decreased. This, however, is merely because members of the family are not paid for this labor at current rates. Nevertheless one of the important reasons for engaging in certain types of farming is that it gives rational and remunerative employment to the children of the family. Farming remains the one great industry where children are a material asset. A man with a family of children may wisely engage in dairying, fruit raising, or vegetable growing, not only because he can use the labor of his children to advantage, but because the training in contributing to the family income which they receive before the age of twenty-one is one of the most valuable assets these children can acquire. If the ideal of a successful home is not a part of the programme it may be well to question whether some other activity may not better engage attention.

THE INFLUENCE OF PRICE

The gross return per acre depends of course, upon two factors— yield and price. The size of the farm required for a given gross return will depend, therefore, not only upon the fertility of the soil but also upon the location. The latter materially affects the price, especially in a state of great size with many communities remote from the larger centers of population. Nowhere, probably, is community effort more important in securing satisfactory prices than with the fruit raiser in California. No matter how satisfactory the yield and quality of the fruit may be, if the grower is not surrounded by others raising a like commodity, usually it will be found difficult to market the crop at a satisfactory price. In the figures which are given in the table it is not intended to state either the lowest price or the highest price at which a given commodity sells in California, but rather to state what men in the industry would look upon as a low or high price. The average price, also, is not necessarily the average of any number of years or of any locality, but rather a statement of what would be looked upon as a satisfactory price by those who are engaged extensively in growing the particular crop in the leading localities where the crop is produced.

ILLUSTRATIONS OF SIZE OF FARM

Table showing the area required to produce a gross income of $4000 per year, assuming the average price stated. The yield assumed is stated in column 2, page 3, under the heading-A Safe Estimate for Business Purposes. Figures are not official.

A certain amount of waste land must be assumed. The smaller the tract the greater the proportion of waste due to roads and buildings. Allowing some leeway for waste land, it is possible to state, in general terms, that for grain raising, such as barley, oats, or wheat, two hundred or more acres will be required to secure a gross income of $4000 per year where the rainfall is sufficient to permit of annual cropping, and twice that amount will be required where it is necessary to practice summer fallow on alternate years. Sixty acres may be required for potatoes, sugar beets, grape growing, or dairying. Various tree fruits may require forty acres or less. Ten acres appears to be the smallest area on which a California crop will return a gross income of $4000 a year under average conditions. It is not intended to assert that a given crop will require a given area as shown in the last column of the table. In fact, it will probably require in most cases either more or less than the amount stated, because the conditions will probably be above or below the average. Neither is it intended to assert that even though the conditions are only average a suitable return may not be obtained from a less area through greater energy, thrift, and knowledge. Indeed, it is being constantly done; for example, while it ordinarily may take forty acres to produce $4000 worth of shipping grapes, an authentic example was brought to the writer's attention where thirteen acres of shipping grapes in 1913 brought the owner, sold on the farm in bulk, $4692. This crop did not cost the tenant, exclusive of rent, to exceed $500, including pay for his own labor. This illustration is quoted to show that while such statements can be made honestly and such cases occur not infrequently, they are not a proper guide for the new settler. A part of the zest in farming in California is that there are such prizes for which one may reasonably strive. What it is intended to say is that if one expects to get greater returns than are indicated in the table, he should be thoroughly convinced that he has more favorable conditions or greater ability than the average. Of course, one may properly be content with a smaller gross income and thus require a smaller area to satisfy his needs. It is fairly obvious, however, that statements of satisfactory income on less than ten acres, which undoubtedly do occur, do not represent normal conditions and are not safe guides for those who desire to make a home in the open country. Such small areas may, and in many cases do, furnish delightful homes for those who have other sources of income. A more delightful place for people of moderate income to live than in some of the valleys of California can be found in but few localities in the world. It is apparent that this type of population is destined to increase largely. Neighbors of unusual

intelligence and culture, schools and civic improvements of the highest order, unparalleled climate, and good roads throughout the year, as well as many other factors, contribute to this end.

SOME CENSUS FIGURES

More than three-fifths of all the land owned in farms in California in 1910, was held in tracts of one thousand acres or over. This vast area of seventeen million acres, however, represents only about 5 per cent of the total number of farms. There were less than five thousand farms of over a thousand acres each, while there were more than ten thousand farms of less than ten acres each. More than one-tenth of all the farms in California, 1910, were less than ten acres in area. In many instances, however, the income from the farm did not represent the total income of the owner. The following table gives the number of farms by size groups, together with the total area of land and the value per acre in each group as determined by the census of 1910.

Speaking in general terms, one-fourth of the farms of California were less than twenty acres in area, one-fourth between twenty and forty-nine acres, one-fourth between fifty and one hundred and seventy-four acres, while the remaining one-fourth were one hundred and seventy-five acres or more in extent. The latter one-fourth occupied seven-eighths of the total area in farms. The average size of farm was three hundred and seventeen acres with an average value for land and buildings of $16,447. The average value of livestock per farm was $1447, and that of implements and machinery was $414.

It is interesting to note that farms operated by owners averaged two hundred and twenty-seven acres, by tenants three hundred and forty-two acres, and by managers nineteen hundred and thirty-three acres. The greatly increased acreage value of the smaller farms as shown in the table above is due to many causes, of which four stand out prominently: (1) location, (2) larger proportionate value of buildings, (3) irrigation, (4) in many cases, plantations of fruit trees.

ESTIMATING THE VALUE OF LAND

A Dairy Farm.-How may one estimate the value of land? All that one can hope to do is to give an illustration of a method. For this purpose, the dairy farm, previously mentioned, may be used. It was seen that sixty acres may be sufficient to produce a gross income of $4000 per year where cows are kept on land raising alfalfa by irrigation. According to figures previously mentioned, this would represent an investment of $16,000. This investment may be roughly divided into four parts: (1) raw land, (2) water rights and the preparation of the land for irrigation, (3) buildings, (4) animals, tools, and other floating capital. The animals, tools, and other floating capital may be estimated at 25 per cent of the total investment, or $4000. If the buildings are satisfactory, they may easily cost an additional $4000, thus leaving $8000 for the raw land, for water rights and the preparation for irrigation. It is a matter to be determined in each individual instance, but if the water rights and preparation for irrigation are to cost $2000 on sixty acres, this would leave $6000 which may be paid for raw land, or $100 per acre. Obviously if water rights and preparation for irrigation cost $4000 then only $80 per acre should be paid for raw land. No one must assume that the figures stated necessarily apply to an individual case. Each person must take the principle here illustrated and determine what the figures. should be under his circumstances.

An Orange Grove. In a previous paragraph it was estimated that twenty acres of land planted to oranges might be required to return a gross income of $4000. According to the basis on which we are working, this represents a capital of $16,000, or $800 per acre. In this instance, probably $2000 may be estimated for the buildings, leaving $14,000 for land, water, and trees. Let it be supposed that the water rights, including water delivered to the highest point of the tract, cost $150 per acre, and the cost of bringing these trees to the age of five years, including the purchase of the trees, planting, cultivation, irrigation, fertilizers, and taxes, is $350 per acre, then the situation would stand as follows: