xt770r9m4j9x https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt770r9m4j9x/data/mets.xml   Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station. 1953 journals 011 English Lexington : Agricultural Experiment Station, University of Kentucky Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.11 text Progress report (Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station) n.11 1953 2014 true xt770r9m4j9x section xt770r9m4j9x Progress Report 11 May, 1953
CHANGES IN THE LEVELS OF AGRICULTURAL
` A PRODUCTION IN SELECTED
WESTERN KENTUCKY COUNTIES l
19 3 9 ·- 19 4 9
C O N T E N T S
INTRODUCTION .n¤°¤.u¤I¤.¤,,¤¤¤¤.¤.“,“...,». Z
REQUIRED AD]UST1\/[ENT IN CENSUS DATA .,.. , ¤¤“... Z
CHANGED DISTRIBUTION OF LEVELS OF PRODUCTION,
1939-1949, BY COUNTIES . u¤,..¤¤u1.¤..¤..¤uu..¤ 6
Ballard County .¤,¤.¤¤.¤.¤¤¤.....¤¤¤.u.,.. 6
Calloway County oau¤.¤,..¤u...p..¤.,L¤.¤u 7
Carlisle County ¤¤¤u...¤.,1...,.°..¤...¤u1 9
Fulton County ¤¤.°.¤¤¤¤.. , ..¤..°,..¤..... IZ
Graves County ,..¤.¤°¤°..¤t.°..... I . l.¤... 12
Hickman County .¤~....¤..¤..¤.........u.. 15
Marshall County n0.¤.¤¤¤¤....c.°.,.¤i¤..., 15
McCracken County ....,..............¤..¤. 17
Livingston County .................,..t.... 20
Lyon County n¤¤°¤.¤¤¤°.¤.¤.u¤u.)¤.t I tuuvu 2.0
SOIL FERTILITY AND ECONONIIC PROGRESS. ,,.°.¤.. 23
NEARNESS TO INDUSTRIAL EMPLOYIVIENT AND ECONOMIC
PROGRESS ,¤91.( , ¤1°0,»u_ I ¤1uu¤..t¤,u¤i 1 .,¤t,¤ Z 5
T.V,A° -- ITS INFLUENCE ON THE DISTRIBUTION OF
THE LEVELS OF PRODUCTION AMONG PURCHASE,
LIVINGSTON AND LYON COUNTIES‘ FAR1\/[ERS .,u..¤,l 26
CROPS AND LIVESTOCK GENERALIZATIONS , .."0( , . . 2.8
SUMMARY ,.,¤¤U¤¤.¤¤¤.,¤,°.¤..... , 1 ¤¤¤.t.¤t 29
APPENDIX ¤n¤¤¤,¤¤,¤°1¤U0,,L¤¤. . . ( ...tt¤,..,. 31
Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station
‘ University of Kentucky
Lexington

 CHANGES IN THE LEVELS OF AGRICULTURAL
PRODUCTION IN SELECTED
WESTERN KENTUCKY COUNTIES
l 9 3 9 — l 9 4 9
Percy RU Luney 1/
The purpose of this progress report is to show the changes which occurred
between 19159 and 1949 in the distribution of the levels of production 2/ among farms
in ten. of the eleven extreme Southwestern Kentucky Counties (Ballard, Calloway,
Carl;tsle, Fulton, Graves? Hickman, Marshall, McCrackensLit¤V"in.gston and Lyon 
These counties are all in or near the Tennessee Valley portion of the state and
have been a.ff€'er‘i1;ed directly or indi.rectly by activities of the Tennessee Valley
A uthor ityy
REQUIRED ADJUSTMENTS IN CENSUS DATA ,
The 1940 and 1950 United States censuses, a.s they pertain to agriculture I _
in Kentucky? have been drawn on almost exclusively as a source of information
for this study, *wbiir:li is primarily concerned with value of farm products produced
per farrri.
The ‘*values of ta rm products produced per farm" reported in the two cen-
su ses are not co·mpax·able for two reasons. First, the 1940 census report distributes A
farm income on the basis or total value of products (whether or not sold) whereas
the 1990 cersus report distr:~butes farm income on the basis of value of products
sold Second price increases which occurred between. the two years make it irn——
pos cihle to use the inrorne data for purposes of rnaking comparisons 4/ of the
1/ The work reported herein was supported by a grant from the University of
Ch.9 and l949_r

 ..8-
Table 1-b. --Bal1ard County: Distribution of Farms by Gross Cash Farm Income Classes
 
 
Gross cash farm Distribution of Farms
income classes Number of Number of Percentage change ·
farms-193·9i/ farms—1949&/ (1939-1949)E_
(  
_VI($ 250 - $ 1,199) 455 407 -11
V  1,200 - $ 2,499) 376 317 -16
IV  2,500 - $ 4,999) 286 308 8
III($ 5,000 - $ 9,999) 47 171 264 .
H($10.000 - $24,999) 18 30 67
I($25, 000 and over ) 1 6 500 .
Total 1,183 1, 239 +5
__________________  <
Value of Farm Products by Source, 1939 - 49
(Thousands of Dollars) J 
Source 1939i/ 1949 Percentage change ~  
All crops ..1.,....,¤ ...., 1,229 1,237 1
Field crops other than
vegetables and fruits
and nuts ..1..,1.,.,   1,133 1,165 3
Vegetables . .1u.1.. . . . . 17 3 -84 j
Fruits and nuts ....¤.. .. 79 69 -13 I
Horticultural
specialities .,....U. . .. . -7 ---- - ---- --
All livestock and U
livestock products .. .,1, 1, 336 -2,102 57 ‘
Dairy products 1..1r . ...1 400 515 29
Poultry and poultry I
products ...¤.,.,,... . 141 82 -42 I)
Livestock and livestock  
products other than 1
dairy and poultry ...,. , 795 1, 505 89
!
Forest products ,... . , ., 8 13 58
Total, all farm products 2.. 573 3, 352 30
E/Estimates based on interpolations. The procedure is described in the introduction.  
b/ 1950 U. S. Census of Agriculture. ‘
E/ Base year — 1939, b
2/ Corrected to the 1949 price level.

 -9- _ ,
Over the l0—year period (1939-1949), there was only a 4—percent increase
, in income resulting from sales of all farm products. There was a decrease of
13 percent in income from all crops sold, whereas, there was an increase of
37 percent in income from all livestock and livestock products sold. The
` small increase in total income and the loss of crop income are due in part to
the flooding of the reservoir area, Income from dairying, which is included in
l the 37—percent increase from sales of all livestock and livestock products,
A increased by 33 percent, Income from poultry and poultry products decreased
{ by 34 percent. Income from the sale of forest products, which is relatively
¥ unimportant as far as total gross farm income is concerned, increased by 169
percent (Table 2),
When changes in the productivity of Calloway county farms are compared
,» with similar changes in Ballard and Fulton county farms, the roles of land
fertility, T, V, A. flooding, and opportunities for urban employrnent begin to
_ b e e vide n t, Calloway county farmers adjusted to better employment opportu-
nities by dropping out of agriculture, Ballard and Fulton farmers, blessed with
better land and not losing any high income farms to the reservoir, were able to .
make much larger absolute and proportional gains, Farmers in all countieshad
new technologies for producing forage made available to them; ~- in fact, the
availability of the new "know -how‘s" was greater in Calloway and also Graves
(at least as far as public agencies were concerned) as the test—demonstration
program 1/ was in operation in Calloway but not in Ballard nor Fulton counties,
The progifess of this work in the Calloway uplands is offset in the census data
Y by the loss of reservoir farms,
Carlisle County
The general improvement in the distribution of the levels of production
j among the farms included Carlisle county, though it was less favorably affected
than Fulton, Ballard, Graves, Hickman and Livingston, Of the 927 farms in
the economic classification with value of products sold over $2.50 in 1939, 22
Q were absent in l949, Only 58 were found to be in higher brackets in 1949,
4 The cha.nges in the distribution of the levels of production, though moderate
4 in all classes, Were greater percentage—wise in Classes 1lI($5,, 0OO—$9, 999) and
II ($10, OOO-$$24, 999); These classes had gains of 23 and 260 percent, respectively,
Of the 58 farms moving to higher-income groups, 20 lodged in the cate-
gories producing over $4, 999, Farmers with such gross incomes are able to
participate in community activities, adequately support families, etc., Failure
l to ma.ke gains comparable to those made by Fulton, Graves, Hickman, and
J Ballard is explained by the low productivity of rnuch oi the county, The narrow
I bottom along the Mississippi is without levees and is subject to overflowing,
` 1/ A cooperative program of the University of Kentucky and T V A , providing
— for the use of T, V, A., experirnental fertilizers in improved systems oi
farming,

 -10- €
Table 2. --Calloway County: Distribution of Farms by Gross Cash Farm Income Classes
 
Gross cash farm Distribution of Farms X
income classes Num5er of / Number oi Percentage c§iange
farms-19392 farms-l949_1`j/ (1939-1949);
   
VI($ 250 -$ 1,199). .. 1,211 1,056 -13 i
V  1,200 - $ 2,499)... 838 788 - 6 w
IV  2,500 - $ 4,999).. .. 440 286 -35 {
lII($ 5,000 - $ 9,999)... 43 95 121 \
II($l0,000 - $24, 999).. . 10 10 O
I($25,000 and over  . -—--- 5 I
, Total . .......   ,.... . . 2,542 2,240 -12
Value of Farm Products by Source, 1939 - 49
(Thousands of Dollars) _ A
   
Source 19398./ 1949 Percentage Change i_
 
All crops ............. . 2, 445 2,131 -13 _\
Field crops other than
vegetables and fruits
and nuts ..... . ....   . 2,358 2,077 -12
Vegetables .. . .. ........ 6 8 30
Fruits and nuts. . . . .... . 58 34 -42 U
Horticultural
specialities. ..... ..... . 25 13 -48
All livestock and
livestock products   . . ., . 1,150 l 572 37
Dairy products ....... . . 337 i 448 33 1 _
Poultry and poultry
products ...,........ . 274 182 -34 `, 
Livestock and livestock
products other than dairy _
and poultry., ........ . 539 l, 042 93 ‘
Forest products ..... . . . . ... 18 49 169
Total, all farm products 3, 614 3, 752 4 `
 
2/ Estimates based on interpolations. The procedure is described in the introduction.
b/ 1950 U S. Census ofAgriculture. l
;/ Base year — 1939
d/ Corrected to the 1949 price level.

 I
-11- _
I Table 3. -- Carlisle County; Distribution of Farms by Gross Cash Farm Income Classes ‘
Gross Cash farm]   of fé.I°IY]S
income classes Number of Number of Percentage change
farms-1939i/ farms—l949.12/ (1939 -1949)  
VI($ 250 - $ 1,199)..,. 416 336 -19
g V($ 1,200 - $ 2,4991... 309 318 3
IV($ 2,500 - $ 4,999)... 171 200 17
III ($ 5,000 - $ 9, 999)- M 26 32 23
1I($10,000 — $24,999).,.1. 5 18 260
I($25,000 and over   0 l -—-
Total ....,..¤..¤..¤°. .. I 927 905 - 2
Value of Farm Products by Source, 1939 - 49
(Thousands of Dollars)
Source 1939g/ 1949 Percentage change
All crops ....¤..,.°.¤. . 589 506 -14
Field crops other than
vegetables and fruits
I and nuts ,¤.¤°....,I K. . T, 554 478 -14
1 Vegetables .¤.¤ ., .,t... .,. 9 3 -65
Fruits and nuts ....¤.¤ . 26 25 — 2
1 Horticultural
specialities .¤¤.¤.¤.°. . —-——- —-- -- —
All livestock and
livestock products ... . 1, 041 1, 643 58
Dairy products ....... . 152 227 49
r Poultry and poultry
products ....,¤..¤..°¤ . 109 80 -27
Livestock and livestock
I products other than
dairy and poultry . .,., , 780 1, 336 71
Forest products »..L., ¤.,, 15 17 13
Total, all farm products 1, 645 2, 166 32
i/ Estimates based on interpolations. The procedure is described in the introduction,
< b/ 1950 Ur S. Census of Agriculture,
` c/ Base year - 1939.,
d/ Corrected to the 1949 price levela

 1
-13-
The eastern half of the county tends to be rough and of low productivity. There is, ,
however, a small strip of productive soil extending up from Hickman county. Though ·'
consolidation may account for some of the 22 farms missing from the economic
classification, Carlisle county, especially the northern and eastern boundaries, is
close to the industrial center of Paducah and many of the missing farms probably
became rural residential units.
Over the 10-year period, there was an increase of 32 percent of gross farm _
income from the sale of all farmproducts and a decrease of 14 percent in income V
derived from the sale of crops. Sales from livestock and livestock products in-
creased by 58 percent. Dairying, which is included in the 58 percent increase,
increased by 49 percent. Of the 58 percent increase, however, dairying accounted
for only 12. 4 percent. Over this same period, the sale of poultry and poultry
products declined by 27 percent (Table 3). Thus, the major portion of the increase
of productive capacity, as shown by the increase sale of products, was due to the
sale of livestock and livestock products, not including dairy and poultry.
Fulton County A
The changed distribution of the levels of production of farms in Fulton county .
is especially significant. To the 879 farms in the 1939 economic classification, -
52 were added by 1949. From the lowest three economic classifications (Classes
VI, V and IV), a net of 158 farms plus 52 that entered the economic classification `
rrioved to a higher economic status. Thus, 210 moved on a net basis into classes
with value of products sold over $4, 999. No other county studied succeeded in T
shifting as many farms percentage —wise from below to over $4, 999. About 25 ' .
percent of the farms in Fulton county made this shift. This, coupled with the
6 percent gain over the 1939 number of farms over the 10-year period, indicates ~
a shift toward part-time farming, a low rate of abandonment and residential 1
movement, and a concentration on increased productivity unparalleled among the
other counties studied.
Over the 10-year period, Fulton county increased gross farm income from .
the sale of all farm products by 20 percent. There was an increase in sales of
crops by 16 percent and livestock sales by 303 percent. No other Purchase county ,
increased its sales from all crops sold to the extent of Fulton county. The large
percentage increase of the livestock sales indicates that the more favorable distri-
bution of gross farm income came largely from the sale of livestock and livestock
products.  
Graves County
Though the increased productivity of Graves county farms over the l0-year
period has resulted in much shifting of farms from the lower economic classes to
the higher economic classes, more than one—half as many farms have dropped
out of the economic classification entirely, For the entire county there was a loss '
of 138 farms from the economic classification due to consolidation, urban employment.
farms becoming rural residences, and other causes. Of the 360 farms displaced in t
1/ See Table 4 for absolute increases.

 1 -13-
Table 4. -- Fulton County: Distribution of Farms by Gross Cash Farm Income Classes
Gross cash farm A Distribution of farms
income classes Number of` Number of Percentage cha7ge
farms—1939i/ farms—l949E./ (1939-1949) E
v1($ 250 -. $ 1, 199)   239 165 -31
V($ 1,200-$ 2,499)... 247 227 — 8
IV ($ 2, 500 - $ 4, 999)... 235 171 -27
1 III($ 5,000 - $ 9.999)... 86 199 131
° II($10,000 — $24, 999).., 51 146 186
l($25,000 and over     21 23 10
} Total. ................. . 879 931 +6
Value of Farm Products by Source, 1939 ·—- 49
(Thousands of Dollars)
`Y Source 193911./ 1949 Percentage change
All crops ..........,.... 2, 225 2» 578 16
Field crops other than
vegetables and fruits 1
and nuts ............ . 2,188 2, 524 15
Vegetables ...,........ . l1· 23 114
Fruits and nuts   .. . 24 21 -16
Horticultural
specialities ........ .. ————- 10 --—
All livestock and
* livestock products ...... . 463_ 1, 867 303
Dairy products ......... 122 237 94
Poultry and poultry -
products ............ . 58 48 -16
Livestock and livestock .
products other than
dairy and poultry .,.... 283 l, 582 459
Forest products ,,..... . 55 33 -40
` Total, all farm products. 3, 858 4, 478 20
i/ Estimates based on interpolations. The procedure is described in the introduction
b/ 1950 U. S, Census of Agriculture.
5/ Base year -1939. l
df Corrected to the 1949 price level.

 -14..
Table 5. -- Graves County; Distribution of Farms by Gross Cash Farm Income Classes
 
Gross Cash farm p is ri ution o .-arms
income classes Number of Number of b/ Percentage chzyige
farms—1939?./ farms-1949- (1939-1949).i
 
VI($ 250 - $ 1,199)... 1,740 1,527 -12
v($ 1,.200-$ 2,499).... 1,109 962 -13
1V($ 2,500 - $ 4,999).... 526 638 21
I1I($ 5,000 - $ 9,999)... 48 133 177
H ($10, 000 - $24,999). . . 28 43 54
I($25,000 and over   1 ll 1,000
Total.,.,.,. .,.,.   .,,. 0 3,452 31314 - 4 j
Value of Farm Products by Source, 1939 - 1949
(Thousands of Dollars)
 -.
Source 1939g/ 1949 Percentage change 1 A
All crops ..,. , .,.1..... , 2, 692 2, 955 10
Field crops other than
vegetables and fruits
and nuts .,...., . ...,,, 2, 490 2.; 774 11
Vegetables .., .,,,...,, . . 31 15 -50
Fruits and nuts .,,.,, . . 154 161 4
Horticultural
specialities ..,. 1.,... , ---—- 5 ——-
All livestock and ’ I
livestock products ..,, . .. 2, 514 3, 346 33 ‘
Dairy products, M ... . 860 1, 057 22
Poultry and poultry
products ...., . ,.,... , , 310 207 -33 »
Livestock and livestock
products other than
dairy and poultry. ,.., 1, 344 2,082 55
Forest products ..,,... . .. ll 47 332
Total, all farm products 5, 217 6, 348 22
   
a_/ Estimates based on interpolations. The procedure is described in the introduction.
b/ 1950 U. S. Census O1'AgTlC\l11\1T€.
c/ Base year - 1939
d/ Corrected to the 1949 price level

 -15-
Classes V and VI, 222 moved to highe-r —income brackets. Though movement out
of the economic classification predominated, only three other counties studied ,
(Fulton, Ballard, and Hickman) moved more farms into classes above $5, 000.
Despite this favorable development, there remains a concentration of farms in the
lower income brackets. In 1939, there was one farm with value of products sold
over $25, OOO; and in 1949, there were eleven (Table 5).
Livestock played a more important role than crop sales in the expansion of
productivity --— 1949 sales of crops were 10 percent higher than in 1939, whereas
1949 livestock and livestock product sales were 33 percent higher than in 1939.
Graves county, primarily an upland county, has obviously been taking advantage of
technological advances in forage production as the base for expanded livestock
operations.
Hickman County
Hickman county excels all other Purchase counties, with the exception of
Fulton, in percentage decrease in the number of farms from economic Class VI.
It lost 91 farms from this class from 1939 to 1949 —- a percentage decrease of 22
· percent. Of the 166 farms absent from economic Classes IV, V, and VI in 1949, 31
fell by the wayside, either grossing under $250 or becoming consolidated, leaving
A 135 to move to a higher income bracket. Thus, in Hickman county, with superior
land relative to most Purchase counties, the c