6.63 9.20 Highest yield per acre (tons) 9.45 10.78 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 13.42 10.94 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 3.48 5.60 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 26.32 18.91 Average cost per acre . dollars dollars Labor 49.01 53.11 Materials 3.28 1.73 Cash overhead 13.39 14.98 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 19.27 21.62 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 11.35 10.48 Total 96.30 101.92 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 7.39 5.77 Materials 0.49 0.19 Cash overhead 2.02 1.63 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 2.91 2.35 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 1.71 1.14 Total 14.52 11.08 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton * The report is given on a fresh tonnage basis. That portion of the crop sold as raisins was converted to a green tonnage basis on a 1 to 4 ratio. Income and net profit are not reported because complete returns were not available at time of making summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor, 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 23 TABLE 13 Muscat Grapes (All Sold Fresh) Cost Account Data, Fresno County 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records : 7 6 Acres in study 95.8 82.5 Total amount produced (tons) 537.80 639.60 Average yield per acre (tons) 5.61 7.75 Highest yield per acre (tons) 9.67 11.57 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 14.19 9.30 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 1.67 4.35 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 48.95 24.35 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 53.89 56.94 Materials ^ 3.59 1.71 Cash overhead 14.41 14.43 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).— 20.20 18.65 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 11.53 9.93 Total 103.62 101.66 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 9.60 7.35 Materials 0.64 0.22 Cash overhead 2.57 1.86 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 3.61 2.41 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 2.05 1.28 Total 18.47 13.12 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton Income and net profit are not reported in the above table because complete returns were not available at time of making summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor. 24 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 14 Malaga Grapes Cost Account Data, Fresno County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 24 14 Acres in study 323.0 152.5 Total amount produced (tons) 1,381.03 655.63 Average yield per acre (tons) 4.28 4.30 Highest yield per acre (tons) 11.40 11.70 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 16.98 8.19 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 1.13 0.89 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 55.46 85.99 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 49.60 45.14 Materials '. 5.77 4.44 Cash overhead 13.58 14.01 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 20.42 21.56 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 8.49 9.54 Total 97.86 94.69 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 11.59 10.50 Materials 1.35 1.03 Cash overhead 3.17 3.26 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 4.77 5.01 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 1.98 2.22 Total 22.86 22.02 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton Income and net profit are not reported in the above table because complete returns were not available at time of making summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 25 TABLE 15 Emperor Grapes Cost Account Data, Fresno County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 3 3 Acres in study 28.0 27.0 Total amount produced (tons) 118.31 126.65 Average yield per acre (tons) 4.23 4.69 Highest yield per acre (tons) 5.77 5.97 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 31.92 24.83 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 3.38 3.00 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 28.45 31.55 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 57.95 76.64 Materials 10.19 5.94 Cash overhead 14.99 17.37 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 28.16 28.43 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 10.07 10.11 Total 121.36 138.49 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 13.70 16.34 Materials 2.41 1.27 Cash overhead 3.55 3.70 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).— 6.65 6.06 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 2.38 2.16 Total 28.69 29.53 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton Income and net profit are not reported in the above table because complete returns were not available at time of making summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor. 26 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [ClRC. 24 TABLE 16 CoRNiCHON Grapes Cost Account Data, Fresno County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 2 2 Acres in study 10.5 10.3 Total amount produced (tons) 53.27 60.57 Average yield per acre (tons) 5.07 5.88 Highest yield per acre (tons) 5.31 7.92 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 20.00 19.23 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 4.82 3.70 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 30.25 19.58 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 61.16 55.41 Materials 8.32 3.36 Cash overhead 16.09 14.59 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 29.89 30.95 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 10.49 9.06 Total 125.95 113.37 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 12.06 9.42 Materials 1.64 0.57 Cash overhead 3.17 2.48 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 5.90 5.27 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 2.07 1.54 Total 24.84 19.28 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton Income and net profit are not reported in the above table because complete returns were not available at time of making summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 27 TABLE 17 Juice Grapes Cost Account Data, Fresno County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 4 4 Acres in study 26.3 20.0 Total amount produced (tons) 135.18 111.58 Average yield per acre (tons) 5.14 5.58 Highest yield per acre (tons) 6.10 6.40 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 13.38 12.46 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 4.05 1.68 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 22.81 48.09 Average cost per acre dollars dollar^ Labor 46.46 56.87 Materials 6.14 2.70 Cash overhead 12.45 15.76 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 21.79 15.27 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 8.09 9.16 Total 94.93 99.76 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 9.04 10.19 Materials 1.19 0.48 Cash overhead 2.42 2.83 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 4.24 2.73 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 1.57 1.64 Total 18.46 17.87 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton Because of the various methods of selling and of deferred payments, income figures are not included in this study. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of H. R. Keller, Assistant Farm Advisor. 28 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 18 Tokay Grapes Cost Account Data, San Joaquin County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 18 15 Acres in study 333.0 350.0 Total amount produced (boxes) 127,206 128,100 Average yield per acre (boxes) 382 366 Highest yield per acre (boxes) 772 651 Cost per box on highest yield (dollors) 1.27 1.30 Lowest yield per acre (boxes) 201 198 Cost per box on lowest yield (dollars) 1.74 1.46 Average cost per acre dollars dollars • Labor 101.56 103.89 Materials 54.96 54.80 Cash overhead 19.79 21.47 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 69.65 66.87 Literest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 25.12 25.13' Total 271.08 272.16 Average income per acre 287.65 289.87 Average net profit per acre 16.57 17.64 Average cost per box cents cents Labor 26.5 28.4 Materials 14.4 15.0 Cash overhead 5.2 5.9 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 18.2 18.3 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 6.6 6.9 Total 70.9 74.5 Average income per box 75.3 79.2 Average net profit per box 4.4 4.7 The above table includes all labor, cash, and overhead costs of delivering packed grapes at the loading shed. The charge for loading, freight, refriger- ation and commission amounted to 73.0 cents per box in 1926 and 77.3 cents per box in 1927. The average selling price per box for Tokay grapes included in this study was $1,439 in 1926 and $1,565 in 1927. Included in the item of ''interest and depreciation" there is a charge of 15 per cent on ''net sales" to cover the risk of doing business. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in San Joaquin County under the direction of J. W. Adriance, Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 29 TABLE 19 Raisin Cost Account Data, Tulare County — 1927 1927 Number of records 27 Acres in study 444.0 Total amount produced (tons) : 492.94 Average yield per acre (tons) 1.11 Highest yield per acre (tons) 2.44 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 56.60 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 0.32 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollors) 293.04 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 41.74 Materials 9.98 Cash overhead 3.94 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 37.73 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 11.08 Total 104.47 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars Labor 37.60 Materials 8.99 Cash overhead 3.55 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 33.99 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 9.98 Total '. 94.11 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton There were 33 records completed in 1927. Of these 32 were full bearing, five years old and over, and one was young bearing. The costs given in this table are, however, from 27 full-bearing vineyards, the raisins from which were all dried in the field. The crop from the remaining 5 full-bearing vineyards was soda dipped and dried in a dehydrator. The extra cost for this process was $31.08 per ton. Income and net profit are not reported because complete returns were not available at time of making summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Tulare County under the direction of W. E. Gilfillan, Assistant Farm Advisor. 30 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 20 Peach Cost Account Data, Stanislaus County — 1925-1927 1925 1926 1927 Number of records 16 23 37 Acres in study 66.1 101.6 217.2 Total amount produced (tons) 768.74 1,492.93 2,041.63 Average yield per acre (tons) 11.63 14.50 9.41 Highest yield per acre (tons) 23.90 26.00 30.01 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 15.25 14.75 11.99 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 4.40 5.70 2.37 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 41.29 58.10 77.01 Average cost per acre dollars dollars dollars Labor 159.00 177.08 139.69 Materials 7.10 10.47 7.73 Cash overhead 25.89 36.72 19.88 Interest and depreciation (improvements, equip- ment, risk,* etc.) 100.50 93.39 79.00 Literest on investment in land (at per cent) .... 21,00 21.19 21.23 Total 318.77 338.37 264.39 Average income per acre 409.50 580.00 211.72 Average net profit per acre 90.73 241.63 —52.67 Average cost per ton dollars dollars dollars Labor 13.67 12.21 14.84 Materials 0.61 0.72 0.82 Cash overhead 2.23 2.53 2.11 Interest and depreciation (improvements, equip- ment, risk,* etc.) : 8.64 6.44 8.40 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) .... 1.81 1.46 2.26 Total 26.96 23.36 28.43 Average income per ton 35.21 40.00 22.50 Average net profit per ton 8.25 16.64 — 5.93 The above table deals with orchards six years old and over which were con- sidered full bearing. In addition to those listed above there were 44 orchards in the 1925 study, 60 orchards in the 1926 study, and 44 orchards in the 1927 study less than six years of age. The labor and material costs per acre are based on the actual acreage report- ing such costs. Hence, the ''total costs per acre" is not a sum of the pre- ceding column of figures. The total cost per acre is arrived at by dividing the total cost for all items of expense by the total acreage involved in each study. * The charge itemized as ''risk" was arrived at by taking 15 per cent of all expenses except interest on investment in land. This item amounted to $41.50 per acre in 1925, $44.15 in 1926, and $31.69 in 1927. On a per ton basis the risk was calculated as: $3.55 in 1925, $3.05 in 1926, and $3.35 in 1927. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Stanislaus County under the direction of A, A. Jungerman, Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNLY FARMS 31 TABLE 21 Peach Cost Account Data, Tulare County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 12 16 Acres in study 112.0 115.5 Total amount produced (tons) 746.60 765.77 Average yield per acre (tons) 6.67 6.63 Highest yield per acre (tons) 11.55 14.63 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 19,85 15.00 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 1.11 0.00 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 124.77 *80.40 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 105.94 8L15 Materials 12.94 14.71 Cash overhead 10.16 5.16 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 50.20 51.22 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 14.04 18.64 Total 193.28 170.88 Average income per acre 251.45 149.17 Average net profit per acre 58.17 — 21.71 Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 15.89 12.24 Materials 1.94 2.21 Cash overhead 1.52 0.78 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 7.52 7.73 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 2.10 2.81 Total 28.97 25.77 Average income per ton 37.70 22.50 Average net profit per ton 8.73 • — 3.27 The 1926 cost data given above are for the full-bearing group of orchards which were six years old and over. There was a total of 21 orchards finishing the study, 9 of which were in young trees. The total production from both full-bearing and young trees amounted to 1,466.10 tons. In the item ''cash overhead," county taxes ($4.22 per acre) and an item of $5.94 for general expense, are included. A total of 34 orchards completed the 1927 study, 16 of which were of the full-bearing groups six years old and over. The remaining 18 orchards were in young trees. The total production from both full-bearing and young trees amounted to 1,342.80 tons. In the item "cash overhead," county taxes only have been included ($5.16 per acre), no general expense item having been used this year. * The lowest production per acre was a complete failure, so cost per acre ($80.40) is given instead of cost per ton. The next lowest orchard was 1.31 tons per acre at a cost of $73.92 per ton. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Tulare County under the direction of W. E. Gilfillan, Farm Advisor, 32 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 22 Pear Cost Account Data, Lake County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 17 15 Acres in study 234.0 222.0 Total amount produced (tons) 2,024.33 1,519.12 Average yield per acre (tons) 8.65 6.85 Highest yield per acre (tons) 21.60 20.00 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 12.33 12.82 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 2.20 1.86 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 52.23 55.12 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 97.61 89.44 Materials 10.77 7.51 Cash overhead 17.51 15.68 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment)—. 44.60 44.11 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 15.11 14.08 Total 185.60 170.82 Average income per acre 304.51 296.65 Average net profit per acre 118.91 125.83 Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 11.28 13.06 Materials 1.24 1.10 Cash overhead 2.03 2.29 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 5.16 6.44 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 1.75 2.05 Total 21.46 24.94 Average income per ton 35.20 43.31 Average net profit per ton 13.74 18.37 There were 36 records completed in 1926 and 31 in 1927. Of the 36 records for 1926, only 17 were for full-bearing orchards and 19 for young orchards. Of the 31 records for 1927, only 15 orchards were in the full-bearing class and 16 were for non-bearing trees. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Lake County under the direction of L. C. Barnard, Farm Advisor, 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 33 TABLE 23 Pear Cost Account Data, Mendocino County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 9 11 Acres in study „ 78.5 101.0 Total amount produced (tons) 881.46 712.01 Average yield per acre (tons) 11.23 7.05 Highest yield per acre (tons) 22.71 17.71 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 10.75 15.10 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 8.03 3.66 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 28.13 53.01 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 116.85 103.72 Materials 10.00 9.91 Cash overhead 15.79 15.80 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 42.61 40.13 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 22.62 22.07 Total 207.87 191.63 Average income per acre 370.46 305.08 Average net profit per acre 162.59 113.45 Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 10.40 14.70 Materials 0.90 1.41 Cash overhead 1.40 2.24 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 3.80 5.69 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 2.02 3.13 Total 18.52 27.17 Average income per ton 33.00 43.26 Average net profit per ton 14.48 16.09 There were 23 records completed in 1926 and 28 in 1927. Of the 23 records for 1926, only 9 were for full-bearing orchards and 14 for young orchards. Of the 28 records for 1927, only 11 orchards were in the full-bearing group and 17 were for non-bearing trees. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Mendocino County under the direction of C. S. Myszka, Farm Advisor, 34 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 24 Prune Cost Account Data, Napa County — 1927 1927 Number of records 22 Acres in study 331.00 Total amount produced (dried tons) 581.00 Average yield per acre (dried tons) 1.75 Highest yield per acre (dried tons) 3.16 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 59.10 Lowest yield per acre (dried tons) 0.26 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 344.72 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 82.32 Materials 22.26 Cash overhead 7.93 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 59.56 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 15.63 Total 187.70 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per ton dollars Labor 47.04 Materials 12.72 Cash overhead 4.53 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 34.03 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 8.93 Total 107.25 Average income per ton Average net profit per ton At time records were completed many prune growers had not received their returns from sales of fruit. It was therefore impossible to give average income or net profit per acre and per ton. All tonnage figures given in the above table are on a dry-fruit basis. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Napa County under the direction of H. J. Baade, Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 35 TABLE 25 Grapefruit Cost Account Data, Imperial County — 1927 192,7 Pull Young bearing bearing Number of records 3 4 Acres in study 8 45 Total amount produced (boxes) 1,920 1,832 Average yield per acre (boxes) 240.0 40.5 Highest yield per acre (boxes) 254.0 73.8 Cost per box on highest yield (dollars) 1.01 2.63 Lowest yield per acre (boxes) 214.0 9.4 Cost per box on lowest yield (dollars) 1.06 10.39 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 124.83 80.59 Materials 48.83 14.61 Cash overhead 4.66 3.03 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 134.04 31.34 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 15.50 15.75 Total 327.86 145.32 Average income per acre 586.32 113.73 Average net profit per acre 258.46 • — 31.59 Average cost per box dollars dollars Labor 0.52 1.99 Materials 0.20 0.36 Cash overhead 0.02 0.07 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).— 0.56 0.77 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 0.06 0.39 Total 1.36 3.58 Average income per box 2.44 2.81 Average net profit per box 1.08 — 0.77 There were 11 grapefruit records completed in 1927. Of these, 3 were in the full bearing class (over seven years of age), 4 were in the young bearing class (from three to five years of age), and 4 were non-bearing (less than three years of age). The 4 non-bearing orchards contained 58 acres. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Imperial County under the direction of F. G. Beyschlag, Assistant Farm Advisor. 36 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 26 Lemon Cost Account Data, Orange County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 7 10 Acres in study 52.0 55.0 Total amount produced (cwt.) 9,016 8,855 Average yield per acre (cwt.) 173 161 Highest yield per acre (cwt.) 248 277 Cost per cwt. on highest yield (dollars) 1.89 1.84 Lowest yield per acre (cwt.) 137 85 Cost per cwt. on lowest yield (dollars) 3.67 4.09 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 154.11 157.67 Materials 77.19 90.24 Cash overhead 35.77 39.22 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 108.93 99.53 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 59.27 62.06 Total 435.27 448.72 Average income per acre 370.05 451.24 Average net profit per acre — 65.22 2.52 Average cost per hundredweight dollars dollars Labor 0.89 0.98 Materials 0.45 0.56 Cash overhead 0.21 0.24 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 0.63 0.62 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 0.34 0.38 Total 2.52 2.78 Average income per cwt 2.14 2.80 Average net profit per cwt — 0.38 0.02 The above figures for 1926 and 1927 refer to full-bearing orchards ten years old and over. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Orange County under the direction of H. E. Wahlberg, Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 37 TABLE 27 Orange Cost Account Data, Orange County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 24 61 Acres in study 238.3 598.0 Total amount produced (boxes) 52,700 129,766 Average yield per acre (boxes) 221 217 Highest yield per acre (boxes) 536 563 Cost per box on highest yield (dollars) 1.05 0.80 Lowest yield per acre (boxes) 85 87 Cost per box on lowest yield (dollars) 3.68 5.96 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 82.70 98.22 Materials 76.23 88.04 Cash overhead 3L97 42.71 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 111.04 99.84 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 72.76 70.71 Total 374.70 399.52 Average income per acre 579.04 655.55 Average net profit per acre 204.34 256.03 Average cost per box cents cents Labor 37.4 45.3 Materials 34.5 40.6 Cash overhead 14.5 19.7 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 50.2 46.0 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 32.9 32.6 Total 169.5 184.2 Average income per box 262.0 302.1 Average net profit per box 92.5 117.9 The above figures for 1926 and 1927 refer to full-bearing orchards ten years old and over. There were 35 records completed in 1926 and 61 in 1927. Of the 35 records for 1926, 24 were for full-bearing orchards and 11 were for orchards less than ten years of age. Of the 75 records for 1927, 61 were for full-bearing orchards and 14 were for orchards under ten years of age. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Orange County under the direction of H. E. Wahlberg, Farm Advisor. 38 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 28 Walnut Cost Account Data, Los Angeles County — 1927 1927 Number of records 33 Acres in study 891.0 Total amount produced (lbs.) 1,726,758 Average yield per acre (lbs.) 1,938 Highest yield per acre (lbs.) 3,069 Cost per lb. on highest yield (cents) 8.1 Lowest yield per acre (lbs.) 602 Cost per lb. on lowest yield (cents) 40.4 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 66.26 Materials 11.69 Cash overhead 24.78 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 49.82 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 45.00 Total 197.55 Average income per acre Average net profit per acre Average cost per pound cents Labor 3.4 Materials 0.6 Cash overhead 1.3 Interest and depreciation (improveemnts an dequipment) 2.6 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent ) 2.3 Total 10.2 Average income per pound Average net profit per pound There were 40 records completed at the end of the year. Of these 40 records, 33 were for full-bearing groves and 7 for young groves. Mature groves are those twelve years old and over. Income and net profit are not reported because complete returns were not available at the time of making the summary. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Los Angeles County under the drection of M. H. Kimball, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 39 TABLE 29 Walnut Cost Account Data, San Joaquin County — 1926-1927 1926 19217 Number of records 8 14 Acres in study 709 1,016 Total amount produced (lbs.) 184,000 1,150,000 Average yield per acre (lbs.) 260 1,132 Highest yield per acre (lbs.) 1,007 1,752 Cost per lb. on highest yield (cents) 19.4 15.4 Lowest yield per acre (lbs.) 170 509 Cost per lb. on lowest yield (cents) 97.2 47.2 Average cost per acre ' dollars dollars Labor 50.14 53.43 Materials 11.19 26.95 Cash overhead 8.60 10.63 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 74.41 80.83 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 20.26 22.05 Total 164.60 193.89 Average income per acre 62.96 214.03 Average net profit per acre , — 101.64 20.14 Average cost per pound cents cents Labor 19.3 4.7 Materials 4.3 2.4 Cash overhead 3.3 0.9 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 28.7 7.1 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 7.8 2.0 Total 63.4 17.1 Average income per pound 24.2 18.9 Average net profit per pound — 39.2 1.8 There were 12 records completed in 1926 and 19 in 1927. Of the 12 records for 1926, 8 were for full-bearing groves and 4 were for young groves. Of the 19 records for 1927, 14 groves were in the full-bearing class and 5 were for non-bearing trees. Walnut blight caused at least 70 per cent damage to the crop in 1926, result- ing in a very high cost per pound. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in San Joaquin County under the direction of J. W. Adriance, Farm Advisor. 40 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 30 Walnut Cost Account Data, Santa Barbara County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 34 24 Acres in study 514.6 385.0 Total amount produced (lbs.) 211,501 916,300 Average yield per acre (lbs.) 411 2,380 Highest yield per acre (lbs.) 900 3,243 Cost per lb. on highest yield (cents) 22.7 9.3 Lowest yield per acre (lbs.) 3.2 941.0 Cost per lb. on lowest yield (cents) 47.1 21.0 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 38.67 71.40 Materials 9.64 8.53 Cash overhead 27.61 30.87 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 68.30 66.17 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 64.80 64.32 Total 209.02 241.29 Average income per acre 91.84 337.15 Average net profit per acre — 117.18 95.86 Average cost per pound cents cents Labor 9.4 3.0 Materials 2.3 0.4 Cash overhead 6.7 1.3 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 16.6 2.7 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 15.8 2.7 Total 50.8 10.1 Average income per pound 22.3 14.2 Average net profit per pound — 28.5 4.1 There were 40 records completed in 1926 and 28 in 1927. Of the 40 records for 1926, 34 were for full-bearing groves and 6 were for young groves. Of the 28 records for 1927, 24 groves were in the full-bearing class and 4 were for non-bearing trees. The weighted average cost of production covering the two- year period was 16.1 cents per pound. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Santa Barbara County under the direction of B. L. Hagglund, Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 41 TABLE 31 Alfalfa Cost Account Data, Merced County— 1927 1926 1927 Number of records 5 15 Acres in study 133 309 Total amount produced (tons) 687.00 1,680.00 Average yield per acre (tons) 5.16 5.44 Highest yield per acre (tons) -. 6.20 9.87 Cost per ton on highest yield (dollars) 8.01 6.81 Lowest yield per acre (tons) 4,30 3.70 Cost per ton on lowest yield (dollars) 13.34 12.71 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 23.83 22.72 Materials 8.10 5.77 Cash overhead 3.85 3.79 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 8.52 13.04 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 13.94 14.14 Total 58.24 59.46 Average income per acre 51.65 63.05 Average net profit per acre — 6.59 3.59 Average cost per ton dollars dollars Labor 4.61 4.18 Materials 1.58 1.06 Cash overhead 0.75 0.69 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment).... 1.65 2.40 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 2.70 2.60 Total 11.29 10.93 Average income per ton 10.00 11.59 Average net profit per ton — 1.29 0.66 Average cost per ton in 1927 is $10.93, fairly close to the average cost of 1926, which was $11.29. Costs per ton varied from $6.74 to $17.49, while per acre costs ranged from $42.48 to $96.97. Labor and material costs amounted to 48 per cent of the total costs, while the remaining outlay of 52 per cent represented overhead. The farmer having lowest cost per ton combined three factors: (1) heavy yield, (2) low overhead costs, and (3) saving in labor costs through use of slings and other efficient methods. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Merced County under the direction of W. H. Alison, Jr., Assistant Farm Advisor. 42 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 32 Bean Cost Account Data, Santa Barbara County — 1927 1927 Number of records 18 Acres in study 1,046 Total amount produced (cwt.) 8,973.67 Average yield per acre (cwt.) 8.58 Highest yield per acre (cwt.) 18.78 Cost per cwt. on highest yield (dollars) 4.92 Lowest yield per acre (cwt.) 3.92 Cost per cwt. on lowest yield (dollars) 7.92 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 21.89 Materials 3.82 Cash overhead 3.47 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment, etc.) 2.41 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 15.23 Total 46.82 Average income per acre 50.44 Average net profit per acre 3.62 Average cost per hundredweight dollars Labor 2.55 Materials 0.45 Cash overhead 0.40 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 0.28 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 1.78 Total 5.46 Average income per cwt 5.88 Average net profit per cwt 0.42 Approximately 50 per cent of the acreage in this study is on rented land. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Santa Barbara County under the direction of E. F. Smyth, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 43 TABLE 33 Cotton Cost Account Data, Kern County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 6 5 Acres in study 137 113 Total amount produced (lbs.) 74,609 61,257 Average yield per acre (lbs.) 545 542 Highest yield per acre (lbs. lint) 796 855 Cost per lb. on highest yield (cents) 15.5 14.1 Lowest yield per acre (lbs. lint) 475 457 Cost per lb. on lowest yield (cents) 16.6 21.0 Average cost per acre dollars dollars Labor 60.55 50.40 Materials 11.32 8.35 Cash overhead 4.31 4.51 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 9.27 6.52 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 13.31 14.62 Total 98.76 84.40 Average income per acre 95.58 134.62 Average net profit per acre — 3.18 50.22 Average cost per pound lint cents cents Labor 11.1 9.3 Materials 2.1 1.5 Cash overhead 0.8 0.8 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 1.7 1.2 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 2.4 2.7 Total 18.1 15.5 Average income per pound 17.5 24.8 Average net profit per pound — 0.6 9.3 The average income per acre and per pound in the above table include receipts from lint cotton and cotton seed. For 1926, the receipts for lint cotton were $79.86 per acre or 14.6 cents per pound and for cotton seed $15.72 per acre or 2.9 cents per pound. In 1927, the receipts for lint cotton amounted to $113.26 per acre or 20.9 cents per pound, while that for cotton seed amounted to $21.36 per acre or 3.9 cents per pound. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers m Kern County under the direction of L. W. Taylor, Farm Advisor. 44 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 34 Potato Cost Account Data, Kern County — 1927 1927 Number of records 6 Acres in study 147 Total amount produced (lbs.) 1,282,154 Average yield per acre (lbs.) 8,722 Highest yield per acre (lbs.) 12,526 Cost per cwt. on highest yield (dollars) 1.51 Lowest yield per acre (lbs.) 4,625 Cost per cwt. on lowest yield (dollars) 2.64 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 49.22 Materials 58.46 Cash overhead 6.87 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 6.42 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) or rental 40.85 Total 161.82 Average income per acre 222.79 Average net profit per acre 60.97 Average cost per hundredweight dollars Labor 0.56 Materials 0.67 Cash overhead 0.08 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 0.07 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) or rental 0.47 Total 1.85 Average income jier cwt 2.55 Average net profit per cwt 0.70 Land charge is high in the above tabulation because half of the cooperators were renters, paying a third of crop as rental. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Kern County under the direction of L. W. Taylor, Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 45 TABLE 35 Wheat Cost Account Data, San Luis Obispo County — 1927 1927 Number of records 15 Acres in study 1,915 Total amount produced (cwt.) 19,916 Average yield per acre (cwt.) 10.4 Highest yield per acre (cwt.) 23.0 Cost per cwt. on highest yield (dollars) 1.18 Lowest yield per acre (cwt.) 4.0 Cost per cwt. on lowest yield (dollars) 3.92 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 5.70 Materials 2.15 Cash overhead 0.88 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 0.90 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 2.98 Summer fallow* 5.47 Total 18.08 Average income per acre 20.53 Average net profit per acre 2.45 Average cost per hundredweight dollars Labor 0.55 Materials 0.21 Cash overhead 0.08 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 0,09 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 0.29 Summer fallow* 0.52 Total 1.74 Average income per cwt 1.98 Average net profit per cwt 0.24 * The summer fallow charge includes all labor, material and overhead costs of carrying the land through the summer fallow year. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in San Luis Obispo County under the direction of J. Earl Coke, Assistant Farm Advisor. 46 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 36 Summer. Fallow Cost Account Data on Grain Land, San Luis Obispo County — 1927 1927 Number of records 19 Acres in study 3,112 Highest cost per acre (dollars) 13.97 Lowest cost per acre (dollars) 3.73 Average cost per acre dollars Labor 2.28 Materials 0.08 Cash overhead 0.29 Interest and depreciation (improvements and equipment) 0.29 Interest on investment in land (at 6 per cent) 2.67 Total 5.61 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in San Luis Obispo County under the direction of J. Earl Coke, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 47 TABLE 37 Dairy Cost Account Data, Imperial County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 14 15 Total number of cows in study 403 482 Average number cows per herd 28.8 32.1 Average pounds milk per cow 6,773.0 6,556.0 Average pounds butterfat per cow 272.6 272.0 Average pounds butterfat per cow to pay expenses 250.4 234.0 Highest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow 390.0 381.4 Average cost per pound: highest producing herds (cents).... 58.6 46.7 Lowest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow 214.4 203.6 Average cost per pound: lowest producing herds (cents).— 88.6 55.6 Average cost per cow dollars dollars Concentrate feeds 5.67 4.63 Eoughage (hay, silage) 21.85 19.79 Pasture and green feeds 51.00 42.35 Labor 44.85 39.80 Dairy stock 11.24 Miscellaneous 13.69 8.80 Depreciation on buildings and equipment 1.60 3.65 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 10.76 11.47 Total 149.42 141.73 Average gross income per cow 157.18 173.40 Average net profit per cow 7.76 31.67 Average farm income per cow 52.56 71.03 Average labor income per cow 41.80 59.56 Average cost per pound butterfat cents cents Concentrate feeds 2.1 1.7 Eoughage (hay, silage) 8.0 7.3 Pasture and green feeds 18.7 15.6 Labor 16.4 14.7 Dairy stock 4.1 Miscellaneous 5.0 3.2 Depreciation on buildings and equipment 0.6 1.3 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 4.0 4.2 Total 54.8 52.1 Average gross income per pound butterfat 57.7 63.7 Average net profit per pound butterfat 2.9 11.6 Average farm income per pound butterfat 19.3 26.1 Average labor income per pound butterfat 15.3 21.9 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Imperial County under the direction of V. W. DeTar, Farm Advisor. 48 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 38 Dairy Cost Account Data, Kern County — 1927 1927 Number of records 9 Total number of cows in study 288 Average number cows per herd 32 Average pounds milk per cow Average pounds butterfat per cow 286.7 Average pounds butterfat per cow to pay expenses 225.0 Highest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow 352.0 Average cost per pound: highest producing herds (cents) 49.8 Lowest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow 249.0 Average cost per pound: lowest producing herds (cents) 51.6 Average cost per cow dollars Concentrate feeds 9.11 Eoughage (hay, silage) 40.70 Pasture and green feeds — 22.13 Labor 36.91 Dairy stock 16.27 Miscellaneous 7.45 Depreciation on buildings and equipment Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 13.69 Total 146.26 Average gross income per cow 186.57 Average net profit per cow 40.31 Average farm income per cow 71.03 Average labor income per cow 57.34 Average cost per pound butterfat ♦ cents Concentrate feeds 3.2 Roughage (hay, silage) 14.2 Pasture and green feeds 7.7 Labor 12.8 Dairy stock 5.7 Miscellaneous 2.6 Depreciation on buildings and equipment Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 4.8 Total 51.0 Average gross income per pound butterfat 65.] Average net profit per pound butterfat 14.1 Average farm income per pound butterfat 24.8 Average labor income per pound butterfat 20.0 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Kern County under the direction of J. P. Hertel, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 49 TABLE 39 Dairy Cost Account Data, Makin County — 1925-1927 1925 1926 1927 Number of records 8 4 3 Total number of cows in study 498 412 Average number of cows per herd 62 59 Average pounds milk per cow 5,965.0 5,080.2 Average pounds butterfat per cow 241.5 198.1 Average pounds butterfat per cow to pay expenses 202.4 Highest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow Average cost per pound: highest producing herds (cents) Lowest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow Average cost per pound: lowest producing herds (cents) Average cost per cow Concentrate feeds ] Eoughage (hay, silage) (All feed) I Pasture and green feeds J Labor Dairy stock Miscellaneous "I Depreciation on buildings and equipnient I Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) Total Average gross income per cow 127.80 Average net profit per cow ;. 34.80 Average farm income per cow Average labor income per cow Average cost per pound butterfat Concentrate feeds "| Eoughage (hay, silage) (All feed) I Pasture and green feeds I Labor Dairy stock Miscellaneous 1 1.9 Depreciation on buildings and equipment I 1.7 0.7 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) I 5.2 Total 38.5 55.5 Average gross income per pound butterfat 52.9 62.9 Average net profit per pound butterfat 14.4 7.4 Average farm income per pound butterfat 21.1 Average labor income per pound butterfat 16.2 The 1925 records were not summarized on the same basis as the 1926-1927 records. Hence, some items appearing in the 1926-1927 records are not included in the 1925 summary. Owing to the small number of records in 1926-1927, these two years were summarized together. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Marin County under the direction of M. B. Boissevain, Farm Advisor. dollars dollars 2L81 67.10 33.56 13.99 21.80 25.15 3.71 4.10 1.39 10.30 93.00 109.91 127.80 124.62 34.80 14.71 41.84 32.08 cents cents 11.0 27.8 16.9 7.1 9.0 12.7 50 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 40 Dairy Cost Account Data, Eiverside County — 1927 1927 Number of records 4 Total number of cows in study 232 Average number cows per herd ■. 58 Average pounds milk per cow 8,675.0 Average pounds butterfat per cow 379.4 Average pounds butterfat per cow to pay expenses 349.0 Highest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow 428.0 Average cost per pound: highest producing herds (cents) 65.3 Lowest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow 310.0 Average cost per pound: lowest producing herds (cents) 98.8 Average cost per cow ' dollars Concentrate feeds 48.81 Eoughage (hay, silage) 91.95 Pasture and green feeds 5.94 Labor 41.55 Dairy stock 11.65 Miscellaneous 15.77 Depreciation on buildings and equipment 9.41 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 23.23 Total 248.31 Average gross income per cow 317.78 Average net profit per cow 69.47 Average farm income per cow 99.05 Average labor income per cow 75.83 Average cost per pound butterfat cents Concentrate feeds 12.8 Roughage (hay, silage) 24.3 Pasture and green feeds 1.6 ' Labor 10.9 Dairy stock 3.1 Miscellaneous 4.1 Depreciation on buildings and equipment 2.5 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 6.1 Total 65.4 Average gross income per pound butterfat 83.7 Average net profit per pound butterfat 18.3 Average farm income per pound butterfat 26.1 Average labor income per pound butterfat 19.9 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Riverside County under the direction of N. L. McFarlane, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 51 TABLE 41 Dairy Cost Account Data, San Bernardino County — 1927 1927 Number of records 12 Total number of cows in study 700 Average number cows per herd 58 Average pounds milk per cow 9,014.0 Average pounds butterfat per cow 353.0 Average pounds butterfat per cow to pay expenses 366.0 Highest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow 403.0 Average cost per pound: highest producing herds (cents) 65.0 Lowest herd average: pounds butterfat per cow 306.0 Average cost per pound: lowest producing herds (cents) 92.0 Average cost per cow dollars Concentrate feeds 51.60 Eoughage (hay, silage) 105.00 Pasture and green feeds 4.06 Labor 61.75 Dairy stock 23.10 Miscellaneous 23.29 Decrease in inventory stock 14.39 Depreciation on buildings and equipment 5.50 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 19.16 Total , 307.85 Average gross income per cow 376.37 Average net profit per cow 68.52 Average farm income per cow 105.89 Average labor income per cow 86.74 Average cost per pound butterfat cents Concentrate feeds 14.7 Roughage (hay, silage) 29.7 Pasture and green feeds 1.1 Labor 17.5 Dairy stock 6.5 Miscellaneous 6.6 Decrease in inventory stock 4.1 Depreciation on buildings and equipment 1.6 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 5.4 Total 87.2 Average gross income per pound butterfat 106.6 Average net profit per pound butterfat 19.4 Average farm income per pound butterfat 30.0 Average labor income per pound butterfat 24.6 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in San Bernardino County under the direction of A. L. Campbell, Assistant Farm Advisor. 52 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 42 Poultry Cost Account Data, Fresno County — 1925-1927 1925 1926 1927 Number of records 3 7 5 Total number hens in study 898 1,454 1,254 Average number hens per flock 299 208 251 Average number eggs per hen 181.0 165.0 171.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 188.5 200.0 183,3 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 21.3 28.7 21.5 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 154.2 125.3 160.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 47.1 25.8 29.8 Average per cent mortality all flocks 9.9 8.3 10.4 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 11.7 24.0 20.0 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 2.5 5.0 1.4 Average cost per hen dollars dollars dollars Feed 2.41 2.14 2.12 Stock purchases 0.05 0.15 0.50 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.03 0.13 Labor 0.72 0.93 0.88 Water, taxes, insurance 0.07 0.06 0.12 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.40 0.35 0.34 Other overhead 0.13 0.01 0.05 Total 3.81 3.64 4.14 Average gross income per hen 5.76 4.46 4.78 Average net profit per hen 1.95 0.82 0.64 Average flock farm income per hen 3.34 1.51 1.92 Average flock labor income per hen 2.94 1.16 1.58 Average cost per dozen cents cents cents Feed 15.9 15.6 14.9 Stock purchases 0.3 1.1 3.5 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.2 0.9 Labor 4.8 6.8 6.2 Water, taxes, insurance 0.5 0.4 0.8 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 2.6 2.6 2.4 Other overhead 0.9 0.0 0.4 Total 25.2 26.5 29.1 Average gross income per dozen 38.1 32.5 33.7 Average net profit per dozen 12.9 6.0 4.6 Average flock farm income per dozen 22.1 11.0 13.5 Average flock labor income per dozen 19.4 8.5 11.1 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Fresno County under the direction of J. C. Hays, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 53 TABLE 43 Poultry Cost Account Data, Humboldt County — 1927 1927 Number of records 17 Total number hens in study 15,606 Average number hens per flock 918 Average number eggs per hen 161.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 187.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flocks (cents) 28.2 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 131.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 37.2 Average per cent mortality all flocks 18.1 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 38.8 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 7.0 Average cost per hen dollars Feed 2.50 Stock purchases 0.36 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 0.85 Water, taxes, insurance 0.06 Literest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.22 Other overhead 0.24 Total 4.23 Average gross income per hen 4.28 Average net profit per hen 0.05 Average flock farm income per hen 1.05 Average flock labor income per hen 0.82 Average cost per dozen cents Feed 18.7 Stock purchases 2.7 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 6.3 Water, taxes, insurance 0.4 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 1.6 Other overhead 1.8 Total : 31.5 Average gross income per dozen 31.8 Average net profit per dozen 0.3 Average flock farm income per dozen 7.8 Average flock labor income per dozen 6.1 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Humboldt County under the direction of J. W. Logan, Farm Advisor. 54 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 44 Poultry Cost Account Data, Imperial County — 1927 1927 Number of records *9 Total number hens in study 4,758 Average number hens per flock 528 Average number eggs per hen 116.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 146.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 32.9 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 84.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 74.8 Average per cent mortality all flocks 22.3 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 36.4 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 6,1 Average cost per hen dollars Feed 1.54 Stock purchases 0.17 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.11 Labor 0.79 Water, taxes, insurance 0.04 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.18 Other overhead 0.25 Total 3.08 Average gross income per hen 2.84 Average net profit per hen — 0.24 Average flock farm income per hen 0.69 Average flock labor income per hen 0.51 Average cost per dozen cents Feed 15.9 Stock purchases 1.8 Decrease in inventoiy (stock) 1.1 Labor 8.2 Water, taxes, insurance 0.4 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 1.9 Other overhead 2.6 Total 31.9 Average gross income per dozen 29.4 Average net profit per dozen — 2.5 Average flock farm income per dozen 7.1 Average flock labor income per dozen 5.3 * Four other records were completed but not included in this material. The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Imperial County under the direction of D. E. Creighton, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 55 TABLE 45 Poultry Cost Account Data, Kern County — 1927 192,7 Number of records 31 Total number hens in study 11,005 Average number hens per flock 355 Average number eggs per hen 155.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 173.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 21.9 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 116.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 93.5 Average per cent mortality all flocks 12.4 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 23.2 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 3.2 Average cost per hen dollars Teed 2.27 Stock purchases 0.31 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 0.76 Water, taxes, insurance 0.02 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.26 Other overhead 0.16 Total 3.78 Average gross income per hen 4.61 Average net profit per hen 0.83 Average flock farm income per hen 1.85 Average flock labor income per hen 1.59 Average cost per dozen cents Feed 17.6 Stock purchases 2.4 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 5.9 Water, taxes, insurance 0.2 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 1.9 Other overhead 1.2 Total 29.2 Average gross income per dozen 35.7 Average net profit per dozen 6.5 Average flock farm income per dozen 14.4 Average flock labor income per dozen 12.3 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Kern County under the direction of J. P. Hertel, Assistant Farm Advisor. 56 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 46 Poultry Cost Account Data, Monterey County — 1927 1927 Number of records 19 Total number hens in study 14,504 Average number hens per flock 763 Average number eggs per hen 150.4 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 189.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 20.2 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 132.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 27.6 Average per cent mortality all flocks 14.0 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 35.0 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 7.5 Average cost per hen dollars Feed 1.92 Stock purchases 0.07 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 0.63 Water, taxes, insurance 0.05 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.21 Other overhead 0.22 Total '. 3.10 Average gross income per hen 4.17 Average net profit per hen 1.07 Average flock farm income per hen 1.90 Average flock labor income per hen 1.69 Average cost per dozen cents Feed 15.3 Stock purchases 0.6 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 5.0 Water, taxes, insurance 0.4 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 1.7 Other overhead 1.8 Total 24.8 Average gross income per dozen 33.3 Average net profit per dozen 8.5 Average flock farm income per dozen 15.2 Average flock labor income per dozen 13.5 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Monterey County under the direction of Reuben Albaugh, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 57 TABLE 47 Poultry Cost Account Data, Napa County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 14 14 Total number hens in study 11,941 11,882 Average number hens per flock 853 849 Average number eggs per hen 152.7 143.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 174.0 171.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 25.7 22.9 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 99.0 118.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flocks (cents) 39.7 27.7 Average per cent mortality all flocks 14.4 15.4 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 33.8 24.9 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 5.4 6.5 Average cost per hen dollars dollars Feed 2.25 2.44 Stock purchases 0.47 0.19 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 0.81 0.54 Water, taxes, insurance 0.06 0.04 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.27 0.25 Other overhead 0.26 0.20 Total 4.12 3.66 Average gross income per hen 4.74 4.11 Average net profit per hen 0.62 0.45 Average flock farm income per hen 1.50 1.06 Average flock labor income per hen 1.23 0.81 Average cost per dozen cents cents Feed 17.7 20.5 Stock purchases 3.7 1.6 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 6.4 4.5 Water, taxes, insurance 0.5 0.3 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 2.1 2.1 Other overhead 2.0 1.7 Total 32.4 30.7 Average gross income per dozen 37.2 34.4 Average net profit per dozen 4.8 3.7 Average flock farm income per dozen 11.8 8.9 Average flock labor income per dozen 9.7 6.8 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Napa County under the direction of W. H. Cudaback, Assistant Farm Advisor. 58 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 48 Poultry Cost Accotjnt Data, Orange County — 1927 1927 Commercial Hatching flocks flocks Number of records 10 4 Total number hens in study 8,170 5,004 Average number hens per flock 817 1,251 Average number eggs per hen 129.0 144.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 150.0 174.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 36.9 39.0 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 113.0 127.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 73.4 33.9 Average per cent mortality all flocks 17.0 14.3 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 27.5 18.5 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 7.9 10.4 Average cost per hen dollars dollars Teed 2.60 2.57 Stock purchases 0.31 0.09 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 1.46 1.20 Water, taxes, insurance 0.05 0.12 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.35 0.40 Other overhead 0.35 0.62 Total 5.12 5.00 Average gross income per hen 3.98 5.26 Average net profit per hen — 1.14 0.26 Average flock farm income per hen 0.47 1.62 Average flock labor income per hen 0.12 1.22 Average cost per dozen cejits cents Peed 24.1 21.4 Stock purchases 2.9 0.7 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 13.5 10.0 Water, taxes, insurance 0.5 1.0 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 3.2 3.3 Other overhead 3.2 5.2 Total 47.4 41.6 Average gross income per dozen 36.9 43.8 Average net profit per dozen — 10.5 2.2 Average flock farm income per dozen 4.4 13.5 Average flock labor income per dozen 1.1 10.2 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Orange County under the direction of W. M. Cory, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 59 TABLE 49 Poultry Cost Account Data, Placer County — 1927 1927 Number of records 11 Total number hens in study 6,548 Average number hens per flock 595.3 Average number eggs per hen 143.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 169.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 33.5 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 123.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 37.1 Average per cent mortality all flocks 15.6 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 22.0 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 7.4 Average cost per hen dollars Feed 2.43 Stock purchases 0.35 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 0.63 Water, taxes, insurance 0.06 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.20 Other overhead 0.33 Total 4.00 Average gross income per hen 4.18 Average net profit per hen 0.18 Average flock farm income per hen 1.00 Average flock labor income per hen : 0.80 Average cost per dozen cents Feed 20.4 Stock purchases 3.0 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 5.3 Water, taxes, insurance 0.5 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 1.7 Other overhead 2.7 Total 33.6 Average gross income per dozen 35.1 Average net profit per dozen 1.5 Average flock farm income per dozen 8.4 Average flock labor income per dozen 6.7 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Placer County under the direction of R. D. McCallum, Farm Advisor. 60 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 50 Poultry Cost Account Data, Sacramento County — 1927 1927 Number of records 11 Total number hens in study 7,139 Average number hens per flock 649 Average number eggs per hen 155.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 186.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 19.7 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 131.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 33.9 Average per cent mortality all flocks 17.2 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 21.8 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 10.7 Average cost per hen dollars Feed 1.92 Stock purchases 0.58 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 0.62 Water, taxes, insurance 0.06 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.26 Other overhead 0.24 Total 3.68 Average gross income per hen 4.03 Average net profit per hen 0.35 Average flock farm income per hen 1.23 Average flock labor income per hen 0.97 Average cost per dozen cents Teed 14.8 Stock purchases 4.5 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 4.8 Water, taxes, insurance 0.5 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 2.0 Other overhead 1.9 Total : 28.5 Average gross income per dozen 31.2 Average net profit per dozen 2.7 Average flock farm income per dozen 9.5 Average flock labor income per dozen 7.5 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Sacramento County under the direction of E. L. Stanley, Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 61 TABLE 51 Poultry Cost Account Data, San Joaquin County — 1925-1927 1925 1926 1927 Number of records 18 20 24 Total number of hens in study 7,625 7,965 12,598 Average number hens per flock 423 398 525 Average number eggs per hen 151.0 149.0 151.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 181.0 172.0 199.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 36.0 28.4 19.7 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 113.0 110.0 123.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 40.2 34.2 40.2 Average per cent mortality all flocks 11.9 12.0 15.0 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 32.0 21.7 36.5 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 5.0 3.4 4.2 Average cost per hen dollars dollars dollars Feed 2.57 2.36 2.31 Stock purchases 0.22 0.25 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.42 Labor 0.79 0.79 0.90 Water, taxes, insurance 0.06 0.08 0.07 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.31 0.28 0.26 Other overhead 0.28 0.17 Total 4.15 4.01 3.96 Average gross income per hen 4.82 4.89 4.12 Average net profit per hen 0.67 0.88 0.16 Average flock farm income per hen 1.89 1.07 Average flock labor income per hen 1.90 1.62 0.81 Average cost per dozen cents cents cents Feed 20.4 19.0 18.3 Stock purchases 1.8 2.0 Decrease in inventory (stock) 3.3 Labor 6.3 6.4 7.1 Water, taxes, insurance 0.5 0.6 0.6 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 2.4 2.3 2.1 Other overhead 2.3 1.3 Total 32.9 32.4 31.4 Average gross income per dozen 38.2 39.4 32.7 Average net profit per dozen 5.3 7.0 1.3 Average flock farm income per dozen 15.2 8.5 Average flock labor income per dozen 15.1 13.1 6.4 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in San Joaquin County under the direction of W. C. Fleming, Assistant Farm Advisor. 62 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 52 Poultry Cost Account Data, Santa Cruz County — 1927 1927 Number of records 6 Total number hens in study 6,328 Average number hens per flock 1,055 Average number eggs per hen 150.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 217.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 30.2 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 131.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 29.7 Average per cent mortality all flocks 25.0 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 44.2 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 12.1 Average cost per hen dollars Feed 2.14 Stock purchases 0.08 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.06 Labor 0.75 Water, taxes, insurance 0.06 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.20 Other overhead 0.14 Total 3.43 Average gross income per hen 3.79 Average net profit per hen 0.36 Average flock farm income per hen 1.30 Average flock labor income per hen 1.10 Average cost per dozen cents Feed 17.1 Stock purchases 0.6 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.5 Labor 6.0 Water, taxes, insurance 0.5 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 1.6 Other overhead 1.1 Total 27.4 Average gross income per dozen 30.3 Average net profit per dozen 2.9 Average flock farm income per dozen 10.4 Average flock labor income per dozen 8.8 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Santa Cruz County under the direction of H. L. Washburn, Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 63 TABLE 53 Poultry Cost Account Data, Sonoma County — 1925, 1927 1925 1927 Number of records 38 52 Total number hens in study 62,730 119,198 Average number hens per flock 1,651 2,292 Average number eggs per hen , 137.8 130.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 180.0 202.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 28.6 17.4 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 113.0 97.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 33.1 58.0 Average per cent mortality all flocks 20,1 28.2 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 33.9 57.3 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 6.2 5.7 Average cost per hen dollars dollars Feed 2.10 2.02 Stock purchases 0.61 0.39 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.06 Labor 0.74 0.69 Water, taxes, insurance 0.06 0.04 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.27 0.28 Other overhead 0.05 0.26 Total 3.89 3.68 Average gross income per hen 4.39 3.74 Average net profit per hen 0.50 0.06 Average flock farm income per hen 1.37 " 0.89 Average flock labor income per hen 1.10 0.61 Average cost per dozen cents cents Feed 18.3 18.7 Stock purchases 5.3 3.6 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.5 Labor 6.4 6.4 Water, taxes, insurance 0.5 0.4 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 2.4 2.6 Other overhead 0.4 2.4 Total 33.8 34.1 Average gross income per dozen 38.2 34.6 Average net profit per dozen 4.4 0.5 Average flock farm income per dozen 11.9 8.2 Average flock labor income per dozen 9.6 5.6 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Sonoma County under the direction of H. H. von Lehe, Assistant Farm Advisor. 64 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 54 Poultry Cost Account Data, Tulare County — 1926-1927 1926 1927 Number of records 15 28 Total number hens in study 13,155 21,262 Average number hens per flock 877 759 Average number eggs per hen 152.0 145.0 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 169.0 175.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 19.8 23.7 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 125.0 71.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 29.6 48.5 Average per cent mortality all flocks 15.2 13.3 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 33.0 36.7 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 4.0 5.0 Average cost per hen dollars dollars Feed 2.00 2.22 Stock purchases 0.16 0.23 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.07 Labor 0.63 0.78 Water, taxes, insurance 0.05 0.11 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.22 0.28 Other overhead 0.22 0.30 Total 3.28 3.99 Average gross income per hen , 4.03 3.65 Average net profit per hen 0.75 — 0.34 Average flock farm income per hen 1.50 0.48 Average flock labor income per hen 1.28 0.20 Average cost per dozen cents cents Feed 15.8 18.4 Stock purchases 1.3 1.9 Decrease in inventory (stock) 0.6 Labor 5.0 6.4 Water, taxes, insurance 0.4 0.9 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 1.7 2.3 Other overhead 1.7 2.5 Total 25.9 33.0 Average gross income per dozen 31.8 30.2 Average net profit per dozen 5.9 — 2.8 Average flock farm income per dozen 11.9 4.0 Average flock labor income per dozen 10.1 1.7 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Tulare County under the direction of M. A. Lindsay, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 65 TABLE 55 Poultry Cost Account Data, Ventura County — 1927 1927 Number of records 11 Total number hens in study 17,959 Average number hens per flock 1,633 Average number eggs per hen 156.3 Highest flock average: eggs per hen 212.0 Average cost per dozen for highest producing flock (cents) 30.2 Lowest flock average: eggs per hen 96.0 Average cost per dozen for lowest producing flock (cents) 59.7 Average per cent mortality all flocks 18.1 Highest flock: average per cent mortality 21.7 Lowest flock: average per cent mortality 15.0 Average cost per hen dollars Feed 2.43 Stock purchases 0.34 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 0.92 Water, taxes, insurance 0.09 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.26 Other overhead 0.29 Total 4.33 Average gross income per hen 4.61 Average net profit per hen 0.28 Average flock farm income per hen 1.29 Average flock labor income per hen 1,03 Average cost per dozen cents Feed 18.7 Stock purchases 2.6 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 7.1 Water, taxes, insurance 0.7 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 2.0 Other overhead 2.2 Total 33.3 Average gross income per dozen 35.4 Average net profit per dozen 2.1 Average flock farm income per dozen 9.9 Average flock labor income per dozen 7.9 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in Ventura County under the direction of S. A. Anderson, Assistant Farm Advisor. 66 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 56 Turkey Cost Account Data, San Bernardino County — 1927 1927 Number of records 4 Total number of breeding hens 225 Average number breeding hens per flock 56 Average number eggs per hen 44 Total number of birds raised 3,182 Total pounds of meat raised 42,799.4 Average pounds meat per bird raised 13.5 Highest cost per pound of meat (cents) 34.6 Average income per pound of meat (cents) 54.2 Lowest cost per pound of meat (cents) 26.4 Average income per pound of meat (cents) 44.1 Average cost per bird raised dollars Feed 2.17 Stock purchases 0.28 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 0.96 Water, taxes, insurance 0.09 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) and depreciation on buildings 0.46 Other overhead 0.25 Total 4.21 Average gross income per bird 6.58 Average net profit per bird 2.37 Average flock farm income per bird 2.99 Average flock labor income per bird 2.69 Average cost per pound of meat cents Feed 16.1 Stock purchases 2.1 Decrease in inventory (stock) Labor 7.1 Water, taxes, insurance 0.7 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) and depreciation on buildings.... 3.4 Other overhead 1.8 Total 31.2 Average gross income per pound of meat 48.7 Average net profit per pound of meat 17.5 Average flock farm profit per pound of meat 22.1 Average flock labor income per pound of meat 19.9 The above tabulations were compiled from individual cost records kept by farmers in San Bernardino County under the direction of A. L. Campbell, Assistant Farm Advisor. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 67 METHOD OF RETURNING DATA TO COOPERATORS The material presented in tables 57 to 62 are a partial illustration of the method used in presenting cost and efficiency data in the various groups of farm commodities. The Gravenstein apple study from Sonoma County, the orange study from Orange County, the walnut study from Los Angeles County, the dairy study from Imperial County, and the poultry study from Sonoma County are used as examples. It is important for the cooperator to know his costs definitely. This information becomes much more valuable when it can be com- pared with costs of various operations of other growers under similar conditions. The least efficient producer may be following practices that should be avoided. On the other hand, the more efficient pro- ducer may be following practices which are worthy of emulation. A comparison of the separate items that make up the total costs of pro- duction furnishes each operator with a clear picture of where he stands in the scale of costs. If his labor costs per acre or per ton are abnormally high, it is his problem to find the cause and if possible to correct it. The farm advisor attempts to help each cooperator to find the leaks in management practices and correct them. The farm advisor's discussion is based on a complete summary of the study in the producer's district, combined with data from his own enter- prise, as shown in tables 57 to 62. Freuently the farm advisorf leaves with the cooperator a written statement of suggested changes in management practices which will increase his efficiency of production. This method of procedure Avas followed in each of the studies reported in this circular. 68 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE ' [CiRC. 24 TABLE 57 Comparison of Cost anb Efficiency Factors in Gravenstein Apple Produc- tion, Sonoma County, 1927. Grouped According to Net Profit per Acre Acreage Age (■ years) Per cent fancy Per cent C grade Per cent unclassed Per cent culls Yield per acre (packed boxes) Gross returns per acre Cost per acre Net profit per acre... -$68.22 Selling price per box... $0. 89 Cost per box $1 . 91 Net profit pex box -$1 . 02 9 Lowest net profit 9.5 17.0 56 6 4 4 3 3 35.7 66.9 S59.46 $127.68 9 Highest net profit 8.0 18.0 69.3 5.9 2.7 22.1 395.0 $466.41 $210.33 $256.08 $1.18 $0.53 $0.65 Average all orchards 9.7 17.3 68.6 5.8 1.2 24.4 212.9 $242.31 $146.86 $95 45 $1 14 $0 69 $0.45 Your orchard No. Labor costs vei acre : PrUxiing Brush disposal Dormant spray.... Summer spray .... Plowing Cultivation Thinning Propping Picking Hauling Fertilization Miscellaneous Average total* Comparative totalf ollars 6 55 3 41 3.13 7.32 3.04 5.82 2.23 0.59 10 57 2 77 1.17 2.92 40 63 dollars 15.89 3.22 4.93 5 84 3.12 5.09 7.59 2.13 50.29 7.63 L84 4.46 105.69 dollars 11.08 2.73 3.18 5.51 3.32 4.33 3.66 1.62 25.38 5.06 1.44 3.59 63.75 dollars Material costs per acre: Dormant spray Summer spray Fertilization Miscellaneous Average total" Comparative totalf. dollars dollars dollars 4.29 7.36 5.34 6 53 8.50 6.20 1 71 1.87 2 95 0.50 52 92 dollars 16.07 10.77 * The average totals shown in these tables are not totals of the above columns of figures. They are arrived at by dividing the total labor, material and other costs by the total number of acres in each group of that study. The average cost of irrigation, cultivation, spraying and other individual items of cost are based on the actual number of acres on which the operation was performed. t The comparative total for each group of records is the sum of those cost items corresponding to the ones incurred by the individual cooperator making the comparison, and may differ with each separate case. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 69 TABLE 57- Overhead costs per acre: General expenses County taxes Depreciation and interest on trees Depreciation and interest on improvements. Depreciation and interest on equipment Interest on investment in land Average total* Comparative totalf Some factors measured on tonnage basis: Thinning Propping Picking Hauling Average total* Comparative totalf (Continued) Average Your 9 Lowest 9 Highest all orchard net profit net profit orchards No. dollars dollars dollars dollars 2 43 6.09 3.73 4.85 4 45 3 97 43 91 43 09 37.31 2.07 1 84 2.14 8.45 13.83 8.74 17.33 19.27 16.45 79 04 88.57 72.34 cents per box cents per box cents per box cts.perbox 3.3 1.9 0.9 0.9 05 0.5 15 8 12 7 11 9 4.1 1.9 24 24.1 17.0 15 7 RECAPITULATION Costs per acre: Labor Materials Cash overhead... Other overhead. Total Costs per box: Labor Materials Cash overhead... Other overhead. Total dollars 40.63 dollars 105.69 16 07 11.54 77.03 dollars 63 75 10.77 7.70 64 64 dollars 8 01 • 7 28 71 76 127 68 210 33 dollars 27 04 03 0.20 146 86 dollars 30 05 04 30 dollars 61 dollars 12 11 1 07 1 91 54 69 * The average totals shown in these tables are not totals of the above columns of figures They are arrived at by dividing the total labor, material and other costs by the total number of acres in each group of that study. The average cost of irrigation, cultivation, spraying and other individual items of cost are based on the actual number of acres on which the operation was performed. t The comparative total for each group of records is the sum of those cost items corresponding to the ones incurred by the individual cooperator making the com.parison, and may differ with each separate case. 70 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 58 Comparison of Cost ani> Efficiency Factors in Orange Production, Orange County, 1927. Grouped According to Net Profit per Acre Items Acreage Age (years) Per cent No. 1 fruit Per cent No. 2 fruit Per cent No. 3 fruit Per cent culls Returns per box No. 1 Returns per box No. 2 Returns per box No. 3 Returns per box culls Number packed boxes per acre. Number packed boxes per tree.. Gross income per acre Total expense per acre Net return per acre Labor cost per acre: Irrigation — preparation of land... Irrigation— application of water. Application of fertilizer Cover crops Fumigation Spraying Disease control Orchard heating Windbreaks Pruning Cultivation Picking fruit Hauling fruit Sweating Miscellaneous Average total* Comparative totalf Average 10 lowest net returns 12.3 14.0 40.0 37.5 12.3 10.3 $3.03 $2.44 $1.50 $0.54 138.0 1.9 $328.62 $417.02 -$88.40 dollars 5 54 6.94 8.27 2.92 12 44 12 41 4.60 9.03 19.44 25.07 8.49 3 25 2.34 93.79 Average 10 highest net returns 9 20 71 22 1 5 $4 $3 $1 $0 360 5 $1331 $455 $875 dollars 4 58 9 22 7.29 2.65 16.63 3.94 5 10 7.93 1.53 21.38 18.43 40 99 14.14 10.18 137 93 Average all (61) groves 9.8 16.0 58 2 29.8 4 4 7.6 $3.55 $2.89 $1.73 $0 45 217.0 3 $655.55 $399 52 $256 03 dollars 4 54 7.66 5.53 1.94 16 47 10 32 3 04 6 37 1 54 10.41 16 11 28 33 9 80 1.74 4 05 98.22 Your grove No. dollars Material costs per acre: Irrigation Fertilizer Cover crops Fumigation Spraying Disease control Plowing and cultivation.. Orchard heating Miscellaneous Average total* Comparative totalf dollars dollars dollars 10.59 17.78 12.73 74.76 64 29 63.48 3 73 93 3.89 14 62 16.35 19.98 21.41 10.85 15.74 2.64 1.18 32 0.12 0.13 2 41 0.56 2.73 2 39 dollars 91.43 04 Cash overhead per acre: General overhead expense County taxes Average* and comparative totalf All labor and cash expense (comparative) J.. dollars dollars dollars 13.39 13.06 9.31 27.69 36.15 30 97 41.08 49 21 40.28 dollars 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 71 TABLE 5 8— ( Continued ) Items Other overhead per acre: Interest and depreciation on trees Interest and depreciation on other improvements. Interest and depreciation on equipment Interest on land investment Average* and comparative overheadf Average total all costs* Comparative total all costsf Average 10 lowest net returns dollars 91.59 8.23 3.35 82.59 185.76 417.02 Average 10 highest net returns dollars 75.33 8 61 12.70 81.48 178 12 455.99 Average all (61) groves dollars 85.33 8 11 6.40 70.71 170 55 397.10 Your grove No. dollars Investment per acre: Trees Improvements (not trees). Equipment Land Total investment Labor and material cost per box: Irrigation Fertilization Cover crop Fumigation Spraying Disease control Pruning Plowing and cultivation Harvesting Orchard heating Miscellaneous Average total* Comparative totalf- dollars dollars dollars 1002 77 739.52 901.71 62.18 73.95 64 87 18.08 58.38 25.69 1376 60 1358.04 1281 38 2459.63 2229.89 2273.65 cents cents cents 16.3 8.7 11.2 60.6 19 8 32.3 4.8 0.9 2.6 19.7 9.0 16.8 24.6 3 11.8 3.5 17 1.5 6.6 5 9 4.8 14.3 5.1 9.2 20.8 15 3 17.3 2.2 3 6 4.0 1.8 2.9 dollars 138.0 63.4 85.8 Cash overhead cost per box: General overhead expense County taxes Average* and comparative totalf All labor, material and cash expense (comparative) t cents cents cents 9.7 3.6 4.3 20 2 10 14.2 29.9 13.6 18.5 Other overhead expenses per box: Interest and depreciation on trees Interest and depreciation on other improvements. Interest and depreciation on equipment Interest on Jand investment Average* and comparative overheadf Average total all costs per box* Comparative total all costs per boxf cents 66.8 6 2.5 60.3 135.6 305 cents cents 20.9 39.3 2.3 3.7 3.5 2 9 22 6 32.6 126 78.5 183.0 * The average totals shown in these tables are not totals of the above columns of figures. They are arrived at by dividing the total labor, material and other costs by the total number of acres in each group of that study. The average cost of irrigation, cultivation, spraying and other individual items of cost are based on the actual number of acres on which the operation was performed. f The comparative total for each group of records is the sum of those cost items corresponding to the ones incurred by the individual cooperator making the comparison, and may differ with each separate case. t This is the sum of the comparative totals for labor, materials, and cash overhead for each group of farms. 72 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 59 Comparison of Cost and Efficiency Factors in Producing Walnuts, Los Angeles County, 1927. Grouped According to Yield per Acre 8 Lowest 11 Highest yield yield per acre per acre Number of groves 8 11 Average acreage 16.3 20. Number of trees per acre 20.2 19.5 Average age of trees 16. 1 24.0 Per cent seedling trees 53.0 65. 7 Per cent budded trees 47.0 34 3 Yield: pounds walnuts per acre 1101 2434 Merchantable nuts (pounds) 769 1789 Cull nuts (pounds) 332 645 Labor costs per acre : dollars dollars Cultivation 15.89 9.59 Irrigation 5.56 5.93 Pest control 4. 10 7. 12 Disease control 2.74 2.40 Pruning 4 41 2.63 Brush disposal 8 52 1.38 Harvesting 23.50 51.03 Heating 2.12 Wiring and propping 3.24 Miscellaneous 1.31 2.27 Average total* 50. 78 78. 82 Comparative totalf Material costs per acre: dollars Cultivation .• 0.43 Irrigation 5.83 Pest control 3. 19 Disease control 0. 66 Pruning 0.21 Brush disposal Harvesting 2.40 Heating Wiring and propping Miscellaneous 9.45 Average total* 10. 68 Comparative totalf Overhead costs per acre: dollars General expense 3.07 County taxes 19.42 Depreciation and interest on trees 28.52 Depreciation and interest on improvements 8.20 Depreciation and interest on equipment 6 . 80 Interest on investment in land 45. 75 Average* and comparative totalf 111.76 124.72 11.95 Average all groves 28 23.8 18.4 22.0 66 3 33 7 1938 1383 555 dollars 10.37 6.21 5.38 1.56 3.29 1 81 38.99 1.27 2.29 1.56 66.26 dollars dollars 0.08 18 6.57 6.85 3.96 3.32 0.15 3.73 0.36 0.48 3.08 3.02 0.12 1.25 2.59 1.92 1.02 1.94 11.69 dollars dollars 4.53 3.90 23.42 20.88 34.70 34.70 5.04 5.19 12.03 9.93 45.00 45.00 Your grove dollars dollars dollars 119. X929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 73 TABLE 59— (Continued) Costs per acre: Labor Materials Overhead Total. Costs per pound: Labor Materials Overhead Total. RECAPITULATION 8 Lowest yield per acre dollars 50.91 10.68 111.76 15.7 11 Highest yield per acre dollars 78.82 11.95 124.72 8.8 Average all groves dollars 66.26 11.69 119.60 173.35 215.49 197.55 cents cents cents 4.6 3.2 3.4 1.0 0.5 0.6 10.1 5.1 6 2 10.2 Your grove dollars cents * The average totals shown in these tables are not totals of the above columns of figures. They are arrived at by dividing the total labor, material and other costs by the total number of acres in each group of that study. The average cost of irrigation, cultivation, pest control and other individual items of cost are based on the actual number of acres on which the operation was performed. ^ t The comparative total for each group of records is the sum of those cost items corresponding to the ones incurred by the individual cooperator making the comparison and may differ with each separate 74 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 60 Walnut Cost Account Study, Los Angeles County, 1927. Extremes Cultivation Practices Showing Four Groves for Comparison v^iTH Your Groves OF Item Grove No. 1 Grove No. 2 Grove No. 3 Grove No. 4 Your grove Cost per acre S33 49 $30 34 $4 15 . . $6.31 0296 0.0395 0.0029 0022 Yield — pounds 1,130.5 768.1 1,448 8 2,840 5 Age 14 7 15 40 Variety Seedling Budded Seedling Seedling Soil type Hvy.blk.loam 7" to 12' Med. silt loam.. Slight* Sandy loam Hvy. blk. loam Cultivation schedule: January Plow-deep March Plow-deep D-D cult D-D April D-D STH SH May Irr. cult WK-Irr June Cult D-D-SH-Irr D-D-SH-Irr D-D-SH-Irr 1 STH Irr July D-D Cult D-D cult Irr SH** DSH August Irr.-SH Irr.-STH Number of plowings 1 1 Number of diskings 3 5 Number of cultivations 5 4 4 4 Number of irrigations 1 4 3 2 Penetration of water Poor Good Good Good .. . Cult. — Cultivations other than disk, furrow, or plow. D— Disk. D-D— Double disk. DSH — Disk with spike harrow attached. SH — Spike harrow. STH — Spring tooth harrow. WK— Weed knife. * — Soil will not pack into hard layer. ** — Spring toothing when top of ground dry — disking ten days later. As with many other crops, walnut groves are frequently cultivated without beneficial results and sometimes with detrimental effect. The question is, where does cultivation cease and ''irrigation" begin? Groves 3 and 4 probably had nearly an ideal cultivation schedule. Eeference to cultivation costs will show that general groupings by yield substantiate the tendencies shown by these extreme cases. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 75 TABLE 61 Comparison of Costs and Efficiency Factors in the Dairy Industry, Imperial County, 1927. Grouped According to Net Profit per Cow Your dairy No. 5 Lowest net profit Number of herds 5 Average number of cows per herd 38.7 Pounds milk per cow 6464.0 Average test 4.02 Pounds butterfat per cow 260.0 Total receipts per farm $5917. 73 Total expenses per farm $5608.81 Net profit per farm $308. 92 Farm income per farm $1502.39 Labor income per farm $1072.46 Total receipts per cow... Total expenses per cow. Net profit per cow Farm income per cow.... Labor income per cow.... $152.95 $144.96 $7.99 $38.83 $27.72 5 Highest net profit 5 34 8 6681.0 4.27 285.0 $6697.51 $4490.81 $2206.70 $3607.18 $3267.10 $192.40 $129.01 $63.39 $103.65 $93.86 Average all dairies 15 32.1 6556.0 4.14 272.0 $5560.16 $4544.77 $1015.39 $2277.35 $1909.57 $173.40 $141.73 $31.67 $71 03 $59.56 Investment per cow: Land Dairy buildings Dairy equipment . All feeds Fertilizer... Dairy stock Average total* Comparative totalf.. dollars 10.68 23.14 13.47 9.64 0.23 130.46 182.90 dollars 14.38 30.85 6.98 7.94 0.66 164.21 205.44 dollars 12.41 20.86 10.99 8.18 0.56 142.18 187.63 dollars Income per cow: Butterfat Whole milk Skim milk Dairy stock sold Increase inventory stock... Miscellaneous sales Dairy products home use.. Dairy stock home use Total. dollars dollars dollars 104.57 83.11 95.82 2.52 50.18 26.34 5.97 6.62 5.98 21.54 9.74 16.48 14.76 36.26 23.96 1.85 1.69 1.48 1.55 4.80 3.26 0.19 0.08 dollars 152.95 192.40 173.40 * The average totals shown in these tables are not totals of the above columns of figures. They are arrived at by dividing the total investment in land, buildings, dairy equipment, feed, fertilizer and dairy stock by the number of cows in each group of that study. The average cost of the above items are based on the actual number of cows contained in the herds which had these investments; for instance, renters would not have a land investment charge. t The comparative total for each group of records is the sum of those cost items corresponding to the ones incurred by the individual cooperator making the comparison and may differ with each separate case. 76 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 61— (Continued) 5 Lowest net profit Portion of income from various sources: per cent Butterfat 68.5 Whole milk 1 . 6 Skim milk 3.9 Dairy stock sold 14. 1 Increase inventory stock 9.6 Miscellaneous sales 1 . 2 Dairy products home use 1 . Dairy stock home use 0. 1 Total 100.0 Expense per cow: dollars Hay 20.93 Concentrates 2.23 Silage 4 98 Pasture 40.46 Dairy stock bought 9.52 Decrease inventory stock Hired labor 20.38 Family labor 19. 73 Miscellaneous 10.50 Depreciation buildings and equipment 5. 12 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 11.11 Total 144.96 Portion of expenses for various items: per cent Hay 14.4 Concentrates 1 . 5 Silage 3.4 Green feed Pasture 27.9 Dairy stock bought 6.6 Decrease inventory stock Hired labor 14 1 Family labor 13.6 Miscellaneous '. 7.3 Depreciation buildings and equipment 3 . 5 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 7. 7 Total 100.0 Cost of production per cow: dollars Feed 68.60 Stock 9.52 Decrease inventory stock Labor 40.11 Miscellaneous 10.50 Depreciation .■ 5. 12 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 11.11 Total 144.96 Gross income 152 95 Net profit 7.99 Farm income 38.83 Labor income 27.72 5 Highest net profit per cent 43.2 26.1 3.4 5.0 18.9 0.9 2.5 100.0 dollars 14.13 7.67 1.20 38.41 10.11 5.86 30.46 5.88 2.65 12 64 129.01 29.8 7.8 Average all dairies per cent 55.2 15.2 3.4 9.5 13.7 0.9 2.0 0.1 100.0 141.73 per cent per cent 10.9 12.3 6.0 3 3 0.9 1.7 29.8 7.9 4.5 8.4 23.6 19.7 4.6 6.2 2.1 2.6 9.8 8.1 100.0 100.0 dollars dollars 61.41 66.77 10.11 11.24 36.32 39.80 5.88 8.80 2.65 3.65 12.64 11.47 129.01 141.73 192 40 173.40 63.39 31.67 103.65 71.03 93.86 59.56 Your dairy No. per cent dollars per cent dollars 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 77 TABLE 61— ( Continued) Cost of production per pound butterfat: Feed Stock Decrease inventory stock Labor Miscellaneous Depreciation Interest on investment (at 6 per cent). Total Gross income Net profit Farm income Labor income 5 Lowest net profit cents 26.4 3.7 15 4 4.0 2 4.3 55.8 58.8 3.0 14 9 10.7 5 Highest net profit cents 21.6 3.5 12.7 2 1 0.9 4.4 45.2 67.5 22.3 36.4 32.9 Average all dairies cents 24 5 4.1 14 6 3.2 1.3 4 2 52 1 63.7 11.6 26.1 21.9 Your dairy No. cents Some other management factors: Average price butterfat creamery (cents).... Average price butterfat whole milk (cents). Average price all butterfat (cents) Price skim milk per cwt. (cents) Pounds hay per cow Pounds concentrates per cow Pounds silage per cow Price hay per ton Price concentrates per cwt Price silage per ton Price pasture per animal per month Hours labor per cow Wages per hour earned by owner* Interest earned on investment, per cent Pounds butterfat to pay expenses Cost per pound to produce butterfat (cents). 47.4 53.1 47.5 15.4 4950 144 3263 $8.45 $1.55 S3. 05 $2.54 101 $0.60 10.4 243.0 38.7 48.9 58.7 52.2 15.2 3581 451 609 $8.31 $1 77 $3.94 $2.06 83 $1.37 37.0 212.6 26.2 48 61.3 50.3 15.2 4145 280 1532 $8.41 $1.51 $3 18 $2.34 99 $0.89 23.0 234.0 34.5 * This figure is the total labor income divided by the number of hours spent on the dairy enterprise by the owner. 78 CALIFORNIA AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE [CiRC. 24 TABLE 62 Comparison of Cost and Efficiency Factors in Egg Production, Sonoma County, 1927. Grouped According to Net Profit per Hen Number of flocks Number of hens per flock Number of eggs per hen Per cent production Per cent mortality Per cent culled Per cent replacement* Per cent addedf Per cent pullets Pounds grain per hen Cost per hen Pounds mash per hen Cost per hen Per cent market eggs Average price market eggs (cents).... Per cent hatching eggs Average price hatching eggs (cents). Per cent No. 1 eggs Per cent No. 2 eggs Per cent No. 3 eggs 13 Lowest net profit 13 1889 129.4 35.4 30.6 48.3 66.6 51.6 51.2 44.7 $1.01 41.8 $1.05 93.5 28.0 6.5 39.8 71.0 24.5 4.5 13 Highest net profit 13 2268 137.5 37.6 26.1 14.5 38.6 55.0 52.7 41.0 $0.92 40.1 $1.02 91.7 29.1 8.3 40.5 71.8 23.6 4.6 Average all flocks 52 2293 131.5 36.0 28.7 32.1 56.0 50.8 50.3 41 $0.92 37.0 $0.92 91.4 28.5 8.6 43.2 71.2 24.4 4.4 Yovir flock Average investment per hen: Land Buildings and fences Equipment, tools, etc.... Supplies, insecticides Feed, shell, and grit Poultry stock Total Income per hen: Market eggs Hatching eggs Poultry stock sold.. Miscellaneous Eggs consumed Poultry consumed.. Increase in inventory (stock). dollars 1.26 1.98 0.76 0.03 0.08 1.45 Total. 3.82 dollars 0.91 1.38 0,53 02 0.05 1.39 dollars 1.06 1.63 0.44 0.02 0.06 1.38 dollars 5.56 4.28 4.59 dollars dollars dollars 2.72 3.02 2.79 0.27 0.38 0.40 0.76 0.34 0.47 0.05 0.04 0.04 0.02 0.02 0.02 01 0.30 04 dollars 4.10 3.77 Portion of income from various sources: Market eggs Hatching eggs Poultry stock sold Miscellaneous Eggs consumed Poultry consumed Increase inventory (stock) Total. per cent 71.3 7.1 19.8 1.2 0.6 100.0 per cent 73.7 9.2 8.2 0.9 6 7.4 100.0 per cent 74.1 10.6 12.5 1.1 0.6 0.0 1.1 100.0 per cent * This figure is obtained by dividing the number of hens died and sold during the year by the number of laying hens at the beginning of the year. t This figure is obtained by dividing the number of hens added during the year by the number of laying hens in the flock at the beginning of the year. 1929] ENTERPRISE EFFICIENCY STUDIES ON CALIFORNIA FARMS 79 TABLE 62— ( Continued) 13 Lowest net profit Expenses per hen: dollars Feed 2.16 Stock bought 0. 71 Miscellaneous 0.19 Hired labor 0.22 Family labor 75 Water, taxes, insurance 0.06 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0.34 Decrease in inventory Cstock) 008 Decrease in inventory (depreciation) 0. 16 Total 4.67 Portion of expenses for various items: per cent Feed 46.2 Stock bought 15.3 Miscellaneous 4.0 Hired labor 4.6 Family labor 16. 1 Water, taxes, insurance 1.2 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 74 Decrease inventory (stock) 1.8 Decrease inventory (depreciation) 3 4 Total 100.0 Cost of production per hen: dollars Feed costs 2.16 Stock bought 0. 71 Decrease in stock 0.08 Labor 0.97 Water, taxes, insurance 0.06 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 0. 34 Other overhead 0. 35 Total 4.67 Gross income 3.82 Net profit -0.85 Flock farm income 0.25 Flock labor income —0. 10 Cost of production per dozen eggs: cents Feed costs 20.0 Stock bought 6.6 Decrease in stock 7 Labor 9.0 Water, taxes, insurance 0.6 Interest on investment (at 6 per cent) 3 2 Other overhead 3.2 Total 43 . 3 Gross income 35 4 Net profit -7.9 Flock farm income 2.3 Flock labor income —0.9 13 Highest net profit dollars 1.99 0.22 0.09 0.04 0.49 0.04 0.26 0.12 3.25 3.6 100.0 Average all flocks dollars 2.04 0.39 0.13 0.15 0.55 0.04 0.29 Your flock dollars 0.13 3.72 per cent per cent 61.2 55.0 6.9 10.0 2.7 3.0 1.3 4.0 15.0 15.0 1.3 1.0 8.0 8.0 4.0 100.0 dollars dollars 1.99 2.04 0.22 0.39 0.53 0.70 0.04 04 0.26 29 21 0.26 3.25 3.72 4.10 3.77 0.85 05 1.59 0.89 1.33 0.60 cents cents 17.4 18.6 1.9 3.6 4.6 6 4 0.4 4 2.3 2.6 1.8 2.4 28.4 34 35 8 34 4 7.4 4 13 9 8.1 11.6 5.5 per cent dollars 16m-l,'29