CURRENT TRENDS IN MINNESOTA AGRICULTURE. Supplement to County Data Publications. H. C. PEDERSON, Extension Economist-Marketing

Transcription

1 MAGR GOVS MN 2000 MISC-1957, )/h ---- /ill c.- G CURRENT TRENDS IN MINNESOTA AGRICULTURE Supplement to County Data Publications 'I Farm Numbers Farm Size Dairy Hogs Chickens Crops Population H. C. PEDERSON, Extension Economist-Marketing L. J. PICKREL, Extension Economist Public Policy F. L. OLSON, Extension Marketing Assistant E. K. THOMPSON, Extension Economics Assistant University of Minnesota 1 AGRICULTURAL EXTENSION SERVICE U.S. Department of Agriculture

2

3 INDEX Figure i. Introduction 1. Percentage change in number of farms to Percentage change in size of farms to Percentage change in number of milk cows and heifers two years old and over kept for milk to Distribution of dairy herds by size and crop reporting districts and Percentage change in number of sows farrowing spring pigs to Percentage change in number of hens(chickens} on farms in May to Soybean acreage to be p1anted and Acreage of alfalfa as a percentage of all hay cut in Percentage change in total population--april 1950 to April Percentage of total population living on farms Change in percentage of total population living on farms to Percentage change in number of people living on farms, 1955 to 1956 and 1951 to 1956

4

5 Current Changes in Minnesota Agriculture Introduction This publication has been prepared by the extension economists in marketing and public policy for the purpose of illustrating a number of significant annual changes that have occurred in Minnesota counties since 19 54, when the most recent U. S. Census of Agriculture was taken and later reported. This publication may be considered as the first supplement to the series of 11 county data books on various phases of Minnesota agriculture prepared and released through the Agricultural Extension Service during the past two years. The supplemental material is also given on county outline maps so that comparisons may easily be made with the neighboring counties, the same as with the earlier county data publications. The data included here on various phases of agriculture were obtained from the Minnesota State Farm Census while that on population is based upon releases from the State Department of Health. The Minnesota State Farm Census~ from which yearly information on Minnesota Crops and Livestock information may be obtained, is published annually by the State -Federal Crop and Livestock Reporting Service, State Office Building, St. Paul 1, Minnesota, Roy A. Bodin, in charge. (i)

6 Figure 1 1. The number of farms in Minnesota decreased 2. 3 percent from 1955 to Decreases occurred over the entire state but are most noticeable in the cutover area of the northeast. 2. Nobles, Fairbau1t, Watonwan, Rice, Swift, Meeker, Douglas, and Cook Counties had a slight increase in number of farms. Most of these counties, incidentally, had a corresponding decrease in size of farms (see figure 2). 3. The number of farms in Minnesota has been decreasing steadily from 1946 through 1956 with the greatest decrease occurring in 1956 (see Graph 1). Thousand ~ ~ Graph Change in Number of Farms in Minnesota, 1946 to , ~ - ~ _r-_.f"-~ - I / j ~

7 Figure 1. Percentage Change in Number of Farms to KITTSON ROSEAU MARSHALL J POLK CLEAR- NOR HAN MAHNOMEN WATER 4.2 BECKER CARLTON Minnesota OTrER TAIL Percent Decrease GRANT OOIJGLAS rooo Black = Increase POPE SWIFT KANDIVOHI Red = Decrease So/o and over Under 5% ~~~~~li~jlj I LINCOLN LVON RICE GOODHUE o o.? PIPESTONE HIJRRAV COTTONWOOD WATONWAN BLUE EARTH WASECA STEELE DODGE OLMSTED WINONA ROCK NOBLES JACKSON HARTIN FARIBAULT FREEBORN MOWER FILLMORE

8 Figure 2 1. Farms in Minnesota increased 0. 9 percent in size from 1955 to This increase was uniform throughout the state. 2. The average farm has increased steadily from acres in 1946 to acres in 1956 (see Graph 2). 3. This trend toward larger farms is a part of a national trend and reflects improvements and changes in technology on the one hand, and, in special instances, competition for "base acreage" of restricted crops, Acres per farm 220 zoo 180 ~ ~ J ~ / I Graph 2. Average l S ize T o f Farms 1n ' Minnesota, 1946 to

9 Figure 2. Percentage Change in Size of Farms to Kl T TSON ROS AU 2.4 MARSHALL POLK NORMAN CLEAR MAHNOMEN WATE/ KOOCH!CHIN(; r lfasca BECKER HUBBARD 0.4 WAOENA,:.C.::.AS:..:S:.. ---j CARLTON Minnesota 0.6 TAIL 2.6 DOUGLAS 1.1 POPE TO Do 0.7 HOI/RISON 1.2 AITKIN Percent Increase Black= Increase Red = Decrease LINCOLN LVON REDWOOD PIPlSTONE HVIIRA 'f' COTTONWOOD WATONWAN BLVE EARTH WASECA STEELE DOOGE ROCK NOBLES JACKSON 0.2 OLMSTED WINONA FARIBAULT f'reeboiin HOWER f'illhore

10 Figure 3 1. The number of milk cows on farms decreased by 0. 3 percent from 1955 to 1956, This decrease was most pronounced adjacertt to the Twin Cities, in southeastern Minnesota, and in northern Mirl:9-esota. St. Louis County had a decrease of lz. 6 percent. Z. The greatest increases occurred in Wabasha, Sibley, and Carver Counties where a 4. 9 percent increase was reported. 3. The number of milk cows decreased steadily from 1946 to 1952., increased in 1953, but since then has decreased somewhat (see Graph 3}. In spite of this decrease in numbers, total production has increased due to increased production per cow. Graph 3. Number of Milk Cows and leifers Z Years old and over Kept for Milk and Production per Cow, in Minnesota 1946 to 1956 Milk Cows {Mil.) z. 1 Milk Production Per Cow ( 1, 000 lbs. ) ~ ~... l.z ~ ~ ~ _,_ - _ ~ ~ ~ 8 ~~ Number of Milk Cows Production per cow 4 z

11 Figure 3. Percentage Change i~ Number of Milk Cows and Heifers 2 Years and Over Kept for Milk K I TTSON ROSEAU 4.0 MARSHALL POLK CLEAR- NORMA N MAHNOMEN WATER BELTRAHI 4.6 KOOCHICHINC 12.6 (is ITASCA 2. 5 CLAt' B ECKER NIJBBARO CASS CARLTON WADENA OTTER TAIL Minnesota Percent Decrease HDRRISON GRANT DOUGLAS TODD KANABEC SWIFT POPE' HILL LACS 0. 3 Black = Increase Re d = Decrease KANDIVOHI HEEKER LINCOLN LVON PIPESTONE HIIRRAt' COTTONWOOD WATONWAN BLUE E'ARTH WASECA STt:CLE DOOGE' OLMSTEO WINONA RICE ROCK NOBLES JACKSON HART/IV FARIBAULT FREEBORN MOWER FILLMORC

12 Figure 4 1. Figure 4 shows the proportion of dairy herds in the various size groups for each of the nine crop reporting districts for 1955 and Z. The proportion of the dairy herds having less than 10 cows decreased throughout the state while the proportion having ZO and above have increased. 3. The proportion of dairy herds having less than 10 cows varied from in the Northeast District to ZS. 0 in the Southeast District. The Southeast District also had a larger proportion of its dairy herds in the ZO to Z9 and 30 and over groups than any other area of the state. 4. One of the factors contributing to large dairy herds in southeast Minnesota is its topography. Much of the land there is better suited to forage crops than to such row crops as corn and soybeans. 5. The smaller sized farms in northeastern Minnesota are also associated with smaller sized dairy herds. I]:_. I 1 See figure 3 in "Important Aspects of Minnesota Agriculture 11

13 Figure 4. Distribution of Dairy Herds by Size according to Crop Reporting Districts 4 (Percent) Dairy Cows per Herd First Figure 1-9 SecondFigure Third Figure Fourth Figure 30 and over lili 60.6 J).6 J , J , ~ ).1 J0.2 J1.J ) O,J l llli J !± 1955!2j J8._5 40.J o ii lj.l J lli.5. J ) J.5 Minnesota Dairy Cows per herd (Percent) & over ~ lli ) I7JU:'U IUU:"U 2 12.i5. ~ J _

14 Figure 5 l. The number of sows farrowing spring pigs in the state decreased 19 percent from 1955 to However, the drop was less pronounced in the southeast portion of the state. 2. The major factor causing the reduction in spring farrowing a was the low hog prices in the fall of These low prices occurred when plans for spring farrowings were being considered, 3. Graph 4 shows the cyclical movement in numbers of sows farrowing spring pigs over the past ten years. Spring farrowings hit peaks in 1950, 1951, and 1955 and lows in 1948, 1953, and possibly 1956, Thousand 700, ~ r ~ ~------~ ~ Graph 4. Number of Sows Farrowing Spring Pigs in Minnesota, 1946 tol

15 Figure 5. Percentage Change in Number of Sows Farrowing Spring Pigs 1955 to 1956 s 18.8 KITTSON ROSEAU MARSHAL L KOOCHI CHING r------; POLK NORMAN 14.6 HAHNOHEN CLEAR WArtR 9.4 CLAY 18.9 B ECKER 19.3 HUBBARD 38. WADENA CASS IFASCA 56.6 CARLTON Minnesota OTrER TAIL Percent Decrease GRANT DOUGLAS TODD POPE 25.0 SWittr HILLE BENTON LACS SHERBURNE Black = Increase Red = Decrease 23.3 HEEKER KANDIYOHI 23.5 LINCOLN 21.0 LYON PIPfSTOHE HURRA't' COTTONWOOD w~tot2an BLUE EARTH OLHSTEO WINONA FARIBAULT t:reeborn HOWER t:illhore * No sows farrowed spring pigs R CK NOBLES JACKSON HARTIN

16 Figure 6 1. The number of chicken hens on farms in May 1956 decreased two percent from May This decrease was quite pronounced in the northern two-thirds of the state, although hen numbers there are always fewer than in southern Minnesota. The numbers in southern Minnesota, where laying locks normally are comparatively large, remained fairly constant although there were variations between counties. 2. Graph 5 shows that chicken hen numbers have experienced a downward trend except for the increases in 1950 and Million ' ' \ ~ I ~ v '"'....._ Graph Number of Hens (Chickens) on Farms in May, in Minnesota, 1946 to

17 Figure 6. Percentage Change in Number of Hens (Chicken) on Farms in May, 1955 to KlrrSON ROSEAU 8.7 MARSHALL 11. '? POLK KOOCHICHING NORMAN HAHNOHEN 12.0 BtLrRAHI CLEAR- WArER ~ 1J.J CLAY BECKER 8.2 orrcr rail HUBBARD CAS$ ITASCA WADENA 2.4 ) GRAN. DOIJGLA$ rodd J 5-.5 SWIFr POPE 8.2 KANDIYOHI 8.1 AlrKIN HORRISON KANABEC?.4 HILLE LACS CARLTON J.O Minnesota 2. 0 Percent Decrease Black = Increase Red = Decrease LINCOLN 1.0 LYON 0.1 RICE GOOOHIJE J.O PIPfSTONl HIJRRAY COTTONWOOD WATONWAN 8LIJE EARTH WASCCA STCCLC DODGE OLHSTCD WINONA ) s.o ROCK NOBLCS JACKSON HARTIN FARIBAIJLT I'RECBORN HOWER I'ILL,.,ORE * Comparable Data not available

18 Figure 7 1. The acreage planted to soybeans in Minnesota continues to increase. In 1956 the acreage to be planted was Z, 559, 600 acres or about 13 percent of total cropland harvested. This represented an increase of 370, ZOO acres or 16.9 percent over The acreage of soybeans in 1956 was ZOO percent larger than 1946 and 145 percent more than in The most noticable increases occurred in the Minnesota River Valley and in the lower portion of the Red River Valley. The Red River Valley will probably become more important as new early maturing varieties of soybeans are developed. 3. Minor decreases in soybean acreage occurred in Fillmore, Olmsted, Murray, Pipestone, Hennepin, and Anoka Counties. It appears likely that maximum plantings of soybeans reached their peak in that area earlier than elsewhere in the state. 4. Graph 6 indicates the tremendous increase which has taken place in the soybean acreage in Minnesota. 5. More acreage was planted to soybeans in Renville County than in Z5 northern Minnesota counties. 6. See figures Z6 through 30 in "Minnesota Crops" for more information on soybeans. 100,ooo 26 Graph 6. I I 1 Soybean Acreage in Minnesota, ~----t 1946 to t----JY ~~----~-----r ~~ _, r ~------~~~~ ~ ( ~~-----;------~~ r ~ r r----~J'~r ; i ~~-----~ r---~ J( r r~~~--~r ; , to v.,...~ ~~---~~-~----r ~------; v "' ~------,_ r ~ ; 8 A~ I j_ oc 1946 I ~-----=1~----~,~----,

19 7 2 *... Figure 7. Soybean Acreage to be Planted Top Figure = 1956 Bottom Figure = 1955 (thousands) KITTSON 4 1 MARSHALL t ROSEAU POLK * 25 7 NORMAN CLAY 4 2 MAHNOMEN GRANT BECKER OTTER TAIL CLEAR WATER DOUGLAS POPE 1 HUBBARD WADENA 7 5 TODD 17 9 KOOCHICHING j CASS 4 ITASCA * CARLTON AITKIN 2 MORRISON KANABEC 5 Minnesota Thousand Acres , , , LAC QIJI PARLE.,_ft~L 6 ZDICINE LINCOLN L'f'ON PIPtSTONE MIJRRAY COTTONWOOD WATONWAN ROCK NGBLES.JACKSON MARTIN * Less than 50 acres of soybeans RICE BLIJE EARTH WASECA STEELE DODGE OLMSTED FARIBAIJLT FREEBORN MOWER FILLMORE WINONA

20 Figure 8 1. The importance of alfalfa for hay as a forage crop has increased steadily over the past ten years. In 1946 alfalfa made up ZZ. 1 percent of the hay cut compared to percent in 1956 (see Graph 7). Z. The percent of hay cut as alfalfa is greatest in southern Minnesota and lowest in northeastern Minnesota. Low alfalfa acreage in northeastern Minnesota is due largely to costly lime applications that are necessary for good stands in this area. Since hay yields are fairly low 1 I and hay is the most important crop Zl, there is a need for a nigh-yielding, acid soil-loving legume if this area is to be competitive in agriculture with other areas of the state and nation. 1 I Figure 7, "Minnesota Crops 11 7:1 Figure 8, 11 Minnesota Crops" Percent Graph 7. Acreage of Alfalfa Cut as Hay as a Percentage of All Hay Cut in Minnesota, 1946 to zo

21 Figure 8. Acreage of Alfalfa as a Percentage of all 8 Hay Cut in CARLTON 6 Minnesota Percent Percent Percent 80 and over Under 20

22 Figure 9 1. The total population of Minnesota increased 8. 9 percent from 1q50 to This change in population varied from 71.8 percent increase in Lake County to 10.8 percent decrease in Red Lake County. Z. All the counties in southern Minnesota except Jackson, Rock, Sibley, and Lac Qui Parle Counties increased in population. All the counties in the Red River Valley except Clay, Polk, and Pennington Counties decreased. 3. Counties showing largest increases in population are around the Twin Cities and up along the Lake Superior Taconite ore development area. 4. One of the factors causing the decreases in population in rnany of the rural counties was the decrease in the number of people living on farms (see graph 8 and figure 1 0). Thousand Graph 8. Number o People Living on Farms in Minnesota, 1950 to ~ ~ ~ ~ Z

23 Figure 9. Percentage Change in Total Population 9 April 1, 1950 to Ap ril 1, 1956_ KITTSON ROSEAU 2.8 MARSHALL 3.0 lfoochich/ng 5.2 POLK NORMAN CLAY 3.6 BELTRAHI CUII/I HIIHNO,.,EN WATER ITASCA HUBBARD CASS BECKER OTTER TAIL Minnesota CARLTON WADENA 8.9 Percent 3.6 Increase 1.8 GRANT DOUGLAS TODD Black =Increase Red = Decrease lac QUI PARt 7.3 KANDIYOHI LINCOLN LVON PIPESTONE HURRAY COTTONWOOD WATONWAN BLUE EARTH WASECA STECLE DODGE OLHSTED WINONA , ROCK NOBLES.JACKSON HARTIN FARIBAULT FREEBORN HOWER FILLHORE RICE

24 Figure Only percent of the people in Minnesota live on farms. The percent varied by counties from a high of 59.4 percent in Sibley County to 0. 1 percent in Ramsey County. 2. There are only 11 counties out of 87 where over half the people live on farms. They are Dodge, Jackson, Kanabec, Lac Qui Parle, Lincoln, Marshall, Red Lake, Roseau, Rock, Sibley, and Traverse. 3. In northeastern Minnesota only a smal{. part of the population live on farms. Three of the counties had less than 5 percent of the people living on farms. 4. These percentages were computed by dividing the number of people living on farms 1 I by the total population 2/ The trend in nonfarm and farm population is similar in the United States with nonfarm increasing and farm._ decreasing. This is shown in the following chartand in Figure 11. (Page 26, 1957, Outlook Chartbook). 1 I Source: State Farm Census. 'ZI Source: State Department of Health. Farm and Non -Farm Population Trends % Nonfarm [8 Farm TOTA.L. POPULA.TIOH IN AULLIOHS1 1910, 91.,; "20, JJJO, 121.8; r940, JJLa; USO, Ul.l; 1954, 167.f U. 5. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NEG, (8) AGRICULTURAL MARKETING SERVICE

25 10 Figure 10. Percentage of Total Population Living on Farms Minnesota Ye~r Percent , , and over 40.0 to to to 29.9

26 Figure This figure shows the change in proportion of people living on farms from 1950 to Only Rock County failed to show a decrease between these six years, 2. These percentage point changes were obtained by comparing the percent of rural farm population as reported in the 1950 Census of Agriculture with the percent of people living on farms as computed in figure In Mille Lacs and Aitkin Counties the percentage decrease is especially large, 4. You may wonder how it is that the number of people living on farms continue to decrease while total population is increasing. This is possible because farm output per man hour in the United States has made tremendous 1ncreases since 1940 as shown in the following chart (page 15, 1957, Outlook Chart Book), Farm Output Per Man Hour IN T~R~$ JJt' TIM~ UJ~O 8Y A.DtiLT MALliS U, $, DEPARTMI!NT OF AGRICULTURE NEC, 56(10) )63 AOAICULTURAI. RESI!ARCH SERYICI; 5. This increased output has increased the number of persons supported by one farm worker in the United States from less than 5 before the Civil War to 19 now. This is shown in the following chart and the table in the note of figure 12 (page 15, 1957, Outlook Chart Book) Peraon1 Supported by One Farm Worker PERSONS 15 fth U.S DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE NI:O, 56 f11).,09 AGRICULTURAL RFSE.t.RCH SERVICE

27 11 Figure 11. Change in Percentage of Total Population Living on Farms 1950 to 1956 NORMAN CLAY BEC/fEit GRANT 9.2 OTrER TAIL 9.4 DOUGLAS J Sl<ll~r /t'andi.,-oni Minnesota 6.1 Percent Decrease Over Point Decrease Less than 10 Point Decrease Black= Increase Red= Decrease 8.1 LINCOLN 7. 7 r=~~=~=5tr :::::::~::::::::::::::: PIPESTONE.:: HURRAY: : : 2.6 J.J ROC If NOBLES COTTONWOOD s.o WATONWAN ).) 8.) JACKSON HARTIN RICE BLUE EARTH WASECA STEELE DODGE OLMSTED WINONA ) 8.8 FARIBAULT FREE/lORN HOWER FILLHORE

28 Figure The number of people living on farms has decreased consistently since 1950 with the greatest decrease occurring from 191)5 to Minnesota had a 6.1 percent decrease from 1951 to 1956 and a 2, 8 decrease from 1955 to The migration of people out of agriculture is most pronounced in the cutover area of Minnesota, where farm incomes are lower than the rest of the state 1 I. The number of people living on farms in St. Louis, Lake, anacook Counties decreased more than 20 percent between 1951 and Ramsey County had a decrease of percent between 1951 and 1956, due mainly to suburban expansion. 4. Rock, Nobels, Lyon, Nicollet, Rice, and Anoka Counties slight increases over the five-year period. 5. This trend of few people supplying the food for a larger total population is the same in the United States as in M:l.nnesota. This is shown in the following table. Persons supported by production of one farm worker, United States Year Total Persons supported per farm Total United States farm worker employ- population Total At home Abroad ment July 1 11 number millions , , This increased output per farm worker has released many people from agriculture and thus enabled the United States to improve the standard of living and make the industrial revolution possible. 1 I See figure 1 in "Cash Farm Receipts in Minnesota".

29 Figure 12. Percentage Change in Number of People Living on Farms Top Figure = 1955 to 1956 Bottom Figure = 1951 to 1956 KlrrsoN ) R OSCAIJ MARSHALL P OLK 4.9 Z.6 J,S..,Az CLAY 9.6 CLEAR- NAHNONEN WATER ) BCCif 11 ) OTTER TAIL 4.) GRA N T DDUGL4S ) ) POPE 6.5 1).5 BELTI/4/'fl KOOCHICHING ~ 8.0 HIJBB.ARD WADENA ) TODO Z ) CAS$ z.z ITASCA AITKIN ll.j Z CARLTON ).2 1).2 Minnesota to = 2. 8 Percent Decrease to = 6. 1 Percent Decrease Z Black = Increase Red = Decrease 20. ~ ~ 53.2 J.J 5.8 LINCOLN PIP/STONE 1.0 z.o ROCK 1. ~ 1. LVON 2.9 ).1 l.j NIJRRA'f' 1, -9 z 0 C TTONWOOD 1.,3 o;! NOBLES JACKSON WAT~NWAN MARTIN BLUE E4RTH 0.1 z.z FARIBAULT WASECA RICE l.j J.5 STEEL Z I'REEBOIIN J.J 1.8 DODGE OLNSTED WINONA J..Z J NOWEll FILL HOI/

30