QUARTERLY ' BULLETIN I

I
Georgia Department

of Agriculture

I

.~'"(. -~~tT QUARTER 1920

-.~ , .'

. &tlt~~ ., AND ~CH.) .~.' X,'

FEBRUARY
s:m~RIAL No. s2

I

..

1t

~~ , .. 1r

~ ~

. .

'

... '

~'_,rJr'nJj x.~
..-..:

4 .,_, , .



..

-

.

;.J
Agricultura~ . )
Aids and Fac~

Including Practical Fertilizer Formulas, list of Bulletins, Sheep Husbandry, Parasitic Diseases of Farm Animals and Official Georgia Statistics.

.

Agricultural Aids and Facts

PUBLISHED BY DIRECTION OF
J. J. Brown, Commissioner

Georgia Department of Agriculture

SERIAL NO. 82.

. .

PART I.
Practical Fertilizer Formulas. List of Agricultural Bulletins. Sheep Husbandry in Georgia. Parasitic Diseases of Farm Animals.
PART II.
Official Georgia Statistics for 1919 Compiled and Published by the Co-operative Crop Reporting Service of Georgia. .
50 Years Georgia Crops, Compiled by Georgia Department of Agriculture, J. J . Brown, Commissioner, and U. S. Crop Estimates, Leon M. Estabrook, Chief.

Entered at Atlanta, Georgia, as second-class matter, October 7, 1900, under Act of J une 6, 1900. Acceptance for mailing at a special rate of postage provided for in Section 1103, Act of October 3, 1917, authorized on J une 29, 1918.

ATLANTA, GA ., MAY, 1920.

qorn---A Leading Georgia Crop
Stripped Corn Stalks in Georgia are not used as Telephone Poles, but they might be.
1. The exhibit of the Boy ' Com Clnbs at the Southeastent Fair, held eve1y fall in Atlanta.
2-J. These photographic scenes leave nothing to the imagination as to the size of Georgia corn. The lens tells a stmy of Georgia fertility that 1end e~s othe1 descriptions swp erfl1wus.

INTRODUCTION.

In this bulletin we are presenting to the farmers of Georgia

agricultural facts and aids which are quite often requested in per-

son and by mail, of this office. The statistics given are for the year

1919, with quite a number of years previous added, making this

booklet very valuable as a reference for those interested in Geor-

gia crop statistics. This being the year for the census to appear, complete stati.3-

tics as taken by the census enumerators will be given out by the

Cen us Bureau during 1920. Those statistics will be official.

We hope this booklet -may come into the possession of all who

are interested in teaching and learning the facts about our great

State.

J. J . BROWN,

Commissioner of Agriculture.

At the Georgia Ex periment Station

gations. 7. mule barn.

Oats

1. Japanese plums used in study of Plum Wilt. 2. Elbe1ta peoch t1ees. 3. Cannan peach t1ee g1own on stock of wild peach of China, in a semch fol 1oots 1esistant to the nematode. 4. Young f igs 1l1'0perly pruned. 5. A f ertilizel' experiment with Mayflower peach trees. 6. Soy beans g1own in connection with fomge crop investigrown by the open fmrow method. 8. Conmete
AT EXPERIMENT, GEORGIA.

PRACTICAL FERTILIZER FORMULAS
This bulletin contains an up-to-date list of fertilizer formula-; for the practical use of Georgia farmers. Quite often requests come to us for information concerning soils in various parts of Georgia and fertilizers suitable for the growing of different crop.3 on those soils. The famers recognize the value of the intelligent use of manures and commercial fertilizers in securing best crop results.
Recently there came to my desk a 4evice in the form of a disc, or rather two discs attach ed, which was not only unique, but, in my opinion, useful in ascertaining proper fertilizers for Georgia soils in the growing of her principal crops. 'rhis device was the work of Dr. J. N. Harper of the Soil Improvement Committee. Recognizing great merit in the work that he was undertaking for the advancement of Georgia agriculture, I addressed a communication to him, requesting that he prepare a list of fertilizer formulas for Georgia, eliminating as many as possilolle and thus simplifying for the farmer the work of selecting his fertilizers by reducing to the minimum the number of formulas necessary for all crops and all soils in our State. My letter to Dr. Harper and his reply, together with the requested list, appear in this bulletin.
The merits of this list are apparent at once, and bespeak for it the commendation of all interested in the improvement of agricultural conditions in Georgia. I desire to r eturn my thanks to Dr. Harper for his kind co-operation in an effQrt to render a service to the agricultural interests of Georgia. I feel sure that this list will receive the approval of those farmers in our State who have already worked out the fertilizer problem, as applied to their individual farms.
However, there are many farmers in Georgia who have not satisfactorily solved this problem, and also many who under these acute boll weevil conditions are substituting for cotton other crops with which they are not entirely familiar. Thi.~ list is given with the hope that it may prove helpful by answering various questions relative to manures and fertilizers which are being asked in this day of intelligent farming.
In addition to what has been said above and preceding it, from a point of importance so far as it goes, is the farmers
5

eompost heap. No farmer can afford not to collect, by cement floors and other available mea!'ll:l, all the refuse matter and plant food material that may be had in and around the barnyard and the farm premises in general. Home-made manures applied to the soils as early as possible so as to avoid loss by ferm entation or othenvise and the g1owing of leguminous crops, form one oE the most satisfactory and efficient means of soil improvement for Georgia farms. Necessarily these processes can not extend over the entire farm, but ~hould always receive the farm ers' closest attention and, as rapidly as possible, let him extend th~ areas thus improveu.
J. J. BROWN, Commissioner.

FERTILIZERS FOR GEORGIA SOILS

Following is the correspondence between Dr. Harper and

Commissioner Brown, in which the Georgia fertilizer formulas

for many crops are given:

DR. J . N. HARPER, Soil Improvement Committee, Rhodes Building,

April 1, 1920.

.Atlama, Ga. Dear Sir:

The State Department of Agr iculture issues annually fonr quarterly bulletins. The bulletin for our first quarter of 1920 will contain statis~ics of unusual interest. Besides having the usual annual stati tics for the preceding year, it will give statis-

tics for a number of years back in cotton and other crops, thereby presenting in bulletin form reference information which this Department has not hitherto given. I desire to make this bulletin as valuable to Agriculture in general and for Georgia in particular, as spaee will allow.
This Department has numerous r equests for matters pertaining to agriculture and especially do we receive quite a number

of requests for fertilizer formtllas to be used under various crops in the different sections of our State. I realize that tbe State

of Georgia is divided into several distinct soil sections, and that
each of these sections is also subdivided into different types of soil. Also, that a great vari ety of crops is ~?rown in the State 'lf Georgia and that an intelligent use of fertilizen is highly desilable to secure the greatest success in agriculture.
Recently there came to my office a disc prepared by yourself,

6

which is a very unique and, in my judgment, helpful device br the practical use of the farmer in determining the fertilizers b be used under his crops. I recognize the importance of the work that you are doing in collecting and disseminating to the agriculturists of the southeastern states the most useful information on this important subject. 'l'herefore, l am addressing you this communication with the request that you prepare for the bulletin mentioned above a list of f ertilizer formulas which you consider the most practical and those that will give best results for the various crops planted in Georgia. I feel that your extensive r esearch work along this line will add largely to the value of the formulas which you give.
Thanking you now for the consideration of this matter, and trusting that this method of co-operation will be beneficial tJ Georgia agriculture, I am with best wishes,
Very truly yours,
J. J . BROWN, Commissioner of Agricultur4'
Dr. Harper repli ed as follows:
Atlanta, Ga., April 2, 1920.
liON . J. J. BROWN,
Commissioner of Agriculture,
Atlanta, Ga.
Dear Sir:-
It gives me pleasure to comply with your request of April 1 to join yop. in any undertaking that looks to the welfare of the . outhern farmer. In accepting your offer I feel that a small part is afforded me in the splendid service your Departmrmt is r endering the farmers of Georgia.
I believe that there is a great need for the farmers of this State to r educe the number of formulas they aFe now demanding. It will result in a saving of the manufacturing cost, and ther efore, the cost of fertilizers to the farmer. I have gone to great pains to arrive at th e results recorded in the following article.
Very truly yours,
J. N. HARPER, Director.
7

u

..

...

...

...

GEORGIA

SOIL RE610

. .. .

...

8

FERTILIZER FORMULAS FOR GEORGIA SOILS
BY
J. N. HARPld?., Directot,
Southetn Soil Im.provement Comm.ittee.
'l'he requirements of plants are the same, no matter where grown. Therefore, among the factors o.:. plant feeding, the kind and quantity of nutrients that a plant needs are constant and well defined. If only the plants food and feeding habits were all that entered into the making of fertilizer formulas, the problem would be very simple indeed.
But the soil's part in feeding the plant must enter into the ::":ormula-finding equation. Soils vary in their plant food content and also in their ability to release what they have for the use of the plant. The soil's variations, however, are not so numerous nor so complex in Georgia as to require a great number of fertilizer formulas.
A practical balanced ration of plant food can be obtained on all soil types for all crops without the great number now employed in the production of fertilizers.
It is true that the mosf popular formulas have been worked out through years of trial, adaptation, and eliminations. They have the endorsement of experience. It is desirable that there ~hould be as few fertilizer formulas as are practical for obtaining profitable production. The greater the number of formulas the greater the expense of manufacturing fertilizers, and therefore, the greater the cost of fertilizers to the farmer.
When it is realized that a fertilizer plant must stop, that 3ll parts of the mixers must be cleaned out in changing from one formula to another, it will readDy be seen that a large number of formulas will add materially to the operating cost.
With the end in view of directing how the number of formulas can be reduced without sacrificing any necessary plant food combination, the writer brought under consideration the findings of southern experiment stations ; the practices of many leading farmers whose names the county a~ent3 supplied; the data contained in the soil surveys of the .United States Department of Agriculture; and person al observation<> and studies.
Out of this data, the kinds of fertilizer formulas found practical and profitable have been cataloged. They have been found to vary with general soil regions. Therefore, each soil region bas been studied to determine the best formula to use on each crop grown therein. When this had been done for all of the main soil r egions, it was found 'that the range of formulas was not wide, that in fact, a comparatively few will serve all purpose<>.
9

..
The result of this .!tudy leads to the recommendations here tabulated, which afLlrd abundant variations in formulas for all differences of soil~ and for different crops when grown on the main soil typ es d Georgia.
These formulas apply to general conditions and fit ill with general farm practices. There ar<l, however, conditions under which the furmulas recommended should be modified as to their nitrogen content. For instance, where a legume has been grown or where manure has been appli ed, the percentage of nitrogen in the formula can be reduced. One can tell when ther e is an excessive amount of nitrogen in the soil, as compared to the other elements, by the over-growth of the stalk.
Lime is rarely neGded as a plant food but as a soil conditioner it can be widely used, especially as a corrector of soil acidity so that legumes will thrive.
In the tables given below, it will be observed that three main soil types are -taken in each soil region of the state. These typ~s are predominant. Others are so closely related to th em in plantfeeding ability as to make the recomm endations in the tables essentially all that th e state as a whole requires.
In the following ta bl cs the first figure r epresents the percentage of phosphoric acid, the second the percentage of ammonia and the 1:hird the prcentage of potash :
10

I APPALACHIAN VALLEY. Sandy silt loam / Silt loam

Silt lGam :

CROP

yellow silty Red silty clay red clay

\ clay subsoil

subsoil

subsoil

Alfalfa . . . . . . . . . . . . . -~ 10-2-2 .

10-0-4

12-0-2

Asparagus . ......... . 9-4-3

9-4-3

9-3-3

Bean:; ... ...... . .... . 10-2-2

10-0-4

12-0-2

Beets ... .. . - - .. - - - -I 9-4-3 Cabbage ............ -I 8-4-3

9-4"-3 9-4-3

9-3-3 9-3-3

Cantaloupe ... ....... -1 9-4-4

9-4-3

9-4-3

Cauliflower ... . .... .. ! 8-4-3

9-4-3

9-3-3 .

Clovers .............. 1 10-0-4

10-0-4

1:l-0-2

Corn . . .... .... ..... . 1 9-3-2 Cotton .. . . .. .. ...... . , 9-3-2

10-3-2 10-3-2

12-2-2 10-2-2

Cucumbers .......... . 8 4-3 I 9-4-3

9-3-3

English Peas . ... . ... -1 10 2 3

10-2-3

12-2-2

Egg Plant . .. . ... ..... ) 9-3-4

9-3-3

9-2-3

Field P ea.c:; .... . ..... . 10-0-4

12-0-2

12~0-2

Grasses . . . . .......... . 9-4-2

10-4-0

10-4-0

Irish Potatoes .... .... . 9-3-4

9-3-3

9-2-3

L ettcue ... .......... . 9-4-3

9-4-3

9-3-3

Oats ........ ... . . ... . 10-2-2

12-2-2

12-2-2

Onions .. .. ...... .. .. . 9-4-3

9-4-3

9-3-3

Peanuts ... ... .... .. . . 10-2-2

10-2-2

10-0-4

Sorghwu ............ . 9-3-2
Soy Beam . .. ..... - - .. I 10-0-4 Squash ............... i 9-5-4

10-3-2 12'-0-2 8-4-4

12-2-2 12-0-2
9-4 -3

Strawberry ... ........ , 9-3-4

9-3-3

9-2-3

Svl'eet Potatoes .. . .. . . . 10-2-3
Tomatoes . ... . ........ I 9-3-4

10-2-2 9-3-3

12-2-2 9-2 -3

Velvet Beans .......... ) 10-0-4
Watermelons .. . .. . . ... . I 9-4-4

10-0-4 9-4-3

12-0-2 .. 9-4-3

Wheat . ..... . .. . ...... I 10-2-2

12-2-2

12-2-2

11

BLUE RIDGE REGION.

I I Sandy loam: Sandy loam: Sand clay loam

CROP

brown loam red clay loam red clay

Alfalfa ..... .... . . .... J
Asparagus ... .... ... .. I
:Seans ........ . ...... J

subsoil
10-2-3 9-4-4
10-2-3

subsoil
10-2-2 9-4-3
10-2-2

subsoil
I 10-0-4 9-4-3
I 10-0-4

Beet.; . . ............. -1 9-4-4 Cabbage .... ........ - 1 8-4-3

89--44--33 ~

9-4-3 9-4-3

'.'

Cantaloupe ......... . . I 8-4-4
2au~iflower .......... , 8-4-3

9-4-4 8-4-3

9-4-3 9-4-3

vlo,ers . .... ........ . 10-2-2

10-0-4 I 10-0-4

Corn ......... ...... . 9-3-2

9-3-2 I 10-3-2

2otton ........... . ... , 9-3-3

9-3-2 I 10-3-2

~.Jueu~bers .......... . Egg Plant ........... .

8-4-3 9-3-4

89--43--34 Il

9-4-3 9-3-3

E~glish P eas . ....... 1 9-2-3

10-2-3

10-2-2

F1eld Peas .......... . 10-0-4

10-0-4

12-0-2

Grasses .............. , Irish Potatoes . ...... . Lettuce ........ ... . . .

9-4-2 8-3-4 9-4-4

9-4-2
9-3-4 9-4-3

II 10-4-0 9-3-3
I 9-4-3

Oats ................ J Onions ... .. . ........ J P eanuts . .......... . .. J Sorghum . . .......... J
Soy Beans .. . .. . .. .. / Squash : . ........... .

10-2-3 9-4-4 10-2-3 9-3-3 10-0-4 8-4-3

10-2-3 9-4-3 10-2-2 9-3-2 10-0-4
8-4-3

12-2-2
I 9-4-3 I 10-2-2 I 10-3;-2
II 12-0-2 9-4-3

Strawberries .... .. .... 1 8-3-4

9-3-4

9-3-3

Sweet Potatoes ....... J 9-2-3 Tomatoes .... . ... .. .. J 9-3-4 Velvet Beans .. .. ..... J 10-0-4

i 10-2-3 I 10-2-2

9-3-4

9-3-3

10-0-4 I 10-0-4

Watermelons ...... . .. J 8-4-4

9-4-4 . 8-4-3

'Wheat .... . . .. ....... 1 10-2-3

10-2-2 1 12-2-2

12

PIEDMONT REGION.

CROP

I Alfalfa .............. I
Asparagus ..... . .. .. Beans . . ... . ..... . . . . Beets .. . . . . ~- . ...... . , Cabbage . ......... . . . Cantalo.upe . . . . . . . . . . 1
Cauliflower . ... .. .... 1
Clovers . . ... ... . ... . / Corn .. ............. . Cotton ...... . . . . . .. . . Cucumbers .. .. . ... .. . Egg Plant .. . .. ... . . . English Peas ........ . Field P eas ... . . .... . . , Grasses ....... .. .... .
Irish Potatoes .... ... 1
Lettuce . . .... . ..... . .
Oats ... . .. . . . ... . .... !
Onions .... . . .. ...... 1 Peanuts ........ . ... . 1
Sorghum ... . ......... I Soy Beans ... . ...... .. I
Squash ..... . ........ 1 Strawberry .. . ....... 1
Sweet P otatoes .. .. ... . I
Tomatoes . . .- .... . ... . 1 Velvet Beans .... . .... 1
, Watermelons ... . ..... I Wheat . .......... .. .. I

10-2-3
8-4-4 9-2-3
8-4-4 8-4-4
8-4.-4 8-4-4 10-2-3
9-3-3 8-3 -3 8-4-4 8-4-4
8-3-3 10-0-4
9-5-2 8-4-4 8-4-4
9-2-3 8-4-4
10 -2-~
9-3-3 10-0-4 9-4-4
8-4-4 9-2-3 8-4-4
10-0-4 8-4-4
9-2-3

I 10-2-3

9-4-4

10-2-3

9-4-4

I 8-4-3 8-4-4 8-4-a

10-2-2

I 9-3-2

9-3-3

8-4-3

I 8-3-4 9-2"3

I 10-0-4 9-4-2

8-3-4

I 9-4-4

10-2-3

9-4-4

I 10-2-3

" I I

9-3-3 10-0-4

I 8-4-3

I 8-3-4 I 9-2-3

I 9-3-4

I -10-0-4

I 8-4-4

I 10-2-3

10-2-2
8-4-3 10-2-2
9-4-3 8-4-3
9-4-4 8-4-3
10-0-4 9-3-2
9-3-2 8-4-3 9-3-4 10-2-3 10-0-4
9-4-2
9-3 -4 9-4-3 10-2-2
9-4-3 10-2-2
9-3-2 10-0-4 8-4-3
9-3-4 10-2-3
9-3-4 10-0-4 9-4-4 10-2-2

13

UPPER COASTAL PLAIN.

CROP

" ., a-2~
~0 ~ ,.0
,...... rJJ ~

>. li';

-reo"ng'

~
">' .

~
~<>

0) >.
>...'a0 =s
8 rn $
"' ~ ~0 """...' .,

>...0.,

>.
~

rg e ~

eoSn0-

8 ~

r>o .

~
rn

= ~0>.

.oS,

,.0 r"n '

= "' "" "" ~>. ~

~ ,......

en "'

Alfalfa

.....

.

..

....

.

'

I
I

!:l-2-3 I 10-2-3 I 10-2-6

i

Asparagus ... . ...... . I 8-4-6 I 8-4-4 I 9-4-4

Beans . ... . ......... . I 9-2-4 I 9-2-3 I 1012-3

Beets . . ... ... . .. . .. . -I

8-4-6 I

8-4-4

I
I

9-4-4

Cabbage

.

.

.

.

....

..

..

.

I
I

8-54 I

8-4-4 I

8-4-3

Cantaloupe . . ~ ...... .I 8-5-4 I 8-4-4 I 8-4-4

Cauliflower . . .. ... .. .I 8-5-4 I 8-4-4 I 8-4-3

I I Clovers . ........... .
Corn . . . .......... . . .

9-2-3 9-4-3

10-2-3 . I 10-2-2 9-3-3 I 9-3-3

Cotton .... . .. . . ... . . -I Cucumber . ......... . I
Egg Plant ......... .

8-3-4 I 8-5-4 I 8-4-4 I

8-3-3 I 8-4-4 I 8-4-4 I

9-3-3 S-4-3
8-3-4

English P eas . .... . . . .

Fi eld Peas . . .... . ... .

:I Grasses ....... . ... . .
Irish P otatoes . . . ... .

Lettucs . . .... . . .. . . . .

Oats ... . ... . . ...... . I

OnionS! ..... . . . _. ... .

Peanuts

...

.

........

.

'

I
I

I Sorghum .. . ........ .
Soy Beans ... . .... .. . .

8-3 3 9-2-3
8-5-2 8-4-4 8-4-6
8-3-3 8-4-6 9-2-3
9-4-3 9-2-3

I 8-3-3
I 10-0-4
II 9-5-2 8-4-4
I 8-4-4
9-2-3
I 8-4-4
10-2-3
9-3-3 10-0-4

9-2-3

I 10-0-4

I 9-4-2

I 8-3-4

I
I

9-4-4

I 10-2-3

I 9-4-4

I 10-2-3

I 9-3-3

I 10-0-4

Squash . .......... .. . I
Strawberry . . ..... .. . .I
Sugar Cane ......... . I
Sweet Potatoes . . .. . . . .I

8-5-4
8-4-4
I 8-4-3
9-2-4

9-4-4 I 8-4-4 I 8-4-3 I 9-2-3 I

8-4-3 8-3-4 8-3-3 9-2-3

Tobacco .. _. .. . . ... . . I 8-4-4 I 8-4-4 I 8-3 4

i

Tomatoes .. ..... .. . . . . I 8-4-4 I 8-4-4 I 8-3-4

Velvet Beans ........ . I 10-0-4 I 10-0-4 I 10-0-4

Watermelous ........ . I 8-5-4 I 8-4-4 I 8-4-4

.I

Wheat .... .. . . .... .. . I 8-3-3 I 9-2-3 I 10-2-3

j

14
.
t

MIDDLE AND L OWER COSTAL PLAIN.

CROP

Alfalfa ... . ......... -I
Asparagus .. . ... . ... \ Beans . .. .. . ........ .
Beets ............... \ Cabbage . . . . . ....... .
I Cantaloupe .......... 1
Cauliflower . ....... . . I
Clovers ...... . .. .. .. . Corn . ... . .......... .
j Cotton . ... .. . .. .... - I
Cucumbers . . ........ Egg Plant .... . .... . . English P eas . . ....... I
Field Peas ........ ... 1 Grasses . . . . .......... I
Irish P otatoes . . . . .. .. I J.Jettuce .. ." .. . ... . . .. . I
Oats .... .... .. ... .. .. 1
Onions ... . ... . .. . . .. I
Peanuts ... . . . ..... .. 1
Sorghum ..... . . . ..... I
Soy Beans ...... . .... I Squash .. ..... . .. .. .. I Strawberry .. . ... .... I Sugar Cane .. . ... .... I Sweet Potatoes ..... .. I Tobacco ........... . .. I Tomatoes ........ . ... I Velvet Beans .. . . . . ... I Watermelons ..... . . .. I Wbeat ...... . ........ I

9-2-4

7-5- 6

!:J-2-4

7-5-6

I 7-5-6
7-5 -6 7-5-6

9-2-4

8-4-3 \

8-4-4 I

i 7-5-6 I
8-4-6

8-3-4 I

9-2-4

8-5-2 \

I 8 4-6
7-5-6

8-3-4 7-5-6

I!

9-2-4 8-4-3

il

9-24 I

7-5-6

8-4-6

8-4-4

9-3-4

8-4-6

8-4-6

9-2-4

7-5 -6

8-~ -4

9-2-3 8-4-6 9-2-4 8 4-6 8-5-4 8-5-4 8-5-4 9-2-3 9-4-3 8-3-4 8-5-4 8-4-4 8-3-3 9-2-3 8-5-2 8-4-4 8-4-6 8-3-3 8-4-6 9-2-3
!l-4-3
9-2-3 R-5-4 8-4--4 8-4-3 9-2-4 8-4-4 8-4--4
10-0-4
8-5-4
8-3-3

10-2-3 8-4-4 9-2-3
l:l-4-4
8-4-4 9 4-4 8-4-4 ] 0-2-3
9-3-3 8-3-3 9-4-4 8-4-4 8-3-3 10-0-4 9-5-2 8-4-4 8-4-4 9-2-3 8-4-4 10-2-3 9-3-3 10-0-4 9-4-4 8-4-4 8-4-3 9-2-3 8-4-4 8-4-4 10-0-4 ( fl-4-4 9-2-3

15

GOOD ROADS IN GEORGIA
1. St1etch of sandy clay roads. 2. F arme1s turning ottt to repair a road. 3. A market highway. 4. Georgia is constantly laying new roads and 1epairing old ones.
There are Thousands of Miles Like These
\
16

AGRICULTURAL BULLETIN LISTS
Let me call your attention also to another feature of this bulletin; namely, a list of the publications issued by the various Divisions of the Department of Agriculture, also by the Experiment Station at Experiment, Georgia. This list is more comprehensive than any similar list yet published by our Department. Should you desire any of the bulletins mentioned in this list, request them from the head of the Division under which they are listed.
The bulletins listed by the Experiment Station can be secured by addressing Mr. H. P. Stuckey, Director, Experiment Station, Experiment, Georgia.
For general bulletins, annual and quarterly r eperts of the Commissioner, fertilizer bulletins and bulletins relating to agriculture in general, address this Department. In this connection I wish to express my appreciation to the various heads of Divisions of this Department, and to Mr. Stuckey for kindly furnishing these lists.
J. J . BROWN, Commissioner.

DEPARTMENT BULLETINS.

If you should desire literature on subjects not included in the lists given in this bulletin, a letter addressed to the Georgia Department of Agriculture, State Capitol, Atlanta, Georgia, will receive our immediate attention, and we shall try to supply your needs.

Annual Reports. Commercial Fertilizers. Commercial Feeding Stuffs. Peanuts.
Soil Inoculation for Leguminous Crops. lowing).

(See note fol-

NOTE : The Department furnishes bacteria for the inoculation of leguminous plants at 30c per acre by parcel post prepaid. Let remittance accompany your order.
U. S. bulletins on poultry, berries, gardening and, in fact, on almost all subjects of interest to the farmer.

17

BULLE'l'IN NO. 75.
Contains the F ood, Drug, Narcotic and Sanitary Laws of Georgia, and will be mailed to any address free of charge upon r equest.
BULLET! J NO. 81.
Contains the Laws, Rules, Regulations and Standards governing the manufacture and sale of Concentrated Commercial Feeding-Stuffs, and will be mailed to anyone upon r equest.
MONTHLY BUJ_,LETINS.
These bulletins are issued monthly. Those desiring to receive copies of these bulletins regularly, kindly advise this Department and we will take pleasure in placing their names upon the mailing list.
When requesting the above mentioned bulletins, kindly address your letters as follows :
0. s. LEE,
Chief Food In pector, Department of Agriculture,
Atlanta Georgia.
THE GEORGIA STATE BOARD OF ENTOMOLOGY, AT'LANTA, GA., HAS THE FOLLOWING PUBLICATIO 8 FOR FREE DISTRIBUTION.
Copies of any or all of these will be sent upon application.
BULLETINS.
No. 26-Peach Leaf Curl and Rosette. No. 34-Wilt Disease of Cotton in Georgia and Its Control. No. 36-Army Worm and Cotton Caterpillar. No. 44-Mexican Cotton Boll We~vil. No. 46-Cotton V~:J,riety Tests, 1916. No. 47-How to Grow Cotton in Spite of the Boll Weevil. No. 49-Pecan Insects and Diseases. No. 50-Cotton Variety Tests, 1917. No. 52-Cotton Variety Tests, 1918. No. 53-Spray Calendar.
18

:-\o. 54-Insects and Diseases of the Apple. No. 56-Dusting Cotton for the Control of the Boll Weevil. No. 57-Insects and Diseases of the Peach.
CIRCULARS.
No. 7-Hessian Fly in Georgia. No. 12-Army Worm and Cotton Caterpillar. No. 20-Directions for Making First Year Cotton Selections. No. 22-Control of Insects Attacking Stored Products. No. 26-Maintaining the Purity of Cotton Seed. No. 29-Cotton Variety Tests, 1919. No. 30-Dusting and Spraying of Peaches, 1919.
PRESS BULLETINS.
No. 1-Insects and Diseases of Irish Potatoes. No. 2-Services of the State Board of Entomology to Farmers
of Georgia. No. 3-Watermelon Stem-end Rot.
CO-OPERA'l'IVE CROP REPORTING DIVISION.
The crop reporting service, maintained by the Georgia Department of Agriculture in co-operation with the Bureau of Crop Estimates, United States Department of Agriculture, has charge of the work of compiling and interpreting all crop and livestock data for the State. W. L. Pryor is director in charge of .this work and has an able corps of assistants. This division publishes monthly reports upon the crop and livestock situation in the State, and will be glad to mail reports regularly to any one interested on request.
STATE BUREAU OF MARKETS.
We desire to call the attention of the public to the Georgia State Bureau of Markets. Thr;mgh this division of the Department of Agriculture, the farmers of Georgia have a medium for listing all products grown on the farm in the weekly Market Bulletin. which goes to more than 40,000 readers each week. Our files show thousands of letters and testimonials that the Market Bu-
19

I
reau has rendered a great service to the people in disposing of their diversified products at satisfactory prices. This service is rendered the people of the State free of charge, as the State makes an appropriation for the maintenance of this Bureau.
Mr. L. B. Jackson, the Director of this branch of our Department, is exceedingly anxious that each and every one interested, and who is not already on the mailing list for the Market Bulletin, mail at once a card requesting to be placed on the regular list for this bulletin.
It was the Bureau of Markets that induced the Federal authorities to place the sweet potato on the Army ration list. This made the Georgia yam famous throughout the entire nation, as the soldier boys from every section of our great country have had an opportunity to know the real wholesome food value of the Southern yam potato.
The Bureau maintains four traveling men whose duty it is to assist the people in assembling their hogs, live stock and other farm products in carload lots. These men are at all times in communication with market centers for ascertaining the best prices and points for the products at the time of shipment. The services of these representatives of the State Market Bureau can be had by any community in the State by communicating with the Bureau in advance of the proposed dates of sales and shipment.
Millions of bushels and pounds of food products have been sold through the assistance of the State Bureau of Markets, at profitable prices to the producer. Co-operation of all the people in connection with this branch of our Department is solicited.
Address all communic~itons direct to the State Bureau of
Markets, 123 State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga.
STATE VETERINARIAN.
The following bulletins may be secured by addressing Dr. Peter F. Bahnsen, State Veterinarian, 314 State Capitol, Atlanta, Ga.
BULLETIN NO. 14, SERIES C. Laws and Revised Regulations governing the suppression and eradication of infe<;tious and contagious diseases affectjng live stock in the State of Georgia.
20

BULLETIN NO. 6-S. V. The Question of Tick Eradication.
BULLETIN NO. 11-S. V. Law and Regulations governing the inspection of slaughter houses, meat markets, meat and meat food products.
BULLETIN NO. 12-S. V. Law and Regulations governing the inspection of dairies, creameries, milk depots, milk and milk products.
FEDERAL BULLETINS.
FARMERS' BULLETIN 411. Feeding Hogs in the South.
FARMERS' BULLETIN 834. Hog Cholera: Prevention and Treatment.
FARMERS' BULLETIN 1057. Cattle-Fever Ticks and Methods of Eredication.
FARMERS' BULLE'riN 1069. Tuberculosis in Live Stock: Detection, Control and Ercdication.
GEORGIA EXPERIMENT STATION.
Publications Available for Free Distribution February 1st, 1920.
No. 12%. Plans and Purposes of Experiment Station. 22. Manures and Fertilizers. 23. Corn Culture. 24. Cotton Culture. 34. Corn Culture. 33. The Cultivated Blackberries and Dewberries. 39. Corn Culture. 41. Corn Culture. 45. Some Important Insect Enemies of Cucurbirs. 48. Strawberry Notes for 1899. 51. Corn Culture. 52. Cotton Culture. 53. Second Report on Grapes.
21

54. 'rhe Pickle Wor m. 55. Corn Culture. 56. Cotton Culture. 57. Cantaloupe Culture in Georgia. 61. The Fig in Georgia. 62. Corn Culture. 63. Cotton Culture. 64. Cattle Ticks and Texa F eve r . 65. Corn Culture. 66. Cotton Culture. 67. The Plum in Georgia. 68. Japan and Hybrid Plums. 70. Cotton Culture. 71. Some Field Jotes on Soil Inoculation. 73. The P each Tree Borer. 74. Corn Culture. 75. Cotton Culture. 77. The Fig in Georgia. 78. Corn Culture. 79. Cotton Culture. 87. Spani sh P eanuts, Soy B eans, and Skim Milk as a F eed Sup-
plementary to Corn . 92. The Cotton Red Spider. 93 . Corn Production. 94. Corn Production. 95. The Influen ce of Stall Manure Upon the Bacterial Fl ora of
the Soil. 97. Corn Culture. 98. Cotton Culture. 100. Cotton Culture. 103. Nitrificati on in Acid or Jon-basic Soils. 104. Corn Culture. . 105. On Cotton Cultivation . 106. . Vegetable Gardening. 107. Sweet Potatoes. 108. The F eeding of Cotton . 109. Digestion and Metabolism of a St eer When Placed on a
Continuous Ration of Corn Silage. 111. Dehorning Cattle. 112. Tomatoes.
4
22

113. Variety Work with Corn and Cotton.
114. The F eeding of Cotton. 115. 'rhe Associative Digestibility of Corn Sila.ge, CottonsecJ

Meal and Starch in Steer Rations.

116. P ecans.
117. Winter Crops. 119. Acidosis and Cottonseed Meal Injury.

120. Studies of B. radi cicola.
121. Blossom End Rot of Tomatoes. 122. Changes in Butter Fat by Feeding Cottom eed Oil to Dairy

Cattle.
123. Irish P otato Spray. 124. 'l'he Two Groups of Vari eties of the Hicora P ecan ani!

their relation to Self-Sterility. 126. The Value of Ammonificat ion 'rests. 127. Gum Formation with Special Reference to Cankers and

Decays of Woody Plants.

128. Cotton and Corn.

129. 130.

The 'rhe

VInelEvleutenB~eeano.f

Certain

Factors

on

the

Time

of

Ma-

turity oE Cotton. 131. Effect of Composting on the Availability of the Phos-
phoric Acid Content of Raw Rock Phosphates. 132. A Comparison of Certain Raw Phosphates with Acid
Phosphates as Sources of -Phosphorus for Cotton. . 133. Work with Vitis Rotundifolia-A Species of Grapes. 134. Further Studies in Fertilizing and Storing Sweet Po-

tatoes.
135. Spraying Peaches. CIRCULARS

39. Some Spring Suggestions. 40. Bird Protection. 41. Hog Cholera. 42. The Cotton Caterpillar (Alabama argillacea). 43. Two Orchard Maladies: Brown Rot and Peach Borer.
44. Variety 'l'ests of Cotton. 47. Lumpy Jaw in Cattle. 48. Pear Blight. 50. Bird Protection-Our Present Law and .its Defects.

23

51. Lucerne, or Alfalfa. 52. Variety Tests of Cotton for 1905. 54. Our Peach Crop. 57. Dependable Apples. 60. Crown Gall. 63. Dehorning Cattle. 66. Variety Tests for Cotton and Corn. 70. Cotton and Corn Variety Tests. 71. Soil Nitrogen-Green Manures. 72. Alfalfa. 73. Rape for Fall Pigs. 74. Corn and Cotton Varieties. 75. Corn and Cotton Varieties, 1916. 76. Varieties of Pecans.
H . P. STUCKEY, DIRECTOR, Georgia Experiment Station, E xperiment, Ga.
24

SHEEP HUSBANDRY
Hon. Martin V. Calvin, our Statistician, has recently prepared a treatise on sheep husbandry in Georgia. In these times of high prices for yarns and meats, our farmers, doubtless, could easily swell their income by raising a few sheep of approved breeds. Besides, they could be in a position to supply their own tables with wholesome fresh meats at all seasons of the year. This treatise is included in the pag!:)s of this bulletin with the hope that it may contribute to the best interests of agriculture in Georgia.
Dr. Peter F. Bahnsen, State Veterinarian, has prepared a very timely and valuable article on "Pa_rasites and Parasitic Diseases '' of horses, cattle and hogs. This will be studied with wide interest at this time when cattle and hog raising are among the rapidly developing industries of Georgia. Dr. Bahnsen's article follows that of Mr. Calvin.
J . J. BROWN. Commissioner.
SHEEP HUSBANDRY IN GEORGIA.
By MARTIN v. CALVIN,
STATISTICIAN OF THE GEORGIA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE.
Numerous inquiries addressed to the Georgia Department of Agriculture, as to the practicability and the possibilities of raising sheep in this State, suggested this publication.
During the last ten or fifteen years, interest in this subject has been sporadically manifested, but there was lacking the degree of earnestness which prompts action. The destructive work of the boll weevil has had the effect of intensifying the interest to which reference has been made; it has had the additional effect of imparting to the inquirers a spirit which authorizes the belief that numbers of farmers are ready to address themselves to the undertaking.
In bringing this very interesting subject to the attention of all the farmers of the State, it should be stated that raising sheep in Georgia can not be regarded, in any sense, as an experiment. It has been successfully demonstrated that sheep can be profitably raised in this State. Those who embark in the
25

-

enterprise now will be reviving an industry which was crowned with unquestionable success, in every county in the State, in th e Fifties. You have only to turn to the records to find the fullest confirmation of the accuracy of the assertion just made.
It is in order, just here, to give a clear insight into the universality of the industry by presenting facts and figures, official in character. This information will be a source of encouragement and strength to beginners. It will occur to each of them that what has been accomplished, in any average undertaking, can be again accomplished by well directed and persistent effort.
In order to bring out the facts which bear directly on this important subject, a comparison will be instituted between results won in 1860 and 1910. 'l'his compari on can not fail to interest every man and every woman, who is in earnest a to raising sheep.
In 1860, we had in this State 512,618 sheep; in 1910, we had 187,644 sheep. January 1, 1920, we had 125,000 heep.
In 1860, the five leading counties were Bulloch with 14,810; Emanuel with 17,938; Montgomery with 11,769; Tattnall with 10,514; and 'l'elfair with 9,041 sheep. The general average number of sheep per county, in those counties, was 12, 14.
In 1910, the five leading counties were Coffee with 14,3 3; Decatur with 9,852; Emanuel with 9,195; Irwin with 8,281, and Colquitt with 6,558 sheep. 'rhe general average holdings per county, in the counties named, amounted to 9,654 sheep.
In 1860, the State was divided into 132 counti es; in 1910, the number of counties was 146. In 1860, the general average number of sheep per county was 3,883; in 1910, the general average number of sheep p er county was 1,285.
In partisan politics, parallel columns are regarded as deadly. Jot so in this field of activity where constructive work is the purpose in mind. H ere are sixteen counties with a r ecord in sheep raisin()' in 1860. and in 1910. Four of them are in North, seven are in Middle, and five are in South Georgia.

Year. County. No. Sheep 1860 Appling . .... . .. .7,105
Carroll .. ... . . . .. 7,385 Cherokee . .... . .. 6,642

Year. County. No. Sheep ] 910 Appling . .. .... . .1,073
Carroll . . . . . . . . . . 38' Cherokee . . . . . . . . 55~~

26

Columbia ........ 6,087 Coweta ...... . .. 6,455 Dooly ..... ..... . 6,845 .1;-,loyd ........... 7,652 Gwinnett .... . .. 6,454 Jefferson ..... . . 6,643 Laurens ........ 6,379 Oglethorpe ...... 6,362 Screven ......... 6,711 'l'homas ......... 6,028 Walker ......... 6,656 Washiogton ..... . 6,932 Wilkes .......... 6,674

Columbia . . . . . . . . 146 Coweta . . . . . . . . . 115 Dooly . . . . . . . . . . . 22 F loyd . ......... 1,053 Gwinnett . . . . . . . . 314 Jefferson . . . . . . . . 145 Laurens ..... . ... 1,143 Oglethorpe . . . . . . 219 Screven ......... 1,88'7 Thomas ..... . ... 1,490 W allier ......... 2,626 Washington . . . . . 172 Wilkes .. . ... . . . . 177

107,005

11,523

Note the fact that, in the sixteen counties above named, we had, in 1860, 95,482 sheep more than we had in 1910.

Here is another table which is worthy of careful consideration, because. it carries a great many valuable facts brought out by a comparison of general averages by groups of counties. The table shows the general average number of sheep in each group in 1860 and in 1910:

Group

Number of .Counties

One .... . .. . .. : ... . . .. ....... . ... 5

'l'wo ..... . .. . ... ... .. . ........... 16

Three .. . ..... . ........... . .... . .19

Four ........ . ...... .. .... .. . .. .. 17

Five ..... . .... .. . . ........ . ..... .20

'ix ... . ... . ... . ............. . ... . 21

Seven ...... .. .......... . .... . ... .34

1860 12,814
6,888 5,511 4,453 3,446 2,520 1,115

1910
. ~,966
759 2,457 1,001
573 1,340
566

Of the 146 counties which comprised the list of 1910, thirteen were not on the list of 1860. Cass county of '60 became Bartow shortly after the close of the War between the States. The thirteen counties, created after the war above mentioned, contributed to the total of sheep on farms in 1910, as follows:

Counti es.

No. of Sheep Counties.

No. of Sheep

Ben Hill .. . ............ 1,791 Jenkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298

Crisp ............. . ... 1,094 Rockdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

27

Dodge . . ....... . ..... . 1,471 Dougherty . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Grady . ............... 3,786 Jeff Davis .......... . . .4,169

Stephens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77 Tift .... .. .. .... ..... :2,889 Toombs . .. . .. ...... .... 1,349 Turner ... . ........... .1,405 McDuffie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231

By proper effort and the exercise of care, the status quo of

1860 can be re-established. Why not 1 There are difficultie<;

in the .way. What of that 1 Brush them out of the way. Ob-

stacles will be encountered. Surmount each and all of them.

The statistics of 1860, supplied by the farmers themselves,

establish the fact that there is not a county in the entire State in which sheep can not be profitably raised.

The high price of cotton and the ever increasing demand for

that great staple brought about the abandonment of the sheep

industry and of crop diversification. The World War and

the boll weevil, following in the foot-steps of war, compelled us

to resume the policy and practice of crop diversification and

live-stock farm ing. We are raising thousands of fine hogs and

hundreds by hundreds of beef cattle: let us turn to raising sheep

as was so well done in the Fifties. Let us raise sheep-their

feet are shod with gold!

At the annual convention of the Geor_gia State Agricultural

Society, Gainesville, August, 1876, the subject of raising sheep,

in this State, was under discussion. The late Ex-Governor Jo-

seph E . Brown participated in the debate. He stated that, in

1871, he purchased ten ewes of common country stock, and placed

at the head of the flock a fine Merino buck which he bought of

Mr. Richard P eters. The Governor r emarked that he had clover

fields and grass fields of his own; further, th at he never turned

his stock out; that he kept up five miles of fence to keep out

other people's stock Every two weeks, he transferred his sheep

from one pasture to another. He run them on clover durin g

the winter, feeding them moderately when the weather was cold

- especially when snow was on the ground. In the main, the

sheep made their own living. Winter and summer, he had for

r

his family, and for his employes on the farm , all the fat mutton

that could be desired. On an average, twenty sheep a year

wer e slaughtered for that purpose.

In the winter of 1875, he shipped f orty . sheep to Atlanta

28

where they found ready sale for $200, cash. At the time of addressing the convention, he had on his Gordon county farm seventy-four head of sheep, all from the original ten dome~tic ewes and the pure-bred Merino ram. Bear in mind the fact that Governor Brown bought his small flock of eleven sheep in 1871 ; that twenty a year, during a period of five years, were killed for the family and the employes' tables-a total of one hundred; that he sold $90.00 worth of wool, and that he had on hand, at the time above mentioned, seventy-four sheep. 'l'his is a case in point for beginners in sheep raising. Reduce to a dollar and cents basis the figures given-the statement may prove to be of value to you.
In concluding his excellent extemporaneous address, Governor Brown gave utterance to the following words of wisdom:
''The true rule by which to raise sheep is to raise them on your own pasture. A few words about a good pasture. Many of you have broom-sedge in your fields. Burn that off in F ebruary. This is one of the earliest grasses that grow. You should keep enough sheep and cattle on it to limit its growtil so that it will not get hard. You will have a very good pasture. Sometimes it may be too heavily pastured; in that even_t, it will
1
be killed out. The native grasses are about the best you need. I never let stock run on my corn land or wheat stuhble."
Apropos of pastures, tilere is high authority for the assertion that one acre of land, well set with Bermuda grass, will support ten sheep all the year through.
In Putnam county, in th:s State, after the \Var between the States, the late Robert C. Humber, a successful planter and a most useful citizen, had a large flock of native ewes, headed by pure-bred Merino rams. He had well Watered Bermuda pastures. There the sheep roamed at will, accorded no attention other than salting at regular intervals. His annual profit on th e investment was 100 per cent.
David Ayers had 3,500 sheep on wire-grass range in Southwest Georgia. No shepherd. His profit on the investment was 90 per cent, annually.
David Dickson, of Hancock county, herded his sheep on an acreage in. turnips. Each succeeding year h'e planted the acreage in cotton. The yield of seed cotton was 4,000 pounds per
29

CHEVIOT RAM
MERINO EWE AND LAMB
30

acre or two and two-thirds bales an acre. Before the land was treated to sheep manure, the average yield per acre of seed cotton was 1,000 pounds.
Late summer or early autumn is the preferred time to begin raising sheep. Native ewes are more readily obtainable, at that time, at a r easonable price. If choice grade e\ves be available, buy a number of them. Whatever you do, do n ot fai l to buy a pure-bred, r egistered, ram to head your flock. Do not buy a lamb ram for that purpose. If your object be wool, purcha..'\e a l\ferino r am ; if mutton, buy a Southdown ram. Two year-old or yearling ewes are most to be desired. Exercise care in your -purchases. See that each ewes' udder is free from lumps, and otherwise in healthy condition. If a beginner, do not purchas~
THREE SOUTHDOWN RAMS
too many sheep. Ten ewes and a pure-bred ram will afford you full opportunity to acquire invaluable experience in raising sheep.
Concurrent opinion is, that selected April lambs make a fine flock for breeding purposes. Seize this thought. and hold it fast. You can not succeed with sheep, or any other undertaking for the matter of that, unless you give close personal attention to the work.
In addition to what bas been said about pasturage, it may be remarked that, if you have not Bermuda on your place, you will find Texas blue-grass very good for spring and early summer
31

pasturage. Essex rape and rye-four pounds of rape per acrfl, and just enough rye to give a thin stand, will make good pasturage. Recalling the fact as to our wealth of native grasses, there is no lack of pasturage in Georgia. In the few instances in which nature has contributed little or nothing to good pastmage, you can supply the lack as above indicated. There is an abundance of excellent material at your command.
AI> a matter of general information, it may be stated that there are thirty breeds of improved sheep which have been brought up to a fixed type. Of th ese, twelve are well and favorably known in the United States; others are gaining in popularity.
Fineness of wool is the distinguishing characteristic of the Merinos and the Rambouillets. It is claimed that fine wool sheep are strongly resistant to internal parasites, and are long-lived. The Chevoit belongs to the middle wool class, and is especially adapted to the hill country.
The Southdown and the Shropshire are recognized as mutton sheep and are deservedly popular. The Hampshire is another one of the mutton-wool sheep.
There is good money in mutton and in wool. It is hoped that thousands of Georgia farmers, full of resourcefulness and enterprising withal, will make sheep raising a leading feature of their p olicy and practice of live-stock farming and general crop diversification.
A SUMMARY WHICH IS BRIMFUL OF VALUABLE
SUGGESTIONS.
A farmer had a large tract of cut-over land. He had a flocK: of domestic ewes; at the head of the flock a Shropshire ram. His experience was that medium wool sheep give a greater pere:entage of lambs than the Merino; of course, less wool. A daily ration for each of his flock was as follows: five pounds of corn silage with a small quantity of velvet bean hulls and hay. His profit on lambs a yeax was 125 per cent.
There are very many instances in which sheep have proved to be profitable on land that cost $100 to $200 an acre.
Broadcast Essex rape in your oat field. It will grow apace.
32

When the oats have been harvested, let the sheep in. They will enjoy the succulent rape; it will do them good.
Do not have two or more breeds among your ewes. Have one breed only-either domestic, grade or pure-bred. In every case, the ram should be pure-bred and high quality.
Protect your sheep against inclement weather. A shed is much better than a basement or clbse structure. See that the top of the house is rain-proof. Do not mix cattle with your sheep.
Fresh pasturage, every two weeks, will protect lambs against stomach worms. Do not fail to provide a full supply of pure water, and a good sense quantit-y of salt for the ewes and lambs. Finely cut tobacco stems should be placed where the lambs will find them; they will eat enough to rid them of worms. Have a place, near the sheep shed, into which the lambs may go and be free from disturbance by the older sheep. That place of rest is sometimes called ''a creep.''
Have an eye to your flock so you may detect the presence of disease, etc. If you note a sheep ''going thin,'' indisposed to eat, you may know that the animal is troubled with worms. Give each and all of that class immediate attention. Keep them off feed a night, then drench them. Gasoline is frequently used. Mix one tablespoonful of gasoline with ,five ounces of sweet milk for older sheep. Repeat in 10 days. Be careful not to use more gasoline than prescribed. Mix thoroughly.
Do not be uneconomical. Do not admit into your sheep fold a scrub ram although a gift. A pure-bred, high class, ram is more than half the flock.
It affords the writer hereof great pleasure to make acknowledgment of much valuable information gleaned from publica.-
tions of the Agricultural Extension Department-Dr. P. C. Holden, Director-of the International -Harvester Company, Inc., Chicago, illinois; likewise, in the same spirit and manner, to make acknowledgment to the American Sheep Breeder, and Wool Grower, Union Stock Yards, Chicago, Illinois, for the use of the cuts which picture three breeds of sheep adapted to this Statethe Merino, the Southdown and the Chevoit.
Write your United States Senator or the Congressman from your district, requesting him to have mailed to you the following Farmers' Bulletins. They are to be had for the asking:
No. 713, Sheep Scab; No. 810, Equipment for Farm Sheep Raising, and 840, Farm Sheep Raising for Beginners.
33

I
P A.RASITES AND PARASITIC DISJ<JASES. BY DR. PE'l'ER F. BATINSEN, State Veterinarian.
Uncontrolled insect pests are probably the most expensive and destructive factors in agriculture. This fact has, during th~ past few years, been forcefully demonstrated to us by the invasion of the boll weevil. Orchardists spend annually hundreds of thousands of dollars spraying in an effort to control the insect pests that would, if let alone, destroy the fruit growing industry; truck patches and the home garden are periodically invaded by various parasitic pests that threaten to annihilate the vegetable supply upon which we depend daily; even man's comfort is periodically disturbed and, at times, his life endangered by parasites and pestiferous insects. It is, therefore, not surprising to find our domestic animals annoyed, their life endangered and frequently de:stroyed as a result of parasitic infestation.
The comfort of our domestic animals, even the premature and preventable death of large numbers of them would, perhaps, be viewed with little concern by many if such losses did not make a staggering inroad on our animal wealth and our available food supply thus becoming a vital factor in our economic welfare.
Carefully gathered statistics proved that prior to the establishment of tick eradication. the cattle tick levied an annual toll in excess of six million dollars on our cattle industry.
The actual death rate of cattle lost from tick fever being but a small fraction of this gigantic, destructive toll on our cattle industry. By far a greater item of this enormous waste grew out of the impoverished condition of the infested cattle which stunted them in their growth and developm~nt and robbed them of their constitutional vigor and vitality in which condition they were easy prey for other diseases to which they might be exposed. Of course, if animals are poor and emaciated they are not fit for food consumption and we are, therefore, compelled to feed annually millions of tons of feed to live stock impoverished or stunted in their development because of parasitic infestation.
The preceding statement does not apply to tick infestation only, it is a broad statement which is equally applicable to any form of parasitic infestation in our domestic food animals.

Thousands of cattle die each year from "Poverty Jaw," a

condition due entirely to extensive infestation with the twisted

stomach worm, Haemonchus Contort~. Lung and kidney worm

infestation in hogs is so common as to present a threatening

menace to the development of our bog industry. Numerous and

various parasites invade and infest the digestive canal of our

domestic animals. Light infestation is of little economic im-

portance; heavy infestation always impairs the host's health and

checks his growth and development. Business-cold, unsenti-

mental business, therefore, demands a vigorous and unrelenting

campaign against these undesirable and expensive intruders.

The destruction and eradication of some of these parasites is,

comparatively speaking, easy, inexpensive and certain while, on

the other band, with our present knowledge we can only hope to

control and limit the degree of infe&tation of other parasites.

For practical purposes let us consider the subject under two

separate headings. 1st. External parasites-or parasites that

'

infest the skin of the host. 2nd. Internal parasites-or para"

sites that invade the internal cavities, organs or tissues of the

host.

External parasites of economic importance are limited to cattle ticks, various species of lice and certain species of flies.

TICKS.

The campaign against the cattle tick has progressed to a point where it is uniformly conceded among well informed men that their eradication is but a question of time, men and money. 'rhe officially recognized process of systematic dipping in a standardized arsenical solution will safely and certainly eradicate the ticks within the next few years.

LICE.
Lice are wingless insects that lead a parasitic existence upon practically all birds and mammals. They do not jump like fleas and only by accident leave their hosts. Various animals are infested each by specific family groups of these peduncula hemiptera, the one of greatest economic importance to agriculture is without question the hog louse, Hematopinus Suis.
All manner of louse infestation demands, for its control, periodic disinfection. No single remedy . seems to deserve to be

35

recognized as a specific and yet many formulas, faithfully applied, give splendid results.
In years gone by kerosene emulsions were popular but owing to the difficulties experienced in their preparation, they are now less popular than the equally effective watery solutions of cresylic acid preparations.
Where large herds are maintained a spe~ial hog dipping vat is a splendid investment. The vat should be built on the same general outlines of the cattle dipping vat but should not hold in excess of five hundred gallons of water and be not less than twenty feet long on the water line. For dipping the vat solution should be charged with not less than five or more than ten gallons of an officially recognized cresylic acid preparation such as Cooper's Fluid, 60%; Kreol, Mulford; Kreso Dip, Park-Davis and Company, and others. Keeping the water surface covered with a thin film of oil adds to the effectiveness of the treatment which should be repeated not less than once every ten or fourteen days.
In smaller herds of hogs, an equally effective and less expensive method is to provide a concrete hog wallow which should be kept charged with one-half of one per cent solution of the preparation previously referred to. Equally effective is the periodic application of almost any kind of oil. Application of kerosene or gasoline, full strength or in concentrated doses, almost invariably leads to an exfoliation (a peeling off) of the outer layer of the skin.
Parasites which burrow into the skin are very difficult to destroy by ordinary treatment.
MITES.
Infestation with itch mites, members ofthe Sarcoptidae family, produ'ce mange, a disease observed in horses and mules, cattle, swine and goats. If the mites burrow into the skin and there deposit their eggs it is termed sarcoptic mange. Other species which deposit their eggs on the skin of the host are said to produce scabies or psoroptic mange.
For this condition the official "Lime and Sulphur" preparation is highly recommended. Observations covering many years lead me to consider the periodic emersion in or spraying with a standard arsenical solution carrying from 18-100 to 20-100 of
36

one per cent of arsenic trioxid in solution, a specific for these conditions.
FLIES.
Among the fly pests that rlemand control from a strictly economic viewpoint are the horn fly (Hematobia Serrata), the stable fly (Stomoxys Calcitrans) and the bot flies (Gastrophilus Equi or bot fly of the horse, Hypoderma Lineta or heel fly of cattle and Oestrus Ovis or bot fly of sheep) .
The horn fly is a biting fly and unlike other flies spends almost its entire time on the body of cattle. Its habit of infesting the anteri or parts of cattle, preferably around the horns, led presumably to the name horn fly.
rrhe stable fly resembles the house fly but it is a biting fly and where prevalent in large numbers they prove extremely annoying to horses, mules and cattle. During cloudy and rainy weather this pest frequently invades the residence to the great annoyance and discomfort of man.
Since both of the flies previously mentioned deposit their eggs in fresh manure collecting the manure and either spreading it or placing it in a manure pit and treating it are among the most effective methods of control. Dairy cattle, high priced breeding cattle, horses and mules may be made more comfortable by repeated administrations of a fly repellant. The following formula has proven highly effective in my practice. Crude oil two quarts, oil of tar one pint, kerosene one quart, napthaline four ounces. Mix and apply with a large hand spray. A small quantity. applied every morning ' maintains a fairly effective repellant action during the day.
The bot flies are peculiarly obnoxious and dangerous to thP. live stock industry because the larval stage of their development must take place in the host. In horses this larval development takes place in the stomach. These larvae, commonly designated "Bots," are frequently clustered around the pyloric orifice where th ey may, and no doubt occasionally do, aid in digestive disturbances and other stomach diseases. During their period of development these larvae are attached to and acquire their nutriment from the mucous lining of the stomach. Their larval development completed, which usually occurs in Spring, they detach themselves and thus pass out of the host with the feces .
37

The larva burrows itself in the soil and is transformed into th-! pupal stage which, in due time, develops into a bot fly which in turn deposits its eggs upon horses or mules and these eggs given favorable environments again .develop into larvae, thus completing a most complicated and interesting life cycle.
In a general way the life cycle of the other bot flies is similar to the one described, except that the larval development of the heel fly of cattle takes place in the fatty and subcutaneous tissue, preferably near the back. The bot fly of sheep deposit their eggs on the nostrils of sheep from whence the little larvae migrate to the frontal sinuses of the host where they attach themselves and remain until, their larval development completed, they r elease their hold and are passed to the outer world thru the nasal passages of the host.
Treatment against these larval infestations is very unsatisfactory.
In cattle the larvae may r ea dil y be pressed out of the tissue and destroyed after the skin, to which the larvae is attached by its caudal extremity has been perforated. As far as practical this should be done. Were it practical to thus destroy all larvae on all cattle, for only one season, this pest would be eradicated.
The bot fly of horses and mules is best controlled by frequent application of small quantities of kerosene or other agent effeJtive in destroying the bot fly eggs which are deposited upon the hair of their legs.
38

Cotton Growing in Georgia
SCENES IN GEORGIA'S COTTON FIELDS
1. 11-2 bales an ac1e. 2-J. Green fields of Gemgia cotton. 4 F ttll bloom cotton, ripe fm the picking. 5 Bailing for a shipment from a gin.
DAIRYING IN GEORGIA.
Scenes on One of Georgia's Up-to-date Dai1y Fanns.
39

PART TWO
111111111111111111111111111111111111!11111111111111111111111111111111111;111111111 11
STATISTICS
NOTE: Statement on Interpretation of Statistics. The Co-operative Crop Reporting Service was f ormed for the purpose
of gathering, compiling, publishing an d I N TERPRETING statistics. Interpretation of statistics calls for explanation of figures giving the cause for peculiarities of those statistics. This means that every factor affecting acreage, yields, total production, abundance, quality, price and net valuation per acre should be properly explained so that th e practical farm er will r ea dily understand. This has b een our purp ose in the shor t paragraphs which we have w ritten t o accompany the tabluations.
Z. R. PETTET, Former Field Agent.
40

GEORGIA STATISTICS
The statistics given in this booklet, r eaching back in some instances for fifty years, place this bulletin of the Georgia Department in a class by itself. Such statistics have not heretofore appeared in a publication of this Department.
I take this opportunity of expressing my deep appreciation to the great number of lo'cal crop reporters, who by their patient and painstaking work in collecting data, have made it possible for this Department to issue these statistics. The work of these crop reporters is highly commendable, and through their personal efforts this feature is becoming more and more efficient every day.
The work of securing, coJ)lpiling and editing these crop statisti cs, which has been done so efficiently, has been accomplished through the efforts of Mr. Z. R. Pettet, together with his corps of assistants. Mr. P ettet was formerly in charge of our Co-operative Crop Reporting Service, but has r ecently resigned to take up agricultural work in a more remunerative line. He has been succeeded by Mr. W . L. Pryor, who is, temporarily, Field Agent in Charge.
For our crop statistics, we desire to give full credit to that office and their large number of crop reporters.
J. J. BROWN,
Commissioner of Agriculture.

FOREWORD

The statistical information. contained in this Bulletin is de-

signed to supplement that which will be published shortly by

the Census. The tables contained herein are compilations of of-

ficial r ecords. They cover all the major crops of the State ex-

tending over a period of some 40 years. In addition, there is

some work on yields of cotton by counties which will be of great

assistance in determining plans to combat the weevil.

A marked departure will be found in the complete county

tables of crop yields. These cover not only the average yield per

acre but quite a defini te idea of both the full crop for any

county and the possibilities of maximum production or bumper

~~ .

!

41

'l'he Crop Reporting Service is required by law to accept the Census figures as a basis, hence no estimates which will be superceded by the Census just taken, have been included.
Any question upon statistical or agricultural data not contained herein may be secured, if available, from the Commissioner of Agricnlture or the Crop Reporting Service.
LOCATION OF CROP REPORTERS
\Ve are very often a ked how crop reports are made. The Georgia Co-operative Service depends very largely upon its wonderful corps of volunteer aids in every county. These men receive absolutely no r emuneration and serve because they understand the importance of the work and because their sense of duty impels them to do so.
To get accurate State statistics only a man or two is necessary in each county. To get accurate county data the number must be 10 or more; 20 are preferable. The average number in Georgia is now 15 to the county. These are distributed as well as can be done with our limited facilities. During the past season the county estimates made by these gentlemen Were so splendid as to secure favorable notice from all statistical agencies.
A great many look upon crop reporting as mere guess work. Of course one may say that an excellent marksman who hits the bulls-eye nine times out of ten or ninety-nine times out of a hundred is a mere guesser. If the target could speak it 'would offer evidence to the contrary. While there is usually a slight variation of two or three per cent from the exact truth, this error is normally in the same direction and constant. Tables of correction have been prepared by th~ statistical scientists at Washington, based upon 40 years' record&, so that this slight error is largely overcome just as a. rifleman corrects the sights according to the distance, wind direction, light, conditions, etc.
Anyone desiring to look into the accuracy of the national crop reports is invited to write for Circular 17. As to the accuracy of the Georgia reports, they are usually within a few per cent of the exact truth and for three years running we have almost exactly forecast the Sea Island cotton crop, the most difficult of all crops to estimate. One year we were within 188, another 285, the third 350 hales.
Monthly reports are issued on crops and livestock and may be obtained free upon application.
42
' '

lif.ap No . 1 Showing Location of Regttla1 and Special Co-operative Crop Reporte1s Jan. 1, 1920.
I'OST i::
c ... t. ... - ~~ ~ s:.!.' = . .,...,\H=e-..: . .... . _,,..._ .. ,.HIIIlll WTt'11.........

. __

I
~

NOTE-About 800 new reporters have been added whose locations do not a ppea r. on m!'.p. Eoch dot on the map shows the location of one or more <!roo reporters.
43

COUNTY COTTON ESTIMATES
For several years there has been an insistent demand for esti mates by counties for cotton. No method of estimating damage done by the boll weevil is scientific unless the unit damage is as certained. In other words we must know the yield per acre before and after infestation. No data of this kind has ever previously been published in the State of Georgia. Some of our sister states infested by the weevil at an earlier period have worked up this material.
We take pleasure in presenting herewith figures for the past 16 years by counties and districts. Acknowledgment is made to Mr. W. L. Pryor, U. S. Bureau of Crop Estimates, for use of his data for the early years. The estimates by counties derived from the records of the U. S. Bur~au of Crop E stimates :have also been used. For the past 5 years the complete records of the local Crop Reporting Service have been combined with other estimates resulting in a very reliable and uniform series of figures Which will be found relatively correct.
Attention is called to the average decrease in yield in the southwestern district which was first affected and the southern district which was next affected of from forty to fifty pounds per acre since weevil infestation.
By closely studying the enclosed tables it will be seen that the weevil damage last season in many counties was nearly .50 per cent. While all the lo~s last season was not due to the weevil, a considerable portion may be so considered.
A study of our final cotton map for 1919 will indicate very clearly the regions of maximum damage. Reference to the boll weevil map will show the progress of this insidious pest across the State. The boll weevil has now r eached North Carolina counties and they are looking to us for advice and sound crop plans.
With the many years warning that we have had, let it not be said that we have been unable to adjust our farm methods to the new conditions. The southwestern portion of our State has not only reacted to the weevil but has made very decided crop progress and this may also be said of the southern section. There is very great danger that those counties recently infested will overlook the probable damage this season. This has a1ways been the history in the past.
44

COTI'ON-YIELD PER ACRE, POUNDS OF LINT COTI'ON, BY COUNTIEB-1904-1919 11-YEAR AND 5-YEAR AVERAGE PRODUCTION

Dist. J Counties.

1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 11 yr. 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 5 yr.

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Av. ---

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Av.
--

~
-01

1

Bartow__________ 233 189 161 193 195 135 185 205

Catoosa_________ Chattooga ______ Dade____________ Floyd ___________
Gordon _________ Murray__________ Paulding________ Polk__ ____ _______ Walker__________ Whitfield ________

217 222
-----
207 238 159 199 231 256 203

298 207
----158 219 152 217 195 214 243

196 189
-----
179 166 117 161 178 182 163

-----
189
-----
221 185 182 212 189 196 175

205 220
----190 230 180 200 215 235 195

----185
----175 175 160 155 150 170 155

----195
-- --185 185 115 205 185 190 135

-----
255
----260 220
----195 270 280 265

160 160 200
300 220 250 255 165 195 215 185

240 205 265
---- 220 220 160 210 225 230 250

220 310 225 300 257 245 240 266 270 237 238

193 227 214
------207 212 172 191 209 218 201

177 235 150 265 220 226 236 215 187 192 240

130 135 165 280 160 162 183 154 140 190 177

135 200 178 113 260 200 165 184 219
140 --- -- 244
130 191 193 158 198 215 160 230 229 163 219 195 148 187 195 140 226 237 142 216 250

164 188 177 232 179 192 207 189 171 197 205

District Av. _____ 217 209 169 194 207 162 176 244 210 222 265 204 213 170 145 211 212 191

-- -

---

'

COTTON- YIELD PER ACRE, POUNDS OF LINT COTTON, BY COUNTIES-1904-1 919

Dist.

Counties.

11-YEAR AND 5-YEAR AVERAGE PRODUCTION
51t 1904 \ 1905\ 1906\ 1907\ 1908\ 1909\ 1910\ 1911\ 1912\ 1913\ 1914\ 1~~: 119 151 19161 19171 19 181 19 191

- - - -1

-- ------ -- ---------- ---- --- -- -- ------------ - -------- - -

2 I Barrow__ _______ _ _____ _____ _____ _____ ____ _ ____ _ ___ ___ ____ _____ _____ 220 202 168 1E5 185 19!l 241 193
Cherokee ______ _ 196 186 1E6 170 225 160 160 245 175 2 15 215 191 165 137 146 169 245 172 Clarke __________ 217 168 145 224 185 175 135 265 185 205 199 H1 ~ 08 170 193 210 272 211 Cobb .___ ________ 221 189 214 228 210 :205 :200 2EO lEO 205 25 1 212 239 125 157 158 219 179 Dawwn______ ___ 148 175 130 __ ___ 195 ______ ____ ______ ____ _____ 256 181 214 115 154 234 200 183
DFaenKnailnb___________________ _2_1_7__ _1_7__5 ___1_8_4 _ _2__19__ _2_2_5__ _2_1__0__1_7__5 __2_7_5__ _1__0__ _2_6_0__ _2__0__ __2_1_7___ _2_5_7__ _1_4_5___ 1_8__5 __ 2__63__ _2_4_0__ __2_1_8__ _

~ 0')

Forsyth. ____ __ __ 193 182 198 10 205 10 l EO 270 145 225 221 H6 201 142 132 226 227 186 Fulton_____ ___ __ 254 200 246 226 2EO 195 - ---- - - - - - 130 ____ _ 284 222 290 165 237 350 225 263

Gilmer___________ ____ _____ ___ __ _____ _____ ____ __ ___ _ ______ ____ 125 ______ ___ ___ 135 200 120 _____ 275 182

Gwinnett___ __ __ 241 196 173 213 :2 05 195 145 270 160 235 24 0 207 219 lEO 197 272 213 210 HalL ___ _____ ___ 195 173 168 lEO :200 170 230 220 150 215 210 189 194 112 14 0 156 189 232
Jackson______ ___ 222 163 196 224 :205 165 l EO 275 145 225 205 201 l f 2 160 145 205 207 179 Lumpkin__ ______ 210 170 98 _____ _____ _____ ___ ___ ____ lEO 225 260 1f6 194 140 134 200 225 179

Milton ____ ____ __ 245 255 203 2EO 200 l EO 2EO 275 160 2:20 223 223 196 155 190 236 231 201 Oconee__________ 217 127 206 266 185 lEO 160 315 165 260 ~0 200 203 190 200 250 204 209 Pickens __ _______ 173 :201 126 184 :200 175 _____ _____ _____ 190 202 180 214 120' 110 161 213 164

TUonwi onns_________________ _____-_--_-_-_____________________ ___________- -_-_-_-__- -_-__-_--_-_ -_-__--_-_-_-__- -__-_-_-_--_-_-_-_-__- -_-_-__- -_-_-_-_-__-_-_--_-_-_ -__- -_-_-_-__-_-_-_-_-_--_-__--_-_-_-_-_-__- -__-_--_--

Walton____ __ ____ 217 177 172 236 195 165 185 270 lEO 2EO 240 206 215 185 203 237 263 221 White ______ __ ___ 201 228 140 _____ ___ ____ ____ _____ ____ 240 __ ______ __ _______ 156 125 125 167 197 164

District .Av. ____ _ 215 1E6 173 213 208 180 182 266 162 219 249 200 203 140 164 217 224 196

CO'ITON- YIELD PER ACRE, POUNDS OF LINT CO'ITON, BY COUNTIES- 1904-1919

11-YEAR AND 5-YEAR AVERAGE PRODUCTION

Dist.

Counties.

1904

1905
--

1906
--

1907
--

1908
--

1909
--

1910 --

1911 --

1912 --

1913
--

1914
--

11 yr. Av.
---

1915
--

1916
--

1917
--

1918
--

1919
--

5 yr. Av. ---

~

3

Banks.__ ____ ____ Elbert____ _____ __ Franklin ________
HHaabrte_r_s_h_a__m_ __________
L i n c o l n _________ Madison_________ Oglethorpe _____
Rabun___ - --- - -Stephens._______ Wil"ht".> ___________

196 203 203 231 189 219 215 178
-----
-----
166

189 179 180 157 152 132 203 163
------- --
196

172 145 186 203 185 156 191 129
- -- - 149 128

224 182 207 187 196 184 191 206
--- - 245 210

210 170 205 180 210 210 215 195
----185 185

240 180 175
-1-8-0-
190 150 135
----150 160

180 200 180
----190 150 180 140
----170 120

260 230 295
----250 260 255 230
---- -
240 230

170 130 160 280 165 165 170 155
-1-5-5--
1'35

250 24.0 230 220 245 150 170 210
- -- -200 175

189 181 168 240 200 200 193 233
----217 197

207 186 199 212 197 181 194 180
----- -190 174

213 177 224 219 227 181 179 175
----223 190

187 165 182 172 171 139 166 138
----181 135

160 170 174 187 250 178 180 197
-1-1-)-0-
226

220 177 198 221 191 222 209 196
-----
184 251

206 209 220 233 199 176 253 169
-----
24'1 207

197 179 199 206 207 179 197 176
-- ----206
202

Distrit t Av. _____ 200 172 164 203 197 173 167 260 168 209 202 192 200 163 191 207 212 194

OOTTON-YIELD PER AORE, POUNDS OF LINT OOTTON, BY OOUNTIES-1904-1919 11-YEAR AND 5-YEAR AVERAGE PRODUCTION

Dist.

Oounties.

1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 11 yr. 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 5 yr.

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Av. ---

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-A-v.

~
00

4

OampbelL_______ OarrolL________ _

200 228

203 224

193 182

194 214

195 195

185 155

175 190

205 295

145 175

185 255

239 230

OOlhaaytttoanh_o_o_c__h_e_e___ O o w e t a _________ Douglas____ _____

201 210 201 214

:Fayette________ _ 221

J Hara~son__ ______ .Harns__ _________ Heard___________ Henry_____ ______ Macon ________ __ Marion__ ________

206 132 206 181 195 173

M e r i w e t h e r _____ Muscogee ______ _

206 187

193 196 196 198 203 189 170 187 180 177 141 195 171

186 198 175 193 186 141 177 187 132 152 138 171 154

166 175 196 195 182 190 196 190 189 225 170 205 198 145 171 175 187 175 177 . 145 128 165 178 155 152 185

160 175 160 260 225 180 140 210 200 185 145 145 145

205 195 210 240 225 160 170 205 170 115 170 195 145

225 320 255 260 280 190 225 245 245 205 220 225 195

175 150 160 150 165 175 155 170 160 140 135 145 170

170 225 230 251 185 234 250 282 205 242 215 206 165 186 220 233 200 216 260 174 155 236 170 200 170 218

PScikhele__y____-_--_-_-_-_______
Spalding_____ ___ T a l b o t __________ Taylor __________ Troup___________ Upson________ __-

219 149 224 198 200 214 198

175 116 217 163 177 200 173

132 107 187 243 166 166 200

163 140 238 163 179 179 159

175 170 190 175 155 175 155

155 145 185 120 215 190 170

185 130 170 155 165 220 240

235 210 305 235 235 265 240

195
200 175 155 125 145 170

210 180 205 160 185 165 220

227 205 295 185 210 165 184

193 213 189 219 195 221 215 185 170 201 195 175 164 181 172 198 160 217 177 183 190 191

163 201 140 215 212 214 130 150 212 205 153 107 125 107 67 172 129 165 242 188 160 152 142 270 i94 195 150 145 199 206 187 152 182 197 203 196 115 156 176 157 139 120 125 139 68 162 126 174 203 108 156 130 156 207 208 132 157 200 153 71 138 100 155 159 58 142 138 135 179 109 147 124 128 185 78 172 116 198 233 154 168 100 193 ----- 80 208 177 220 248 224 175 160 132 159 90 180 155 170 163 120 149 122 155 200 96 174 180 215 181 99

186 182 112 179 184 179 184 160 118 155 171 143 122 141 132 175 135 215 143 157 144 170

District Av. _____ 199 184 171 178 178 163 184 241 160 198 223 191 ' 171 138 162 192 136 158

-



COTTON-YIELD PER ACRE, POUNDS OF LINT COTTON, BY COUNTIE&-1904-1919

11-YEAR AND 5-YEAR AVERAGE PRODUCTION --- .

Dist.

Counties.

1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 11 yr. 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 5 yr.

-----

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Av. ---

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Av.
- --

~
<:.0

5 Baldwin_________ 150 149 109 210 130 175 145 195 140 160 245

BBliebcbk_le--y-_-_-_-_-_-_-_-_B u t t s ___________ Crawford____ ___ Dodge___________ Greene__________ Hancock___ _____ Houston________ Jasper __________ Johnson______ __ Jones ___________ Laurens_________ Monroe _________
M o n t g o m e r y ____ Morgan _________ N e w t o n _________ P u l a s k i _________ Putnam_________ Rockdale________ Taliaferro_______ Truetlen ______ _

203
----203 177 189 175 189 199 177 187 132 222 220 273 168 219 227 136 200 _1__63___

161
189 158 184 157 171 150 208 170 184 170 177 208 184 184 177 196 224 1_5__4_

154
200 147 151 147 136 142 170 136 173 150 187 161 161 166 161 184 138 138

138
217 126 189 171 199 154 132 189 180 213 198 173 185 203 171 224 189 173

155 200
200 190 145 175 170 220 195 150 140 185' 150 ~90 170 50 175 175 155 185 225 170 160 180 215 230 175 180 195 165 170 170 235 160 235 220 180 170

140
185 155 160 110 100 155 155 150 190 150 190 200 130 155 115 165 145 160

210
220 245 240 245 205 225 190 230 215 275 240 270 270 235 220 210 260 235

210
145 155 155 145 130 135 145 160 160 150 150 165 155 165 145 115 155 110

205 245 210'
165 240 160 205 230 170 255 155 205 190 230 230 205 220 155 210 195

230 255 190 237
242
203 235 220 190 200 191 226 195 226 245 210 195 190 213 225

165 182 180 196 171 195 169 172 177 169 184 184 196 190 213 190 191 179 179 199 173

144 165 170 198 106 157 140 187 148 170 ' 122 153 142 198 205 212 82 168 160 165 175 192 222 183 160 196 190 174 87 161 159 167 194 192 69 156 160 125 179 209 185 172 154 151 166 168 207 169 157 200 197 203 94 170 160 145 180 220 152 171 130 130 195 225 98 155 141 163 160 187 96 149 184 165 187 183 89 162 151 178 190 179 142 168 170 200 195 266 102 187 162 150 1170 205 213 180 161 151 195 206 215 186 130 167 I 198 140 53 138 172 155 176 204 117 165 169 125 158 203 227 176 174 137 191 158 215 '175

Twiggs__________ 205 172 -123
WWahseheilnegrt_o_n_____________1_8_4____1_58__ 154

-i72 "j" ioo-
180 1150

-ia5-
215

145-
150

-i9o-
295

-iao-
130

2oo-
175

-i95-
247

--is7--
185

----130 156

-----
120 146

--- -148 202

--- -222 192

89 60 108

* 136 161

-----,----- Wilkinson____ __ _ 203
Wilcox__________ -----

161 -----

"i38"
-----

"i93"

"i66"

"i6Q" :"i35"
---- - ~ - --- -

"2i6"
---- -

"i46"
---- -

"i95"
-----

i~~
-----

i~~
--- ---

-

180 160
-----

130 142
-----

198 180 -----

190 206 -----

62 97
-----

150 157
------

District Av. _____ 192 176 154 182 176 180 157 231 147 205 217 182 156 157 182 196 125 I 161 I

*See Montgomery Co.

COt:TON- YIELD PER ACRE, POUNDS OF LINT COTTON, BY COUNTIES-1904-1919 11-YEAR AND 5-YEAR AVERAGE PRODUCTION

Dist.

Counties.

1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 11 yr. 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 5 yr.

Av.

Av.

---------------------------- - - - ----

6 Bulloch_______ __ 214 184 154 205 195 295 215 265 160 275 254 220 172 244 245 235 104 247

Burke___________ 224 224 133 191 200 200 150 300 175 225 232 205 197 233 250 266 188 227

u,

Candler___ __ ____ Columbia___ ____

-----
177

----151

-- --154

-- --203

-----
150

----220

-- --140

----235

-- --130

----200

-- - -240

------ 182

167 150

140 132

235 170

242 140

131 171

183 153

0

Effingham_______ 289 EmanueL ____ ___ 220

269 222

180 156

275 175

250 . 310 210 210

210 ---- - 250 210 245 155

280 280

281 239

259 211

178 247 257 250 78 205 171 208 229 156

202 194

Glascock __ _____ ~ 217 Jefferson_____ ___ 187

185 184

117 168

168 187

205 210

215 195

90 ----- 65 155 195 195

175 270

180 206

162 196

157 145 160 177 150 167 194 210 196 176

158 189

Jenkins ____ __ ___ McDuffie ________

----180

----166

129 135

231 189

230 150

240 220

255 140

235 150

150 125

300 145

240 179

223 162

185 260 260 193 168 182 145 215 225 165

213 186

Richmond_______ 132 156 131 213 165 175 150 275 220 290 210 192 230 144 250 125 196 189

Screven___ ______ 238 206 126 191 250 230 170 345 300 280 300 233 222 225 240 156 174 203

Warren_______ ___ 193 186 144 179 160 170 130 200 90 155 200 165 167 131 175 194 172 168

District Av. ___ __ 207 194 144 200 198 223 168 244 168 241 230 201 183 185 221 202 154 193

...

COTTON-YIELD PER ACRE, POUNDS OF LINT COTTON, BY COUNTIES-1904-1919 11-YEAR AND 5-YEAR AVERAGE PRODUCTION

Dist.

Counties.

1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 11 yr. 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 5 yr.

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Av. ---

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Av.
--

7 Baker_________ __ 175 140 116 172 185 145 140 245 150 195 217 171 190 122 110 155 96 135

0...1..

~

C a l h o u n ________ Clay___ _____ _____ Decatur_________

228 233 193

154 186 179

147 123 208

219 189 161

185 170 145

230 170 175

230 130 140

200 230 230

165 190 135

195 190 215

240 195 185

Dougherty__ ____ Early ____ ___ ____ Grady________ ___ Lee_____ _________ ]{iller __ ___ ____ __

168 196
-- --210 247

133 179
-- --199 217

179 163 208 16.6 166

MitchelL _____ __ Quitman_____ __ _

215 161

163 177

156 101

149 193 135 177 203 203 161

125 185 180 175 ,175 180 170

200 175 155 205 160 210 140

155 330 165 195 205 180 135 205 165 140 325 125 120 ----- 200 180 220 165 100 160 150

165 210 190 240 185 230 160

240 245 217 205 230 223 150

Randolph__ ___ __ Ste~art __ _____ __

171 101

Sumter_______ ___ 231

Terrell__________ 212

Thomas________ _ 201

Webster__ ___ ____ 175

189 147 158 126 l EO 161
170 163
203 147 121 116

227 158 229 245 175 163

175 155 175 210 220 115

180 150 165 165 195 140 220 160 175 170 140 "160

250 215 255 270 300 245

215 205 210 185 220 125

245 165 205 215 225 155

225 227 245 2EO 200 180

199 182 179 183 193
177. 196 190 195 148 198 167 216 209 203 164

165 109 105 170 95 140 100 140 169 80 175 112 125 93 86 160 145 190 - - --- 100 172 142 117 133 72 213 183 160 184 60 162 151 190 110 150 182 100 150 143 73 219 192 170 155 132 112 60 75 125 61 147 100 141 229 123 192 125 145 180 61 168 170 195 171 90 155 175 197 2!18 144 245 157 195 162 90 145 110 150 124 90

124 126 118 149 127 160 153 130 174 87 148 141 169 178 170 124

District Av. _____ l195 172 152 186 172 179 163 243 173 199 216 186 172 127 160 158 93 141

----

COTTON-YIELD PER ACRE, POUNDS OF LINT COTTON, BY COUNTIES-1904-1919 11-YEAR AND 5-YEAR AVERAGE PRODUCTION

Dist.

Counties.

1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 11 yr. 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 5 yr.

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

-

Av. ---

-

-

-

-

~-

-

-

-

-

Av.
--

eJ1
~

8



Atkinson_ _______ Ben HilL_______._

-----
-----

BBreororikesn___ _-_-_-_-_-_-_-__

263 263

CColifnfeceh____-_-_-_-_-_--_____ C o l q u i t t ________ Cook____________
Crisp____ -------_ EDcohoolyls______-_-_-_-_-_-_-__

231 236 235
--------215 105

IJrewffiDn _a_v_i-s-_-__-_-_-_-_- 283

L o w n d e s ________ Telfair_____ ___ __ T i f t _____________

255 222

Turner______ ____ Wilcox ___________ WortbL __________

--- ----- 221 224

---- ----1!<9 193 222 210 189 -----
-----
168 98 213
185 210 --- ----- 203 196

-----
---- -
187 191 140 196 193
----161 151 53 208
149 156 191 194 161 128

--- -100 165 191
-----
231 203 ----256 170 -2-3-4--
203 222 175 298 254 200

----225 190 230 160 185 175
-----
200 225 --- -205
185 180 245 185 240 185

----260 250 175
-- ---
260 245
---- -
235 225 ----275
235 220 240 270 265 200

-2-0-0-180 160 --- -210 155 ----155 150 ---- 185
150 205 135 255 160 215

-- --190 260 240
-2--6-0-
290 -- - -300 295 ----350
280 245 225 430 325 220

-- --170 190 180 90 200 220
-- --160 140
--- -180 260 135 225 265 220 190 230

-----
240 240 230 80 265 275
----170 210
----245 335 255 255 265 285 210 235

- ----
260 257 200 160 302 287
-- --255 254 75 305 285 180 223 307 302 260 275

----- -221 216 214 155 232 224
-- -- --210
200
83 244 293 201 216 227 271 226 210

-2-0-7--
200 237 130 252 207
-- --217 250 100 200 265 126 195 232 246 215 224

----190 132 240 130 186 215
----185 220 75 260 195 155 209 210 235 230 233

----240 138
lY!
123 184 210
--- -200 241 37 290 253 73 190 125 210 205 210

-----
231 131 152 27 165 100 104 174 220
25 157 148 25 233
----170 225 197

----148 133 105 130 92 137 170 93
82 17 104 72 94 74 143 110 100 115

--- ---~
203 147 178 108 176 174 137 174 203
61 202 187 96 180 177 194 196 196

District Av. _____ 230 190 164 216 201 240 180 279 191 237 262 214 206 194 181 142 106 16G

see Coffee Co.

'

COTTON- YIELD PER ACRE, POUNDS OF LINT COTTON, BY COUNTIES-1904-1919 11-YEAR AND 5-YEAR AVERAGE PRODUCTION

Dist.

Counties.

1904. 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 19131 1914 11 yr. 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919 5 yr.

Av.

Av.

----

----

01
C/.:)

9 .

Appling ____ ___ __ Bacon______ _____ Bryan ___________

163 ----259

Camden_________
Charlton________ Chatham________ Evans ___ ________ Glynn.___ __ ___ __
Liberty _________

----105
-----
- ----
----299

M c i n t o s h _______ Pierce___ ________

----136

184. ----268 189 ----193 --------199 ---- 103

119 -- --158 -------------------- 175 ---- -
68

126
--- --
- --- -
----------- --
- ----
---- --------157

190 ----24.0
------------ -
-----
. ---255 ----195

170 180 ----- -------- - 135
----- -----
----- --------- -----
----- -- ---
----- ---- -
--- -- - ----
----- ---- 155 145

230
---------- -- ---- -------- -
- --- -
---- ----215

120
--- -275
-----
- ----
-- ------- ----
85
----95

270 222

----- ----300 275

-- --- 250

215
---- -

-----
--- --

----- -----

----- 150

225 227

- ---- -- --280 225

179
- - ---- 239 216 160
----- --------
150 209
------161

180 125 125 200
--------175
----254 250 170

160 110 140 200 155 165
------- -250 235 163

200 120 206 176 167 175 250
----186 220 175

124. 135 212 220 170
----275 14.0 134 303 300

83 35 83 32 34
----171
---- 17 50 85

149 106 163 166 131 170 218
-----168 211 179

TattnalL _______ 235 187 151 203 180 240 200 350 145 310 198

Toombs _________ VVare ___________ _ VVayne __________

-- --224 205

--- -219 212

123 105 172

233 220 265 225 315 ----- ----- ----- ----- --- -149 180 145 ----- - ----

150 100 200

265 210 325

275 164 310

218 230 170 211

151 187 215 156 180 160 210 200 225 137 165 119 269 227 232 240

80 87 98 87

168 167 149 211

District Av. _____ 203 196 134 174 208 193 177 277 146 266 230 196 184 176 192 196 81 166

Stat e. State average ___ 205 200 165 190 190 184 173 240 159 208 239 196 189 165 173 190 152 174

Georgia B oll Weevil Map Showing Infestation ~n 1918-19.

COTTON

ACREAGE

A
[!
8 z
~

A
[!
~
H

H

~

~

rn

'0
:~:s

..,-
~

0 ~

~

.r.D..

~~

-<<....) Q)
~

1'1
0

1::'1s

. ... 0

~~

::s

'0

~
Q)

0...
~

~

rn
"'rn
~0 ~" '
'0~ 1'1..,
::S.<:l obll ~ - iil
oiS=
0 lQ

'0
:~:s
0
~...
Q) .....
~Q)<.)
<.)Q)
;::A
~
s...
r;o.!.

Q)
::s
~ ......
l>..;
s,..AQ)
r;o.!.

CONDITION

z ~
~

I>< H p
1-)

cp!:i
~

8
~
r~n

8
0 0

118866671

....,,

1868

01

18 69\

18701

18711

18721

18731

18741

1875\

18761

1877'1

18781

18791 1880
18811 1 8821 18831 18841 18851 18861

1,069,167 117 1,197,467 170
1,053,771 147 1,243,450 150
I 1,330,491 173
1,170,832 120 1,311,331 180 1,455,577 184 1,678,856 136 1,611,702, 126 1,515,000. 151 1,530,1501 138 1,560,753 161 2,617,138 156
2,878,851 163
2,994,005 145 2,844,305 146 2,872,748 123 2,958,930 135 3,047,698 150
2,956,267 137

125,093,0001 203,569,000
154,904,000 186,518,000 230,174,943 140,499,840 236,039,580 267,826,168 228,324,416 203,074,452 228,765,000 211,160,700 251,281,233 408,273,528 469,252,713
434,130,725 415,268,530 353,348,004 399,455,5501
457,154,7001 405,008,579

205,000 1
390,0001 290,000 473,934 1 495,000 320,000 595,000 577,150 519,0001
457,000 1 505,000
469,0001 558,403 814,441 1 1,009>,26 0 1
800 ,0001 942,000 752,500 1 807,400 1 9601025 1
. 861,720 1

I
I
I I I I I I I
9.0\
I
8.1\ 10.01
10.0\
9.0 9,51 9.21 8.51 8.2\

I
I
82 96 94 80 91 20,588,850 103 89 20,353,780 101 40,827,353 93 46,925.271 98 92 37,374,168 89 33,568,060 86 36,749,9111 96 38,858,150 95 33,210,7031 82

I 115 94 103 101 82 101 94 91 97 103 90 105 86 97
98 92 93
I 90 97
I 81

57 145 92 101
I 100
80 104
95 94 86 104 85 92 87 98 92
94 78 90 100 80

I 153 80 80 105 78 96 90 77 76 90 77 81
I 82
95 71
89 70 86 91 81

I 40 150
75 7S !)9
72 1;8
82
so
71 gg
77 il7 77 88
73
36 116 79 S7 81

COTTON- ( Contin ued)

18871 18881 18891

2,941,4861 154 452,988,8441 947,158 1 2,970,901 156 463,460,556 953,6231 3,345,104 155 518,491,120 1,191,846

8.71 39,410,029 99 8.5 39,394,147 92 8.61 44,590,236 80

96 I 94 I 84 1 f7

90

90

85 I 79

86

!H

90

B7

18901

2,969,713 165 490,002,645 1,210,000

8.61 42,140,227 94

95

94

86

82

18911

2,821,227 155 437,290,185 1,050,0001

7.41 32,359,474 80

85

86

82

78

18921

2-369,831 160 379,172,960 800,000

8.5j 32,229,702 87

88

84

79

75

1893

3,050,000 136 414,800,000 1,000,000

7.3j 30,280,400 87

86

83

77

76

18941

3,610,968 155 559,700,040 1,18~.924 1

5\.0 27,985,002 76

78

85

84

79

1895 18961

3,069,323 152 466,537,096 1,067,3771

7.01 32,657,597 82

88

87

76

72

3,468,335 182 630,262,508 1,299,3401

7.01 44,118,376 95 'I 94

92

71

67

1897~

3',537,702 178 629,710,956 1,350,7811

6.71 42,190,634 84

85

95

80

70

1898

3,535,205 183 646,942,515 1,378,731

5.6j 36,228,781 89

90

91

80

75

18991

3,698,000 159 588,053,000 1,231,0601

7.2.1 44,318,160 88

85

79

69

64

19001 3,550,760 3,342,000 172 574,846,000 1,203,30~\

9.51 57,157,130 89

74

77

69

67

19011 4,122,309 3,762,000 167 628,225,000 . 1,314,881 19021 3,957,417 4,129,000 165 681,308,000 1,425,044

7.21 47,335,716 80 8.01 57,001,7561 94

72 91

II

78
83 I

81 68

73 62

c:Jt
O';l

19031 4,131,5431 3,834,000 158 605,780,000 1,267,3131\

10.71 67,803,965 75

75 I 77

81

68

19041 4,449,672 4,397,000 205 901,407,000 1,887,853!

9.41 88,729,068 78

85 91

86

78

19051 3,826,7181 4,020,0001 200 804,090,0001 1,682,555 19061 4,728,000 4,610,0001 165 760,710,000 1,592,5721

10.91 91,699,520 8t 9.8j 78,036,420 86

82 82

82 74

I 77

76

72

68

19071 4,!l22,560 4,566,000 190 867,550,000 1,815,8341

10.61 96,238,460 74

78

81

81

76

19081 4,910,000 4,848,000 190\ 922,630,000 1,931,17-9

8.71 84,006,33 0 80

83

85

77

71

119901901

4,763,000 41. 970,000

4,674,000 . 184 4,973,000 173

861,920,000 844,310,000

1,804. 0141 1,767,2021

14.21 128,085,420 84 14.21 . 125,471,200 81

79 78

78 70

73 71

71 68

1911 5,579,0001 5,504,000 240 1,323,710,000 2,768,627

8.91 123,203,5901 92

94

95

81

79

19121 5,3 90,000! 5,335,000 159 848,920,000 1,776,5461

12.41 110,145,480 74 I 72

68

70

65

19131 5,345,000 5,318,000 208 1,107,200,000 2,316,6011 1914 5,510,000 5,430,000 239 1,299,619,000 2,718,0371 19151 4,925,0001 4,825,000 189 912,398,000 1,908,673 '

12.81 148,262,400 69 6.9j 93,772,380 80
11.41 108,794,760 81

74
83 79

76 82 76

l76

72

81

81

69

61

19161 5,450,000 5,277,000 165 870,659,000 1,82(}.939

19.91 ] 81,183,430 73

80

68

62

38

19171 5,274,0001 5,195,000 173 901,060,000 1,883,9111 19181 5,425,000 5,341,000 190 1,014,865,000 2,122,4051

28.81 271,283,184 69

69

27.51 291,831,0001 78 I 80

69 77

68 66

62 62

19191 5,494,000 5,220,000 152 799,474,000 1,658.2531

35.81 296,827,2871 81 I 72 ', 67 I 55

49

United States Boll Weevil Map, Showing Advance From Year t o Yea1.

Hi

~ ! 1

...,

:.! g!
~ ~

;>
.! .. ""~''

:l

0

! ~il z"'

0

~ 0
~

0
(.)

z ~
0

~ j~ ' .~. .;;

~~ i&1_,~:~;Jii

" ;

~~ ~ ~ ::!:

-i~

~
1 e
~

~" j

. I~I~ ii % < 0
. :.. ;. >~<

~
&3

~ ~ ~

t
~

e i ~0 :s!

i g ~ j

"' 1 :c
E-
. ~
0
a <


E
]
:7

~~t ~il~

J

~
i~

e ~
. 2

"' f tt
Cl.
rn

0: ~p l~~ ~

~~
~ ~
...l.! ae-

~
<=~

-5

GEORGIA COTTON 1918-19
(Quantities are in running bales, counting round as half bales. Linters are not included.)

BUREAU OF CENSUS.

( ,

The State 1,677,490 2,117,860

I

County.

1919 1918 Co :mty

1919 191S

Appling

1,912

Atkinson . . . . . . 536

Bacon . . . . . . . . 926

Baker .. . ... ... 1,227

Baldwin . ..... 10,047

Banks .. ...... 10,603

Barrow ....... 20,270

Bartow . . ..... 25,941

B en Hill ... . .. 3,541

Berrien . . . . . . . 2,371

Bibb . . .. . .... 8,351

Bleckley . . . . . . 3,398

Brooks . . . . . . . 6,467

Bryan . . . . . . . 796

Bulloch ... . ... 15,830

Burke .. ..... .53,075

Butts ......... 15,991

Calhoun . . . . . . 5,558

Campbell . . .... 15,279

Can er . . . . . . . 5,893

Carroll .. .. ... 34,715

Catoosa . . . . . . . 2,118

Chattahoochee 1,199

Chattooga .... 12,284

Cherokee ...... 13,942

Clarke ..... . .. 17,233

Clay .... .. ... 2,710

Clayton ....... 13,185

Clinch . . . . . . . . 112

Cobb ... . ..... 24,711

5.981 C:offee . . . . . . . . 4,563 1,656 Colquitt .. .... 11,738 3,037 Columbia . ... .12,470 1,697 Cook ......... 2,600 14,707 Coweta .. .. . .. 29,911 11,007 Crawford . . . . . 3,093 18,831 Crisp . ...... . 7,559 19,514 Dawson . . . . . . 1,579 8,514 Decatpr . . . . . . 5,205 4,137 DeKalb .. . ..... 17,223 14,860 Dodge ........ 11,887 12,063 Dooly ........ 13,047 6,161 Dougherty . . . . 6,684 3,972 Douglas . . . . . . 11,949 32,61:3 Early . . . . . . . . 6,935 67,071 Effingham .. .. 1,657 17,020 Elbert . . .... .25,654 6,408 Emanuel ..... 19,564 14,554 Evans .. . . .. .. 3,805 12,497 Fayette .. .. ... 16,731 34,591 Floyd .. .. .. . .22,815 1,365 Forsyth .. . . .. 13,587 3,!H1 Franklin ..... 30,562 10,826 Fulton , . . . . . . . 4,005 11,989 Glascock . . . . . . 4,201 16,060 Gordon ..... .15,820 3,755 Grady ..... . .. 1,426 14,180 Greene .. . .... 20,793
397 Gwinnett ..... 31,061 20,376 p:abersbam . . . . 1,894

12,926 13,094 18,095
2,083 31,568
6,303 13,136
1,414 4 ,720 16,34! 34,842 31,852 6,425 10,848 8,094 6,322 22,385 46 ,6.45 8,200 16,733 19,477 11,855 27,117 2,939 5,345 13,818 2,748 21,748 30,177 1,350

58

County

1919 1919, County

1919 1918

Hall ... .. . . .. 20,293 16,554

Hancock ...... 19,753 22,859

Haralson .. . .. 11,352 . 10,234

Harris . .. .. . .. 7,989 12,99o

Hart .. .. . . ... 23,448 17,888

Heard 9,733 0 0 11,305

Henry ........ 34,583 31,617

Houston ...... 7,256 20,241)

Irwin 5,320 0 0 12,13:3

Jackson .. .. . .37,187 36,016

Jasper .. .. . .. .20,002 27,037

Jeff Davis







0

852

3,266

Jefferson ..... 25,183 39,725

Jenkins ...... 15,212 25,282

Johnson 0 0 0 . 9,709 20,322

Jones 7,309 0 0 13,092

Laurens ...... 20,165 59,253

Lee 5,687 0 0 0

6,725

Liberty 0 0 .

222

2,639

Lincoln 0 0

9,466

9,4>31

Lowndes 0 1,969 2,088
Lumpkin .. ... 526 546

McDuffie : . ... 12,405 12,979
Macon . . . . . . . 6,897 13,571

Madison . ..... 29,915 22,906
Marion ....... 2,488 5,40')

Meriwether .... 20,046 29,10!

Miller 2,309 0. 0

2,46~

Milton ....... 9,141 7,o29

Mitchell . . .... 13,499 12,742

Monroe ....... 16,565 24,871

Montgomery ... 4,848 12,380

Morgan ....... 34,845 33,599

Murray . . . . ... 4,728 4,242

Mu cogee 0 2,930 6,] 67

Jewton ....... 30,041 24,781

Oconee ... .... 18.674 18.]21

Oglethorpe .... 27,798 27,151)

Paulding .. .... 12,42::!

Pickens ....... 3,156

Pierce 1.306 0 0



0

Pike . ... . . . .. 21,383

Polk ......... .17,867

Pulaski



0

4,722

Putnam ... . .. 14,148
Quitman . ..... 359

Randolph



0



7,919

Richmond ..... 13,696

Rockda~e .. ... 11,679

Schley .. . ..... 2,923

Screven .. . . .. 22,179

Spalding .... . .23,325

Stephens ...... 7,321

Stewart ... : . .. 3,906

Sumter . .. .... 15,885

Talbot 4,711 0

Taliaferro .... 10,927

Tattnall . ...... 5,201

Taylor ........ 6,746

Telfair . ...... 'i,G42

Terrell ........ 16,716

Thomas . ...... 6,272

Tift 7,660 0 0 0 0 .

Toombs 6,832 0

Treutlen 0 0 4,539

'!'roup .... .. .. 17,315

Turner . ...... 8,627

Twiggs . ...... 3,083

Upson 8,201

0 0



Walker ....... 9,519

Walton .. .... .37,784

Ware ......... 329

Warren . .... .. 14.550

Washington ... 20,802

Wayne 1,357

0

Webster . ... . . 1,062

11,029 2 ,4\)1: 4,039
26 ,045 13,076 1 2 ,039 17,729
680 10 ,861 15,602 11,395
6,137 35,236 23,038
8,094 5,700 26,423 8,62() 11,162 12,641 10,950 17,671. 19,083 7,731 9,684 15,599 9,002 22,843 15,162 12,908 13 ,595 7,140 34,848 1,481 14,668 32,243 6,037 1,507

59

County

1919

Wheeler

3,554

White ........ 810

Whitfield . . .. .10,983

Wilcox . . . .... 11,362

1918
9,507 747
7,614 24,909

County

1919

Wilkes ....... 31,875
Wilkim:on .. .. 4,157
wor th .... . ... 13,051 All other ...... 506

191 t3
32,560 9,88! 14,650 2,476

Georgia Cotton Map , Showing the Y ield of Seaso n 1919

I

I

COOP ERATI 'fj,; CROP REPO, NG St:RVICE FOR GEORGIA

'

\ NORTH GEORGIA COTTON VER A AS

GEORGIA DEPART~ENT OF AGRICULTU RE UNITED ST ATES DE PA RTMENT OF AGRICULT URE .

BETT ER THAN LAS'!' YEAR '

Offic e of Fiel d Age nt, Atl a n~a . Ga .

The yi el d per aere

ru ns around 220 po unds ptt acre af lin( cotton. Abo v g th o line A- A. the .av e rag e i s ov er 200 poun ds aor . pe r ac r e . exc e pt w c ~t of lin e D-D,' wh e re th o~ wee vil was a t wor oarly\

0 Au gus ta .

a \ ----:_ ,_-------s ~J;;TWEEN LIN :;, A. - A ANu B.:I.B, YIELD 1I S BETWEEN :IOO POUN DS AND ~0 0 PER ACRE .
The br eak IN Tlt.I S BELT THE YI ELD IS L

BETWEE N ~0 and 100

Colu o bu~

B- a

\
':Ji sasJ; er much cott on
' here. Yi elds un dor

s oa coast yiel d was
under 50
pounds per
o.c r a .

sea Isl a nd

c ott~n pr a cticall y

(:

de str Gyed.

The above sk otch wa s pr e pared by e ~ Gao r gia Fi &l d Age nt

b)lo pl ottin g cou:'lr; y aY ere. ge s and drawing zon e lines acc ordin gly. It

1t . is oade possi ble by exc eptional r eturns from a corp s o f s pl ondid

VQlunt a ry r ~p ort e ra. Th e actu a l . ~ut turn is a ln ost exac tly a s wa s

expect e rt And cha rted oa rli or in the 3 e ason~froc condition fi gur es.

hed.)

NOTE-See statistical table showing yield by counties.

60

GEORGIA AVERAGE CROPS
T~e time has gone by when spread-eagle claims and will-cat advertising will attract settlers. It has always been our idea that the truth about Georgia is good enough. Not only are our lands still the cheapest, considering everything, in the United States, but the yields which can be obtained a,r~ high enough to insure an unusual return upon an investment.
The figures which we present are general averages obtained within the State by reliable, regular and conscientious crop reporters (mostly farmers) . These reporters number on an average something more than 15 to "the county. In addition to the AVERAGE -yield, there is a column devoted to the NORMAL or full crop which is used as a standard by the U.S. Bureau of Crop Estimates and the Georgia Crop Reporting Service. In still another column will be found the BUMPER or high yields which have been recorded in various counties. These are not the highest yields but the average of many good records.
These figures will be of assistance not only to prospective settlers but to all agricultural agencies engaged in building up the State, and even jo the crop reporters themselves as standards for comparison. In making State estimates the theoretical normal or full crop is obtained from records of the past 40 years. These have been worked out for Georgia. The county records in the office of the Georgia Service extend back for a period of 5 year~:~ but this is not long enough to furnish a basis for exact county estimates. The opinions of the reporters themselves have been asked and the r esults given are the codified estimates appended. During the coming seaw n these will be used as a rough standard.
Comparison with the accepted records for the whole State show these to be of rather high elass. The cotton general average for 16 years varies less than 2 per cent from these results and other crops in a like proportion.
We wish to take this opportunity to request co-operation from every intelligent farmer in the Crop Reporting work.
61

;

Map Showing the Di.st1,icts Used by th e G1op R eporting S ervice.
Georgt;;,,

TENN.

N C A ROLl NP.,
./ r------0--------"'.'\ _____ _

A LA.

S . CAROLINA
N.
I

F"L.ORIOA NOTE: Each district has a wifferent r elat' ve importa n ce. This Is teach -
nically cal)ed a we'ght. In mal<ing up final estimates, each district is allotted its proper influence or weight for each crop.
62

GEORGIA'S CORN VALUATION GREATER THAN 19 STATES COMBINED

'l'o those who have not thought of Georgia as a corn producing

State, it will be a matter of astonishment to note that the 1919

corn crop was worth more than that of 19 other states combined,

i.e., Maine, New Hampshire,- Vermont, Massachusetts, Rhode Is-

land, Connecticutt, Delaware, Florida, North Dakota, Montana,

Wyoming, California, New Mexico, Arizona, Utah, Nevada,

Idaho, Washington and Oregon.

The total valuation of the crop is also almost ten times what

it was in 1898 and equals about one-third of the value of the U.

S. corn crop in 1872. The rank of the Empire State among all

the States of the Union on a valuation basis is 11th.

The season of 1919 was not favorable for corn in most of the

State. At times there was too much rain and this was suc-

ceeded by severe drought at the very worst time possible.

Many persons are inclined to draw comparisons between Geor-

gia's comparatively low corn yield and that of the high

yielding States of the corn belt proper. In doing this they

forget that nearly 30 per cent of Georgia's corn acreage is

planted with companion crops such as peanuts, velvet beans, cow-

peas, edible beans and chufas. In round numbers this means

about one million five hundred thousand acres of corn, making in

addition not less than ten million dollars worth of secondary pro

ducts.

The next point that the analyst will discover is that the Geor-

gia corn crop does not occupy the ground the whole season. In

some sections it follows the winter grains and early truck crops,

while in others it is in turn followed by wheat, oats and rye.

When these two factors are taken into consideration, together

with the comparatively low cost of production, it will be seen

that a net profit from an acre of Georgia corn will compare very

favorably with that of any corn section. Since the advent of the

velvet bean and better cultural methods, the yield bas steadily

risen and will doubtless continue to do so.



In sections badly infested by the boll wee;vil, the corn crop

offers the best solution to the problem of what to grow instead

of cotton. Most of the South Georgia farmers recognized this

immediately and corn acreage has grown very rap-idly in that

T E "N N.

6 N CAROL I NA
- --- ------....._.,_\ ___ __
S. CA R. OLINA

Note: This map is prepared on basis of yield per acre as returned by corps of correspondents averaging about 15 to the county. The county yields a.re charted and the zone lines drawn accordingly. It was p r epared by the field a g ent upon request for da ta similar to Georgia Cotton Sketches. County acreages are used in all cases.
AA. North of line AA the yield Ls above 20 bu. per acre. B. "Island B" is an area where the yield is above 20 bu.
c-c. North of line C-C the yield is above 15 bu. per acre.
D -D . Between D-D and line C-C the yield is low between 9 and 14 bu. EE. Northeast of line E-E and between it and line D-D the yield is b etween 14 and 20 bu. p er acre. F-F. -southeast of F-F is v ery poor, b elow 10 bu. to the acre.
64

section. We can use at least ten million more bushels of corn for our own needs. Should there be any surplus, the State Bureau of Markets will assist in finding a market.

Year.
1866 18'67 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1 96

CORN-GEORGIA.

Yield

Price Farm Value

Acreage. Per Acre. Production. Per Bu.

Dec.l

Acres

Bushels

Dollars

2,531,598 . 6.2 15,695,909 106 16,590,947

2,216,564 13,1 29,037,000

69

19,968,138

2,149,133 12.7 27.294,000

68

18,480,312

2,500,000 11.0 27,500,000

96

26,366,878

2,296,296 13.5 31,000.000

81

25,044,883

1,956,310 10.3 20,150,000

84

16,852,068

1,902,160 12.5 23,777,000

76

18,111,798

1,952,358 12.3 24,014,000

76

18,132,118

2,206,667 11.1 24,494,000

83

20,319,639

2,010,000 10.0 20,100,000

75

15,070,619

2,147,272 11.0 23,620,000

55

12,989,918

2,133,333 10.5 22,400,000

66

14,817,121

2,218,000 11.0 24,398,000

61

14,853,074

2,218,000

9.3 20,627,400

70

14,439,180

2,384,700

9.2 21,939,240

69

15,138,076

2,338,700

8.3 19,745,000

97

19,152,650

2,747,005 13.3 36,617,500

65

23,801.375

2,829,415

8.7 24,615,900

67

16,492,65::~

2,857,700 10.8 30,925,000

70

21,647,500

2,857,700 11.3 32,162,000

58

18,653,960

2,886,277 10.8 31,197,000

60

18,718,200

2,915,140 11.0 32,067,000

63

20,202,210

2,923,885

9.6' 28,069,000

60

16,841,400

3,011,602 11.2 33,730,000

55 _18,551,468

2,981,486 10.5 31,306,00

69

21,600,866

3,100,745 12.2 37,829,00

69

26,102,071

2,945,708 11.2 32,992,000

56

18,475,481

3,034,079 11.1 33,678,277

56

18,859,835

3,003,738 11.7 35,143,735

58

20,383,366

3,244,037 13.0 42,172,481

41

17,290,717

2,984,514 11.0 32,829,654

43

14,116,751

65

1897 2,924,824 11.0 32,173,064

48

15,443,071

1898 Z,!l54,072

9.0 26,586,648

48

12,761,591

1899 3,249,479 10.0 32,494,790

50

16,247,395

1900 3,411,953 10.0 34,119,530

57

19,448,132

1901 3,785,758 10.0 37,857,580

82

31,043,216

1902 3,889,331

9.0 35,093,979

73

25,618,605

1903 3,938,324 11.7 46,078,391

69

31,794,090

1904 3,977,707 11.9 47,334,713

71

33,607,646

1905 4,295,924 11.0 47,255,164

70

33,078,615

1906 4,338,883 12.0 52,066,596

67

34,884,619

1907 4,426,000 13.0 57,538,000

76

43 ,729,000

1908 4,300,000 12.5 53,750,000

82

44 ,075,000

~009 3,383,000

11.6 39,375,000

86

33,862,000

1910 3,585,000 14.5 51,982,000

78

40,546,000

1911 3,692,000 16.0 59,072,000

83

49,030 ,000

1912 3,910,000 13.8 53,958,000

85

45,864,000

1913 4,066,000 15.5 63,023,000

91

57,351,000

1914 4,000,000 14.0 56,000,000

85

47,600,000

1915 4,330,000 15.0 64,950,000

78

50,661,000

1916 4,000,000 15.5 62,000,000 100 62,000,000

1917 4,500,000 16.0 72,000,000 160 115,200,000

1918 4,590,000 15.0 68,850,000 165 113,602,000

1919 4,820,000 14.5 69,890,000 160 111,824,000

OATS
The oat crop is one of the easiest in the world to produce under proper conditions of soil and climate. Reference to the table of valuation per acre will show it compares very favorably with corn. To grow oats successfully, proper machinery and properly cleared land are necessary. They are also risky in the northern part of the State but in the coastal plain section oats constitute a very important addition to our agriculture. Not only is the grain of exceptional importance in our crop plan but the grazing and the roughage obtained by cutting the crop when it is in the dough are of decided importance.
For these reasons there can be no hesitation in recommending the doubling of the oat crop wherever local conditions are satisfactory. They are used to best advantage where the two or three horse unit is in vogue.
66

By proper planting oats may be taken off in May or early
June and followed by a very profitable crop of peanuts or cowpeas. In the extreme southwest farm ers have learned to make a very creditable crop of corn following oats though it is doubt-
ful whether this is the best method of utilizing the ground. Other sections do the same to a greater or less extent. Another good method is to plant oats immediately after cotton is "out" in South Georgia, thereby helping to keep the weevil under controL

Year.
1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891

OATS-GEORGIA.

Acreage. Acres

Yield

Price Farm Value

P er Acre. Production. Per Bu.

Dec.l

Bush.

Bush.

Cts.

Dollars

92,098 10.7 99,274 12.4 90,560 12.5 97,560 12.3 86,301 14.6 141,308 10.7 145,120 12.5 358,209 13.4 447,059 10.2 372,727 11.0 491,379 11.6 407,692 13.0

985 ,453

70

1,231,000

64

1,132,000

59

1,200,000

75

1,260,000

75

1,512,000 . 72

1,814,000 74

4,800,000

69

4,560,000

79

4,100,000

78

5,700,000

62

5,300,000

63

685 ,294 793,625 . 665,387 903 ,32S 938,77!1 1,087,770 1,333,587 3,314,917 3,618,395 3,181,343 3,552,704 3,351,167

428,400 16.7

7,154,280

55

3,927,000

449,800 15.0

6,747,000

57

3,845,790

618,470 10.0

6,184,700

75

4,638,525

612,300

9.1

5,566,000

87

4,842,420

765,375

9,5

7,235,800

55

3,979,690

780,682

9.0

7,018,700

56

3,930,472

702,614

8.9

6,270,000

57

3,573,900

709,640

9.0

6,395,000

53

3,389,350

589,001

9.0

5,301.000

60

3,180,600

612,561 11.5

7,044,000

58

4,085,520

618,687 11.5

7,115,000

53

3,770,950

624,874 11.0

6,874,000

50

3,436,807

562,387

9.7

5,455,000

60

3,273,092

618,626 11.7

7,238,000

60

4,342,754

67

1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919

569,136 10.7

6,090,000

52

597,593 13.3

7,947,987

52

561,737 13.4

7,527,276

51

460,624 14.5

6,679,048

46

423,774 12.0

5,085,288

41

394,110 14.0

5,517,540

42

433,521 16.6

7,196,449

48

476,873

9.0

4,291,857

48

467,336 15.0

7,010,040

49

296,644 14.8

4,390,331

67

264,013 11.1

2,930,544

53

256,093 13.6

3,482,865

55

235,606 14.8

3,486,969

55

233,250 15.1

3,522,075

53

216,922 15.5

2,362,291

56

300,000 16.7

5,010,000

72

300,000 17.2

6,160,000

72

412,000 15.1

6,199 ,000

71

404,000 18.2

7,353,000

64

404,000 21.5

8,686,000

70

364,000 20.8

7,571,000

65

420,000 22.0

9,240,000

68

450,000 20.0

9,000,000

70

905,000 19.5 17,648,000

66

860,000 19.5 16,770,000

79

550,000 16.0

8,800,000 117

550,000 20.0 11,DOO,OOO 119

540,000 20.0 10,800,000 115

3,166,673 4,132,953 3,838,911 3,072,362 2,084,968 2,317,367 3,454,291) 2,060,091 3,434,920 2,941,522 1,553,188 1,915 ,5 76 1,917,833 1,866,700 1,882,883 3,607 ,000 3,715,000 4,401,000 4,706,000 6,080,000 4,921,000 6,283,000 6,300,000 11,648,000 13,248,000 10,296,000 13,090,000 12,420,000

WHEAT
The history of this cereal in our section is very interesting. Once there was a small patch of wheat on almost every farm. This gradually declined, however, until in 1909 there was only about 90,000 acres in the State. When the European war came on With its campaigns for food and feed stuffs, the old cracker State responded wonderfully and its acreage was very much more tluin tripled. When the emergency passed, the tendency to drop back to the old plan of a small patch for home use became again no-
68

ticeable, but in 1919 we grew still something over 200,000 acres with an average yield per acre of about 10 1-2 bushels.
Vlhcat for home use should be more widely grown than at present. This is particularly true in those sections of the State where th e soil is suitable. Many have the idea that South Georgia cannot produce good wheat. Some of the best wheat fields in the State, during the war , wer e found as far south as Vidalia, Toombs county, on the famous r ed pebbly soils of that section. With moderate limits its production should b eincreased .

Year
1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874
~875
1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890

WHEAT-GEORGIA.

Acreage Acres
318,114 286,250 327,142 293,243 298 ,375 343 ,600 345,444 310,857 357,671 406,666 473 ,333 400,000 394,000 401,900 484 ,980 477,200 510,000 504,900 487 ,5 00 453,375 385,954 382,094 374,452 378,197 344,159

Yield P er

Acre Production

Bush.

Bush.

4.0

1,272,456

8.0 2,290,000

5.6 1,832,000

"7.4

2,170,000

8.0

2,387,000

5.0 1,718,000

9.0 3,109,000

7.0

2,176,000

7.3 2,611,000

7.5 3,050,000

6.0 2,840,000

9.5

3,800,000

7.0 2,758,000

9.0

3,617,100

6.3

3,055,374

6.1

2,933 ,000

7.5

3,812,900

5.1

2,574,900

6.4

3,130,000

6.2

2,817,000

4. .4

1,690,000

6.6 2,522,000

5.1

1,910,000

6.3

2,383,000

4.1

1,411,000 .

F arm Price
Cts.
189 168 164 131 132 149 153 161 138 131 123 132 118 126 136 163 108 120 105 109 105
95 110
98 110

F arm Value Dec. 1 Dollars
2,406,871 3,854,943 2,998,810 2,837,163 3,149,811 2,564,640 4 ,764 ,01 2 3,5 06 ,44 6 3,602,191 3,988,666 3,488,176 5,027,237 3, 247 ,944 4,557,546 4,155,30V 4,780,790
4,117,93~
3,089,880 3,286,500 3,070,530 1,774,500 2,395,900 2,101 ,000 2,334,988 1,552,157

69

1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 19 09 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 ]919

309,743 216,820 240,670 235 ,857 214,630
212,~4
173 ,824 260,736 297,239 550,674 370,996 284,531 299,958 291 ,370 305,298 316,107 297,000 240,000
93,000 141,000 145,000 132,000 140,000 140,000 325,000 334,000 244,000 280,000 240,000

7.5 6.8 7 .2 6.9 6.2 8.0 9.4 10.0 6.8 9.1 8.2 6.0 6.2 8.8 6.9 10.0 9.0 9.2 8.1 10.5 12.0 9.3 12.2 12.1 11.0 11.4 8.5 10.2 10.5

2,323,000 1,474,000 1,732,824 1,627,413 1 ,33 0,706 1,699,872 1 ,63 3,946 2,607,360 2,021 ,225 5,001,133 3,042,167 1,707,186 1,859, 740 2,564,056 2,106 ,55 6 3,161 ,070
2,670,00 2,208 ,000
753,000 1 ,480 ,000 1,740,000 1,228,000 1,708,000 1,694,000 3,575,000 3,808,000 2,074,000 2,856,000 2,520,000

110 90 90 76 82 89 103 98 98 95 94 98 96 126 107 102
115 121 145 130 114 122 120 134 129 186 290 . 266
263

2,555,379 1,326,938 1,559,542 1,236,834 1,091,179 1,512,886 1,682,96 2,555,213 1,980,800 4,760 ,5 76 2,859,637 1,673,042 1,785,350 3,230,711 2,254,015 3,224,291 3,074,000 2,672,000 1 ,092 ,000 1,924,000 .1 ,984, 000 1,498,000 2,050,000 2,270,000 4,612 ,000 7,083 ,000 6,015,000 7,597,000 6,628 ,000

RYE
Fannin and a few other counties of the extreme northern tier grow rye commercially. Since the introduction of the improved types, such as Abruzzi, the growing for seed has become quite common in many other counties. At present prices this is most profitable. Indeed many consider it preferable to wheat, not only on account of the money realized, but also because it will come through practically any season without winter killing. For
70

every acre <:>frye that is planted for grain, there are two planted for grazing. Perhaps no other pasture crop is as necessary for the profitable production of swine as rye, particularly in its season. A good patch should be found on every farm.

GEORGIA-RYE.

Year
1866 1867 1868 1.869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895

Yield Per

Price Farm Value

Acreage Acre Production Per Bu.

Dec. 1

Acres Bush.

Bush.

Cts.

Dollars

14,441 4.8 9,382 8.1

69,319 93 76,000 127

64,595 96,361

10,144 6.9

70,000 126

88,542

11,230 6.5

73,000 120

87,345

12,345 8.1

100,000 134

133,752

10,958 7.3

80,000 140

112,230

10,588 10.2

108,000 138

149,229

18,333 6.0

110,000 151

166,114

16,000 7.0

112,000 136

152,498

28,358

6.7

190,000 130

246,819

26,117 6.0

156,702 123

21,900 6.6

144,000 140

27,375 5.8

158,400 100

26,554 5.4

142,560 116

27,085

5.4

145,000 120

26,814 4.5 0 121,0 0 113

27,085 5.4

146,000 112

27,627 5.0

138,000 90

28,456 5.3

151,000 90

20,949 4.2

87,021 85

19,902 4.9

97,520 90

19,703 7.6

149,743 115

20,097 . 6.0

120,582 100

20,499 6.4

131,194 108

20,294 6.5

131,911 97

19,279 7.2

138,809 85

192,743 201 ,600 158,400 165 ,3 70 174 000 136,349 163,520 124,200 135,735
73,968 87,768 172,201 120,582 141,690 127,954 117,988

71

1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919

17,158 7.1

16,472 7.4

16,637 8.0

15,805 6.0

15,647 7.0

14,497 7.6

13,917 6.3

13,778 7.9

13,640 8.3

14,206 7.7

14,206 8.3

14,500 9.0

14,000 8.7

12,000 4.9

12,000 10.4

12,000

9.5

11,000 9.2

13,000 9.5

13,000 9.3

13,000 9.2

13,000 9.5

16,000

8.3

30,000 8.8

33,000 8.9

121,822 101 121,893 92 133,096 98
94,830 112 109,529 103 110,177 106
87,677 110 108,846 114 113,212 102 109,il86 109 117,910 105 130,000 125 122,000 12.5
60,000 150 125,000 140 114,000 138 101,000 140 124.000 135 121,000 150 120,000 140 124,000 160 133,000 270 264,000 210 294,000 272

123,040 112,142 130,434 106,210 112,815 116,788 96,445 124,084 115,476 119,231 123,806 163,000 152,000 90,000 175,000 157,000 141,000 167,000 182,000 168,000 198,000 359,000 554.000 800,000

SWEET POTATOES
The first complete record we have of the sweet potato crop was that of 1899. In this year about two million dollars worth uf sweet potatoes were produ ced. H.;ow far we have traveled in the last two decades is strongly apparent when we look at the figures for 1919. The past year over fourte en million dollars worth of sweet potatoes were produced.
rrhe causes for this vast increase may be attributed primarily to the effects of the boll weevil on th e cotton crop . With the arrival of that pest, farmers found it necessary to plant ever ything they needed at home and in addition some other staple money crop. Sweet potatoes fill ed this need very well.
72

With the increase in value of this crop, a great change took place in the varieties used, cultural methods and storage plan:. Under the very able leadership of the State and Federal Bureau of Markets, the Extension Service, and other educational agencies, great progress has taken place. All farmers are advised to plant at least enough for their own use and to secure reliable info rmation up on the comm ercial production.
MONEY IN SWEET POTATOES
A Ge01gia sweet )JOtato f ield ancl a baslret of "Yams."
73

Year 1868 1869.
1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1878 1879 1880 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 190Q 1901 ]902 ]903 1904 1905 1906

-
GEORGIA-SWEET POTATOES.

Yield Per

Price

Acrea~e

Acre 102
58 108 99 88 90 89
64

Production Per Bu. 62 92 59 62 64 57 53 59

100

76

48

102

45

90

65

69

53

71

52

98

44

76

48

72

52

90

44

84

47

82

43

86

45 .

89

81

87

41

78

41

59

43

60

45

105

71,000 72 5,088,000 49

71,000 85 6,035,000 46

72,000 86 6,192,000 48

73,000 81 5,913,000 53

74,000 89 6,586,000 51

74,000 67 4,958,000 70

77,000 80 6,160,000 55

78,000 83 6,474,000 65

74

Value
2,493 ,00C 2,776,00 2,972,00(
~,134,000
3,359,000 3,471 ,000 3,388,000 4,208,000

1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919

7!;1,000 95 7,505,000 65

82,000 86 7,052,000 58

85,000 88 7,426,000 62

85,000 83 7,055,000 65

81,000 81 6,561,000 73

81,000

90

7,290,000

66

83,000 87 7,221,000 68

79,000 85 6,715,000 69

95,000 85 8,075,000 61

94,000 . 80 7,520,000 81

125,000 93 11,625,000 105

. 130,000 92 11,960,000 125

142,000 92 13,064,000 110

4,878,000 4,090,000 4,604,000 4,586,000 4,790,000 4,811,000 4,910,000 4,633,000 4,926,000 6,091,000 12206,000 14,950,000 14,370.000

IRISH POTATOES

Georgia Irish potatoes belong to two distinct classes. 'l'he early or commercial crop of the Coastal Plain section and the medium early and late potatoes of the Piedmont. Chatham county very easily leads in commercial production with about 1,000 acres. Effingham is second.
.Attempts to grow potatoes on a large scale should be made only by those who have experience and capital. Through a iarge part of the .State potatoes for home use can be grown satisfactorily. In the upper third of the State the lowly "spud" is much more at home and there should be at least one-third of an acre on every farm. The present price of imported Irish potatoes would very quickly decline if our North Georgia farmers would take up this matter seriously. .At present the major portion of the potatoes used are shipped stock.

POTATOES-GEORGIA

Year
1866 1867 1868 1869

.Acreage .Acres 4,165 3,059 3,117 4,065

Yield Per

Price

.Acre Production Per Bu.

Bush.

Bush.

Cts.

62

258,221 54

101

309,000 44

102

318,000 110

61

248,000 111

Farm Value Dec .
Dollars 138,268 137,235 350,179 275,119

75

1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908

4,487

78

2,364 96

2195

92

2,590

78

2,271

70

5,000

68

350,000 120 227,000 128 202,000 112 202,000 106 159,000 98 340,000 105

5,150

67

5,000

64

4,800

92

8,407

35

8,827

45

9,268

61

9,175

67

9,175

63

9,083

65

9,355

52

10,291

62

6,163

73

6,225 . 72

6,474

74

6,539

70

6,539

74

6,539

52

6,277

58

5,524

55

5,137

52

5,651

54

5,594 46

5,762

68

9,078

64

8,715

58

8,628

73

8,542

70

8,627

65

8,627

77

10,000

83

10,000

78

345,000

92

320,000 111

441,600 110

294,245

60

397,231

65

565,348

86

615,000 104

578,000

94

590,000

95

486,000

90

638,000

90

449,899

65

448,200

95

479 ,076

80

457,730

80

483,886 92

340,028

81

364,066

71

303,820

75

267,124 100

305,154

75

257,324

83

391 ,8 16

72

580,992 106

505,470

90

629,844 94

597,940 107

560,755 112

664,279 110

830,000 100

780,000 110

76

421,005 289,874 227,228 213,904 156,276 355,711
316,812 355,200 485,760 176,547 258 ,200 486,199 539,600 543,344 560,500 437,400 574,238 292,434 425,790 383,261 366,181 445,175 275,423 258,487 227,865 267,12,1 228,866 213,579 301,698 615 ,852 454,923 592,053 639 ,796 628 ,046 730,707 830,000 858 ,000

/

1909

12,000 75

886,000 100

1910

12,000

82

984,000 105

1911

12,000

72

864,000 110

1912

12,000 78.

936,000 87

1913

12,000

81

972,000 105

1914

13,000

60

780,000 105

1915

16,000

65

1,040,000

99

1916

15,000

60

900,000 175

1917

19,000

84

1,596,000 . 195

1918

23,000

70

1,610,000 185

1919

23,000

70

1,610,000 217

886,000 1,003,000
950,000 814,000 1,021,000 819,000 1,030,000 1,575,000 3,112,000 2,978,000 3,494,000

PEANUTS
1 tobacco is the boll weevil baby, peanuts are his big brother. No crop can so easily and conveniently be used to replace cotton. ro expensive machinery is absolutely necessary, the cultivation is imple and the price is usually very good.
I the farmer will intelligently use his facilities and not rush the product to market when the mills have no storage space, he can make this a money crop year in and year out. It is unlikely that foreign peanuts can be shipped in sufficient quantities and cheaply enough to ever seriously injure our industry. 'l'.he entire coastal plain section is adapted to the production of this legume and indeed it can be grown on the soils of a lighter . class in upper Georgia.
Peanuts are used not only as a commercial or oil producing crop but are very valuable as forage. 'rhe nut itself is a very good grazing crop for hogs and the tops are splendid for cattle. The tops analize about the same as alfalfa, are just as digestible, and do not have the bad effect upon animals that sometimes occun from heavy and unaccustomed feeding of lucerne.
P eanuts wisely and conservatively planted will greatly assist in the change from all cotton to diversification and every farmer hould have at least a small patch of them. It is not recommended that very large acreages be planted the first season but enough should be grown to produce a small share of the cash income and to get experience in growing and handling the crop. Consult your educational agencies for individual advice.



77

Year 1916 1917 1918 1919

PEANUTS FOR HARVEST-GEORGIA.

Yield P er

Price Farm Value

Acreage Acre Production Per Bu.

Dec.

40,000 31.0 " 1,240,000 126

1,562,000

255,000 37.0

9,435,000 160

15,096,000

314,000 28.0

8,792,000 160

14 ,067 ,000

202,000 25.0

5,050,000 246

1 2 ,423 ,000

PRIZE-WINNING GEORGIA PEANUTS

7H

HAY

Nothing in our agricultural repertory is showing such a great and needed increase as this staple. From a value of less than a million dollars in 1866 the hay crop has risen to fifteen and one-half mmions recently.
A large part of this increase is due to the peanut. The tops, when threshing is completed, form a very great and valuable addition to our roughage. This was first noticeable in 1916 and reached its climax in 1918.
It is needless to remark that all our feed stuffs should be produced at home as this is the only safe and sane way of farming. The planters of southwest Georgia bear universal testimony ~) this and it will prove true over all territory where cotton must be grown under weevil conditions.

TAME HAY.

Year
1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880 1881 1882 1883 1884 1885

Yield-Per

Price Farm Value

Acreage Acre Production Per Ton

Dec. 1

Acres Tons

Tons

Dollars

51,610 .90

46,448 16.43

762,952

45,384 1.30

59,000 . 15.46

912,049

61,000 1.00

61,000 16-.29

993 ,973

32,876 1.46

48,000 17.00

815,848

41,044 1.34

55,000 20.94

1,151,840

. 12,000 1.50

18,000 20.74

373,273

11,972 1.47

17,600 22.42

394,558

18,571 1.05

19,500 18.88

368,094

15,909 1.10

17,500 20.14

352,367

15,714 1.40

22,000 15,41

339,111

18,153 1.30

23,600 13.50

318,632

17,440 1.25

21,800 15.56

339,300

23,000 1.73

37,790 13.08

520,606

22,436 1.56

35,000 14.59

510,650

18,431 1.88

34,650 16.00

554,400

12,103 1.25

15,129 17.24

260,824

15,129 1.20

18,155 10.50

190,627

15,583 1.20

18,700 13,50

252,450

15,128 1.30

19,668 13.~ 0

261,584

16,642 1.00

16,642 13.84

230,325

79

1886 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 1893 1894 1895 1896 1897 1898 1899 1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919

33,000 39,600 39,996 63,834 168,985 162,226 163,848 162,2l0 150,855 147,838 137,489 123,740 . 113,841 109,287 112,566 96,791 88,080 88,961 89,851 88,054 88 ,054 95,000 87,000 213,000 213,000 213,000 234,000 250,000 250,000 300,000 400,000 594,000
683,0~0
557,000

1.06 1.20 1.20 1.09 1,.35 1.17 1.35 1.32 1.16 1.60 1.38 1.35 1.75 1.45 1.69 1.46 1.36 1.53 1.52 1.50 1.65 1.75 1.75 1.01 1.40 1.35 1.35 1 .40 1.35 1.15 1.15 1.03 .90 1.10

34,980 47,520 47,995 69,769 228,130 189,804 221,195 214,117 174,992 236 ,541 . 189,735 167,049 190,222 158,466 190,237 141,315 119,789 136,110 136,574 132,081 145,289 166,000 152,000 215,000 298,000 288,000 316,000 350,000 . 338,000 345,000 460,000 612,000 615,000 613,000

13.00 14.92 13 .46 13 .52 14.25 13.50 11.80 12.06 12.38 10.90 11.05 13.00 11.75 13.15 12.75 14.33 13 .40 15.15 15.14 15.75 15.75 18.00 14.35 15.80 16.40 17.00 17.00 17.90 16.20 15.10 16.20 20.00 23.50 25 .30

80

454,740 708;998 646 ,013 943,277 3,250,852 2,562,354 2,610,101 2,582,251 2,166,401 2,578,297 2,096,572 2,171 ,637 2,340,858 2,083 ,828 2,425 ,522 2,025,044 1,605 ,17 3 2,062.066 2,067,730 2,080,276 2,288,302 2,988,000 2,181,000 3,397,000 4,887,000 4,896 ,000 5,372,000 6,265,000 5,476,000 5,210,000 7,452,000 12,240,000 14,452,000 15,509,000

Year 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918

GEORGIA WILD HAY.

Acreage 16,000 16,000 16,000 15,000 15,000 14,000 14,000 14,000 13,000 13,00

Yield Per

Price

Ac.re Production Per Ton

1.09

17,000

1.30

21,000

1.30

21,000

1.30

20,000

1.35

20,000

1.15

16,000 13.00

1.20

17,000 14.00

1.25

18,000 16.00

1.10

14,000 19.70

.91

12,000 21.50

Value
208,000 238,000 288,000 276,000 258,000

SYRUP CROPS
The sugar shortage doesn't worry the Georgia farmer who '' lives at home.'' When sugar runs out he is able to use ''Ion~ sweetening.'' No taffy in the world will compare with that made from first class sorghum or from our Georgia sugar cane.
In the Piedmont section, a great number of farmers have sorghum patches and every farmer should have one. In South Georgia almost every planter has a cane patch. This varies )n size from one-twentieth of an acre to acreages as large as one hundred. The centers of the commercial syrup production are Cairo, in Grady County; Bainbridge, Decatur County; Thomasville, Thomas County; Quitman, Brooks County, and Valdosta, Lowndes County. There are many small places which ship very great quantities of sugar cane syrup annually. Cairo, the leading shipping point, runs above 25,000 barrels in good seasons.
Early advices seem to indicate that we are going to forge ahead this year and keep Georgia on the map. Florida is doing the same thing and we certainly inust not be outdone by our neighbors.
A glance at the production per acre, especially the valuation column, will show that sugar cane is one of our ''high money'' crops. Commercial growers have no trouble in getting two or three hundred gallons per acre, although the State average is !.:omewhat lower.
81

We do not hesitate to go on record as saying that we can and should supply a greater proportion of the country's sugar proucts. The market has already been developed and assistance can .be obtained from the State and Federal Departments in grading and selling them.

Year
1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919

SORGHUM FOR SYRUP-GEORGIA.

Yield Per

Price

Acreage Acre Production Per Gal.

Gals.

7,800 95

740,000 47

7,900 94

743,000 48

7,900

90

. 711,000

50

7,900 95

750,000 49

7,600 106

806,000 50

7,200 108

778,000

4~

8,000 85

680,000

7,600 105

798,000

12,000 96 1,152,000 73

15,000 91 1,365,000. 89

16,000 92 1,472,000 102

Value
348,000 357,000 356,000 368,000 403,000 ::381,000
841,000 1,215,000 1,501,000

TOBACCO DATA
Tobacco grown in the State of Georgia may be classified into three main types: First, shade tobacco and wrapper tobacco of Southwest Georgia; second, the "bright leaf" tobacco of Central and South Central Georgia; lastly, the patch or home consumption tobacco of North Georgia.
Before the great increase in the tobacco area took place, the shade tobacco comprised the principal crop. About 1916 the " bright leaf" tobacco began to be planted and increased continuously. During the past season the jump was tremendous. This resulted in raising our tobacco acreage in the State from three or four thousand to over 30,000 acres, making us a major tobacco growing State.
82

Year 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 1871 1872 1873 1874 1875 1881 1882 1899

G1owing 1'obacco in Ge01'gia Undet Shade .

TOBACCO-GEORGIA.

Yield P er

Price

Acreage Acre Production P er Lb.

1,912 625

1,195,113 22.3

2,504 515

1,290,000 21.5

2,071 585

1,212,000 22.3

2,666 375

1,000,000 15.4

Value 265,950 277.221 270,536 153,724

857 350 700 500 457 750 502 580 2,454 550 1,004 242 1,034 254 2,304 480

300,000 350,000 343,000 291,000 1,350,000 242,758 262,179 1,105,600

19.2 15.8 19.1 11.7 20.7 14.0 14.0 11.9

83

57,734 55,182 65,373 34,112 278,945 33,986 36,705 131,566

1900 1901 1902 1903 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919

2,066 1,990 2,050 2,030 1,868 2,036 3,000 3,700 2,775 2,000 1,600 1,200 1,400 1,800 1,900 1,700 1,300 1,600 4,500 31,000

495 494 670 640 650 525 675 860 975 734 680 900 830 1,000 1,000 680 1,180 1,000 800 530

1,023,336 982,691
1,373,500 1,299,200 1,214,200 1,068,900 2,025,000 3,182,000 2,705,625 1,486,000 1,088,000 1,080,000 1,162,000 1,800,000 1,900,000 1,496,000 1,534,000 1,600,000 3,600,000 16,430,000

15.0 18.0
9.0 15 .0 20.6 17.0 30.0 40.0 35.0 34.0 20.0 28.0 30.0 31.0 25 .0 23.0 27.0 57.0 46.0. 21.5

148,431 176,972 260,965 194,880 250,125 181,713 607 ,5 00 1,273,000 946,969 505,000 218,000 302,000 349,000 558,000 475,000 344,000 414,000 912,000 1,656,000 3,532,000

RICE.
This crop has declined from one of our major products to a very small factor. The causes are principally competition from r the irrigated regions of Texas, Louisiana and Arkansas, high cost of labor, September storms, aud the difficulties encountered in keeping the fields free from rice birds during harvest. The actual decline is from a production of over a million bushels in 1859 to about twenty-nine thousand bushels in 1919.
84

Year 1859 1869 1879 ]889 1899 1904 1905 1906 1907 1908 1909 1910 1911 1912 1913 1914 . 1915 1916 1917 1918 1919

RICE-GEORGIA.

Yield Per

Price

Acreage Acre Production Per Bu.

1,166,837

34,973
18,126
21,998
9,000 26.0 3,053 32.0 3,745 23.0 2,400 34.0 3,500 25.0 6,400 23.1 4,000 22.0 1,450 26.8
900 30.0 500 32.0 1,100 28.0 900 29.3
BOO 20.0
900 30.0 1,200 26.0 1,200 24.4

495,053 563,771 323,476 401,963 234,000 97,696 86,135 81,000 87,500 149,000 88,000 39,000 27,000 16,000 31,000 26,000 16,000 27,000 31,000 29,000

66 102 95 105 109 87 75 77 90 83 89 88 87 195 175 275

Value
154,440 99,650 81,828 85,000 95,375
130,000 66,000 30,000 24,000 13,000 28,000 23,000 14,000 53,000 54,000 80,000

WATERMELONS
One of Georgia 's chief claims to distinction is the watermelon. Occasionally other states may produce a few acres more, but none ever surpass our crop in size and quality. Many people who can scarcely name one other Georgia product think of watermelons the moment Georgia is mentioned. Several counties grow over a thousand acres and some almost reach the two thousand mark. Brooks, Colquitt, Emanuel, Houston and Thomas are the leading producing counties.
85

During the melon season solid train loads of melons are a common sight. These go to all northern markets but perhaps New York and Chicago are the principal ones. During the past season the melon recovered from its war-time slump and something like 30,000 acres were planted for shipment. In addition to this commercial acreage there was doubtless as many more planted for home use. With the aid of the State Bureau of Markets most of the growers netted exceedingly handsome profits last season. 1t is yet too early to predict what the present year will bring forth but there is no reason why we should not have as many or more melons than ever before.
Anyone who is interested in this crop and who is r easonably close to shipping facilities would do well to confer with the State, Federal and Railway Experts in regard to planting and marketing.
WATERMELONS MAKE MONEY FOR M A NY GROWERS
86

CANTALOUPES.

The flavor of the Georgia cantaloupe cannot be excelled. In

size and appearance, some of the market men think that the irri-

gated product from California and Arizona is superior. There

can be no comparison as to taste. Ou~ is far ahead.

This crop r equires the greatest skill in production, grading and

s hipment. Owing to the . fact that the southwestern irrigated

.sections can produce "loupes" a little earlier, our acreage has

suffered. There is still room for an increase in acreage for nearby

markets and our expert growers can give any section ''a run for

their money,'' even With the advantage they have for early season

.and certain moisture.

-

ACREAGE OF GEORGIA TRUCK CROPS, 1918-1919.

COUNTY

I

I Early

1I W19a1t8' mIe1l o91n9s

I C'loupes II. Potatoes 191811919 191811919

_BAapcopnl i.n. .g. . ..... ..... .. .. !

1781 10011 301 .. ..
......................

1.. ..
, ... .

Baldwin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 205 250 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . _
.Bartow ................. 1. .... I 751 .... 1.... 1.... I .. .

Ben Hill ......... .. .... 1 .... j 102 . .. . .,. Berrien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 669 1,159 9 . . . . . . . . . ...

Bibb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 272 426 101 . . . . . .. .

Brooks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,522 2,001 108 15 . .. .

Bryan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 312 495 . . . . . . . . . . . .

Bulloch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 687 2,256 . . . . 4 .. . .

Burke................... 50 40, .... .. . 1 ...... . Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 10 . . . . 50 . . . . . .. .

Candler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .

Chatham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81 1201 ....... . 1,500 1,000
I.... ...... .. Clay ......... . .... ...... I 30I. . . . . . . . . I.... . ... ... .
Coffee .... ....... .. .... . \ 3601 392 . ... Colquitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,0151 3,143]. . . . . .. .

Columbiai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60 601 . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. .

Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 3821 4501 .... .. .. ] .. ..

1 .. .I........ Crisp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 165 .... 1. . . . . . . . ,... .

Dade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

90 ... . I.. .

Decatur ..... .. . .. ..... .. 1 1501 85\ .... ).. .. .. ..

nodge . ......... .... ..... I 153 112 541. . . . . . . . . .. .

Dooley ... .. ...... .... .. . 1..... I 1301 271 501 .. .. .. ..
Dougherty .. , .. ........ . I 1251 230 .... I 201 .... I... .

"Early ....... .. ....... .. 1 301 251 .... 1.... 1.. .. 1.. ..

87

Effingham . ...... ....... 1 1661 1191 .... 1 .... 1 3141 350

Emanuel .. . ... ... . .. .... J 1,000 ..... J . . .. J .... j J .. . .

Evans . ... . .. . ......... . I 551 1501.... I ... 1... . I .. .

l!-,annin ...... ..... . . . . . . j J 20 1 . ... j 1.. .. J . . . .

j ... j... Gilmer . ................. j 201..... j . I .. . 1... J .. . .

Glynn .... . .... .. . ...... 1 971 . . . . .

I. . . .

J ... .

Gordon ... . ..... . .. . .. . . j. . . . . 70 . . . . j. . . . . . . . j.. . .

881 .... Grady .. ...... ......... . j 3851 91 1.... I 52 J.... I .. .

H arris .. ..... . ....... ... !. . . . .

1. .. . , . ... j .

Ho~ton ..... Irvin ... .. ..

. ...... .......

... ...

. .

. .

j-1,982 I. . . ..

I

3,741 125

J asper .... ... ........... 1 60 , . . . . .

. .

211 l .. 1 . . . ... ....

~

. . . . . . . .

j .. .
j. .. ....

J eff Davis ..... .. ..... . . 1 ..... I
J efferson ............. . . 1 401 J enkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
Laurens ............ .. ... I 200

40 . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . ..
25 .. .. 1.. .. j.. .. i .. ..
75 . . .. I' .... I.. .. 1.. ..
550 . . . . . . . . . . . . ,... .
100 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Lee .. . .... .. . . .. . .. ..... 1 352 446 24 45 1.. . 1 . . .
: t~~~~ts .:: :: ::::: ::::: I 505 687 2.5.8 42ol:::: : :::

McDuffie ....... .. . ...... 1. . . . . 110 .. . . J. . . . . . .. j... .

Macon 00 Madison . Marion . .

. . .

. ...... .. ..... . ... .........

. . .

. . ... ..... .....

1 9321
1. . . . . Jl
I .....

1
..

,050
.. .
40

..
I ..
.

00
..
..

1j0.0. .... j ....

100 .. j.. ..
I ....

J ..
I .. I ..

. .
. . . .

I !.. .. Mitchell .. . ......... . ... . I 1,272\ 1,719 720 1,263 1.... J ... .

Montgomery ..... . ......

40 1

I.... [... .

j .. . Ogleth orpe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101 90 , .... J . .. . I.. .

I.. ... I.... Pickens ... .. . ...... . .... ! .....

! ....

J .. .. .. ..

j .. . Pul aski ... . .. .. . ... .. ... I 100 401.. .. .. .. I....

1.. . Polk ....... . .. . . . .... . .. 1..... .. ......

1 .. .. . . . . .

Rabun ... .. ... . . .. ...... i 501. . .. . I.. ...... I. . .. 1 .. . .

j ... . Randolph ....... ... . . ... 1.... . 1.... . I..... ... I... . J ... .
Richmond ............... J , 501 20j .. .. 1 .. . . I .. .

Schley ... . ..... .. . ..... . 1 3391 260 , 91 .. .. I. . . . . . . .

Screven 00 ........ .... 00.1 159 239 1.... 1.... !.... 1.. ..

Spalding ....... .. ..... .. 1. . . . . I. . . . . !. . . . I. . . . I. . . . . .. .

Stuart ... . ......... . .. .. 1... . . I .. . .. 1.. .. 1 . ... I . ... 1.. . .
Sumter . . .... .......... .. I 7551 5721 361 25 1. . . . 1... . Taylor .................. I 571 1551 .... !.... I .. . . 1... . Telfair ... . ... . . .. ....... I 751 601 811.... 1.. .. I.' . . . Terrell . .. ............... I. . . . . ~ . . . . . I. . . . I. . . . I. . . . I... . 'l'h()mfls ....... . .. . ... .. . I 1,9521 2,5021 . . .. I 1201.... I... . 'l'ift .... . .. . .......... . . I 9621 1.5741 571 . ... I .... I .. . . 'l'oombs ................. I 201.... . 1.... 1.... I... . 1.. ..

Tnrner . .. .. . . . . ......... I 3751 701 1 1531 201.. .. I... .

Twiggs .......... oo .. 00 .. 1 255 1 5151 .. .. 100 .. 1.... 1.. .. Wfllker 00 .. ... ......... 00 30!..... 1.... 1.... 1.... J .. ..

88

~:~~:gt~~ ::::::: :: : :I' 5I' ~gl :: :: I:: :: I:: :: Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60/. ... /.. . . /.. .
Wheeler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15 141 ... ."/ .. . . /.. . Wilcox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . /.... . j . . . . . . . . .

/ . .. . /. . .. / .. . . // .. .... ..

Wilkinson . . . . ....... . . .. / 752 870 . . . .

/ . . .

Worth ... ... . ......... . . ! 916! 910 270 250 . . . . .. . .

'l'be State .... . . ... .. ... /~~i/~3~~12:3"741l,814!1i.~so

COMMERCIAL WATERMELONS.

_ ___ _ r------ ...............

....-

'\.

S . "CAROLINA

r
A LA.

F"LORIOA
-"'OTF' The figu res appearing In each coun ty in dicate the n u mber of acres socfliwclattienrfmoermloantsiopnlacnotveedrifnogr tshheippmr eesnetn, t wsehaicsohn.were report eo. in 1919. We
1

COMMERCIAL CANTALOUPES

T E 'N N , ALA.

N C A ROLl NA
,.-- - - ----.
_.,
S . CAROLINA
N.
t
i

F" L. 0 . R I 0 A
NOT!!' The figures appearing in each county indicate the number of acres of c&.ntAioupes planted for shipment, which were reported in 1919. We solicit Information cover 'ng the present season.
90

PEACHES
'l'he Georgia peach has a reputation which extends from coast to coast. In rank of importance it exceeds most other Georgia crops. In a good season and when prices are high, it will rank fourth or fifth ,.exceeding in value, wheat, oats, peanuts, tobac9o, etc. Such was the case last year.
Visitors to the State should make it a point to see the l<'ort Valley or Cornelia section before leaving. When the trees are in l;lloom no pictures of far Japan nor any conception of fairyland can be more beautl.ful. Mile after mile. of pink extends before th e view. In a recent interview with a motion picture representative, he voiced the thought which has often been in our mind that at blossom-time the Fort Valley section is one of the most beautiful in the world.
Other Georgia fruits are of considerable importance but do not compare with the peach. The map will show the genernl Jo. cation of the commercial sections.
91

PEACHES
Black indicates mea g1eatest p1oduction.
Unshaded mea least produc tion Aor un?"eportedQ.
Gmdations between shown by intermediate shadings.
MAPS BY STATE DEPilR1'MEN1' OJ!' EN'l'OMOLOUY .
92

PECANS
In a few more years when the huge commercial pecan groves of South Georgia come into bearing, the State will outrank any in the Union in the production of this valuable nut.
Close to five million pounds were produced the past season and this is steadily increasing. A California nut expert who recently made a tour of the groves in ordm: to see what competition the California walnut might have, went away with the firm impression that the Georgia pecan would become a formidable commercial rival of the English walnut. The California growers appreciate this very keenly and have formed associations to promote the sale of their product. Our own nut growers have started like combinations and hope to secure remunerative prices when the nut finally reaches its high point of production.
The pecan offers one of the very best solutions for the big land owners as to what to do with his plantation when the cotton boll weevil seriously affects it. The small farmer can well afford 5 or 10 acres of trees and these will eventually make him much more than cotton ever did. Of course, the same can be said of all fruit and nut orchards.
93

PECAN . Map by State Depa,l"tment of Entomology.
Black indicates aTea great est production.
Unshacled aTea least lnoduction AO!" unreportedQ.
Graddations between shown by intermediate shadings.
94

LARGE PROFITS IN GEORGIA PECANS
THE POPULAR PECAN. The pecan nut has been
steadily growing in favor. 'l'en years ago seven counties- four in southern and three in middle Georgia-had 4,196 bearing t r ees; the average yield per tree was 24.4 pounds. In Mcintosh 376 trees averaged per tree 67.4 potmds of nuts.
That was a decade ago, and the entire crop was 355,000 pounds. In 1918 the crop totalled 2,728,000 pounds.
Ther e are fifty duly approved vari eties of pecan nuts, from which you may make a selection best adapted to th e locality you ch oose.
95

GEORGIA LAND
There is a saying that Georgia land increases in value every time the sun sets. While this optomistic statement may hava some minor exceptions an examination of the facts are convincing. The average valuation of farm land in Georgia is now more than six times what it was 20 years ago ($5.25 per acre), and very much more than double what it was 10 years ago ($13.75 per acre).
During the past season the rise was absolutely unprecedented. Practically all sections of the State shared this increase, although land sales were greatest and prices highest in that part of the State not seriously affected by the boll weevil during the season of 1919. In estimating the true worth of land there are a number of important considerations. Among these: Net income on the investment per acre, convenience or accessibility to markets, ease with which the soils can be cultivated and variety of products which can be raised. In all of these respects our section is singularly favored.
While labor is much scarcer than formerly, the prices paid are still far below that in other agricultural states.
Many newcomers and even a large number of our own citizens think of Georgia as completely and thickly settled. This is far from the truth. Nearly one-third of the State is'' new country.'' Cut-over lands once considered scarcely worth farming have been proved equal to any in productiveness. During the past ten years the movement of population into the splendid and easily tilled Coastal Plain has been very marked. Industries, such as hog raising, pecan growing and dairying have made very marked progress. Some of these lands which could be previously purchased at 2 or 3 dollars an acre have risen to 40 or 50 and in some cases even more.
A glance at the tables appended will show you about what land is worth. In one column is the returned valuation of land p er acre and the next the true values estimated by the Tax Commissioner, Mr. Fullbright, in his bulletin of January 1, 1920. These taken together will give you a very fair and ('Onservative idea of present Georgia land values.
96

Returned Estimate value per of aere a.1g. real
1919 value

Returned Estimate value per of aere avg. real
1919 value

Appling . .... . $ 7.18 $15.00 Cook 11.70 0 0 30.0(

(

Atkinson . .. ... 4.88 10.00 Coweta 11.52 0 0. 35.0[

Bacon 7.90 0

20.00

Crawford







0



5.92

25.00

Baker 5.30 0







15.00 Crisp . ... .. .. . 8.31

35.00

Baldwin 0 . 6.81

Dade 30.00





0



0



7.62

30.00

Banks 8.32 0. 0 30.00 Dawson .. ..... 4.52 18.00

Barrow .... . . . 11.82 50.00 Decatur . ... .. 6.56 18.00

Bartow 0 0 . 12.27 35.00 DeKalb . . 0 . 33.45 100.00
Ben Hill .. . .. . 7.80 25.00 Dodge . .. . .. .. 10.29 35.00

Berrien

0

0

8.94

40.00 Pooly . . . ..... . 10.97

35.00

Bibb ....... . .. 24.50 75.00 Dougherty ..... 8.10 27.50

Bleckley

0

0



11.70

Brooks .. . .. . . . 12.21

35.00 Douglas ....... 10.39 30. 00 Early 0 9.49

25.00 20.00

Bryan 4.30 0 0 0.
Bulloch . ...... 7.68
Burke . . . . . . . . 6.53

15.UO Echols . .. .... . 3.46
35.00 Effingham 0 5.63
30.00 Elbert . ... ... . 7.53

10.00 20.00 50.00

Butts .. .. .... . 8.28 40.00 Emanuel . . .. . . 7.60 25.00

Calhoun 0 6.82 20.00 Evans 0 0. 7.46 35.00

Camden .. .. 0. 3.50

Fannin 7.50



0. 0 0

5.68

20.00

Campbell 0 . 0 . 10.95 Candler 0 0 0. 0. 8.69
Carroll ....... 10.89

50.00 Fayette ....... 10.54
35.00 Floyd . ....... 12.11
40.00 Forsyth .... . .. 8.40

50.00 35.00
c:J U. UIJ

Catoosa 10.74 0 30.00 Franklin . ... . . 9.71 Sv.OO
Charlton 0 0. 2.05 7.00 Fulton . ... . . . 85 .53 150.00

Chatham . . .... 37.85 Chattahoochee 5.63 Chattooga 0 9.84

75.00 Gilmer 0 0 . 2.85
12.50 Glasscock .. ... 5.46 50.00 Glynn . .. ..... 7.02

15.00 27.50 15.00

Cherokee . . ... . 7.01 40.00 Gordon 0 0 . 11.75 35.00

Clarke 23 .69 0 0 70.00 Grady 0 0 0 6.21 25 .00

Clay Green





0 0



5.66

18.00

0



0 0

9.84

45 .00

.

Clayton 15.56 0 . 0

50.00

Gwinnett



0 0 0

.

12.13

45.00

Clinch 2.33 0 8.00 Habersham . . . 8.55 32.t.'D

Cobb 16.07 0 70.00 Hall ... ... .. .. 10.92 40.00

Coffee



0.

0



6.54

20.00

Hancock



0

0 0

0

7.67

35.00

Colquitt 0 0. 8.94

30.00

Haralson





0



8.69

25 .00

Columbia

7.20 30.00 Harris 0 0 . 5.47 10.00

97
-

Hart 8055









0 0.

Heard 5095 0
Henry ...... . . 9000

Houston 0

0

0 0

8008

Irwin 0. 0000000 7085

Jackson . 000000 10.33

Jasper 00000000 5095

Jeff Davis .. 0. 5o93

Jefferson 000000 9o17

Jenkins 0000000 6.64

Johnson 0000000 6052

Jones 00. 00000 4080

{laurens. o00000 12069

Lee 0. 0.. 000000 7012

Liberty . . . . . . . 3061

Lincoln .. ... 0. 6028

Lowndes 0. 0 9o42

Lumpkin 000000 4036

Macon 6067 0
Madison .. . ... 8096

Marion o0000000 4060

McDuffre 0 0 6073

Mcintosh .. 000. 3.41

Meriwether 0000 9068

Miller 7050 0

Milton .. 000000 11063

Mitchell 0. 0 0 7059

Monroe 7037 0

Montgomery 00 9.20

Morgan . 000000 10o22

Murray

0. 0. 0

7.44

Muscogee





0 00

39095

Newton ..... . . 12078

Oconee ..... 0. 8087

Oglethorpe 0 12.55

Paulding 0

8063

Pickens 0

3090

Pierce 6020



0 0.

Pike 10003 0

30000 15 000 50000 40000 25000 55 .00 30000 20 .00 30000 30000 25000 25000 40oOe 20 000 8000 35000 30000 15 .00 30000 60.00 12050 32050
8.00 30 .00 15000 30000 25000 45.00 35 .00 55000 40000 80000 50o00 60000 50.00 20 000 20000 12050 40000

Polk 11064 0

Pulaski 0 .

0

0

9010

Putnam 0 0 8007

Quitman 0

0

4o12

Rabun) 6004 0

Randolph 0 6098

Richmond

15 013 0



Rockdale o. 0000 13030

Schley 6039 0 0.
Screven ...... 4090

Spalding 000000 15034

Stephens . 00000 8065

Stewart 0. . 000 6051
Sumter ... ..... 12008 Talbot ........ 4020

Taliaferro 000oo 8010

Tattnall 0000000 8o21

Taylor 00o00o00 4o52

Telfair 00000000 10067

Terrell 0000: 000 9060

Thomas. 000000 10007

Tift 0 0

9.18

Toombs 9o09 0
Towns ........ 6021

Treutlen . ..... 10o13

Troup 7098 0

Turner 8o97 0 0 0

Twiggs 5032

0 0.

0 0.

Union 3084

0

Upson 8.20 0 0

Walker 0. 0 12037

Walton 0 10060

Ware 6089 0 0. 0.

Warren 00oo0o0 5030

Washington 000 5085

Wayne 8.50 0 0

Webster . . . . 0. 8008

Wheeler 0000000 7071

White 4061

0 0 0

2500( 35 000 35000 15000 15000 20 000 40o00 50000 20 .00 30000 50.0( 30oOC 17.5( 60.00 8.00 25 000 30000 25000 35 000 40o00 30.00 35 000 35 000 15o00 30000 35 000 35o00 25000 12000 22050 35 000 65 000 16o00 25000 30.00 18000 20.00 30o00 20o00

98

TheNewWay
Plowing With Tractor on a Georgia Farm
99

Whitfield Wilcox Wilkes

8.92 30.00 Wilkinson . .. . . 4.79 20.00 7.84 35.00 Worth ....... . 8.32 35.00 7.15 50.0()

LAND VALUES PER ACRE-GEORGIA.

Average ot poor plow lands
1915 1916 $16.00 1917 18.00 1918 20.00 1919 24.50 1920 30.00

Average of good plow lands
$32.00 35.50 40.00 49 .30 63 .00

Average of all plow lands
$24.00 27.50 28.00 37.50 46.00

Average val-:: Average-value ue-per
per acr e with acre without improvem ents improvements

$24.65

$14.89

27.50

18.00

30.00

21.30

34.00

25.00

45.20

32.00

57 .00

39.00

Averages returned by correspondents of the Co-operative Crop Reporting Service of the State, numbering 15 to the county about March 1st.

TWO-HORSE MACHINERY
Early indications are that the limiting factor in Georgia production this year will -be labor. Not only is labor scarce but it is hard to handle and wages are high. In this emergency we wish to call the attention of the Georgia farmers to the very muc!~ greater amount of land which can be cultivated by one man i1 he has improved facilities.
The tables furnished by the U. S. Cotton Specialist for all States bring out this point with exceptional clearness. For ex ample, in Texas 85.6 of the farmers use two horse machinery while in Georgia only 7 per cent use it. The result is that th<J average acreage that can be handled per man is almost double that of Georgia.
100
J

A careful study of the figures app"-ud ed is earnestly recommended.

STATE

Virginia ...... .. 1 4.7

5.1

North Carolina ... I 8.9

13.3

South Carolina ... 1 12.3

13.6

Georgia ......... J 11.9

16.7

6.6

10.1

5.2

9.1

2.7

8.1

5.2

7.0

Florida ......... . 5.8

7.5

Alabama .... . ... I 9.7

13.3

Mississippi .. . .. .. I 10.6

14.3

3.5

3.8

2.7

6.1

9.0

27.5

Louisiana ....... . 11.6

14.0

3.0

4.0

Texas ........... ! 19.6

35.2

76 .5

85.6

Arkansas .. ..... . 1 11.6

16.4

17.5

36.0

Tennessee ........ 1 9.7

13.0

26.8

53.5

I Oklahoma . .... . . I 12.5

23.8

Missouri ........ I 11.8

17.1

69.8 68.0

89.5 94.1

California . ....._.I

I 6.0

10.0

10.0

VALUE GEORGIA PORKER 1909 $3.50 VALUE JAN. 1, 1920, $17.50
To the man who thinks in terms of dollars and cents, nothing will be more convincing of Georgia's great progress in the livestock industry than the comparison of the razor-back of 1909 with the square-shouldered, dish-nose grazer of 1919.
At the time of the last census, the Empire State had about one million seven hundred and eighty thousand bogs of all kinds. At the time of inventory of 1919 there were on hand approximately three million forty-three thousand head.
A comparison of the total valuation shows an increase from fmir million two hundred ninety thousand to fifty-three million two hundred fifty-two thousand. In other words, our hogs are now worth practically ten times what they were 10 years ago. increase in price and increase in number. If one -were to plat

101

Money in Georgia Hogs
1. "Uncle Billy" and his prize hog. 2. A prize i//~~//W///m//////////a:.:~t;;t).#H////////////W//////N~ winning p e n a t t h e Southeastern fair. 3 Pals at the fait. 4 Ready for the judges. 5 A cool corner in an Atlanta packing plant.
102

a graph or chart showing these things by separate lines, they would be almost parallel. Great advance has been made in all directions.
The period of greatest increase followed the weevil infestation of 1914. Previous to this many counties such as Brooks, Thomas and Dec.atur, grew large numbers of hogs and even put up pork for sale, but these counties were the exception rather than the rule. They furnished, however, a demonstration to the newly infested regions of what could be accomplished in producing home-cured hams and bacon.
The disastrous price of cotton, the money panic and general disorganization following the outbreak of the war, made it imperative that the farmers adopt whatever means possible to produce home supplies. All of the missionary work which had been done by the Demonstrative Service, Pig Clubs, Veterinary D~ partments, and others along this line, brought important returns.
The -increase of hogs in southwest Georgia was great enough to raise the State swine population over 10 percent. A large area went into hog raising, increasing with the progress of the cotton pest.
At that time a local packing plant was opened at Moultrie, which furnished an outlet for the farmer's surplus. The rush of hogs to slaughter far outdistanced the anticipation of the founders of this industry. During the main killing months the plant was swamped with stock and it was able to run much longer than expected. Each season the jam at the slaughter pens was greater, and the killing season grew longer. Very soon other plants were established at Waycross, Tifton, Macon and Statesboro. The abbatoirs in neighboring states got a great deal of the overflow. Andalusia, Alabama, Jacksonville, Florida, Richmond, Virginia, and even St. Louis packed Georgia hogs. The plant at Atlanta began handling increased numbers and is now one of the leading packing plants in the State.
In addition to those mentioned above, huge stock yards are planned for. Port Wentworth, near Savannah. In addition to the big killing establishments, many towns have established local r efrigerating plants where the nearby farmers can kill and store their surplus if they do not want to smoke it at home.
While these commercial plants are perhaps the best indices of
103

what the State is doing along these lines, many people think the most telling criteria are the displays to be seen rat our fairs. Comparing the stock shown at these with that exhibited five or six years ago, is a revelation. We now have herds of swine equal to any in the world in some breeds and can make a creditabl ~ showing in all breeds.
Experts tell us that pork can be produced in this State more cheaply than almost any other in the Union. All over the Coastal Plain, peanuts, velvet beans and cowpeas have become stapl~ grazing crops. The soils of North Georgia are slightly differ!=lnt but there is plenty of land of suitable type for grazing and this together with the higher crop production in these regions make pork producing very profitable.
The northern end of the State lagged behind the southern until the fall of 1916. From this period increases which were formerly confined to South Georgia began to be manifest in the Piedmont. 1917-18 witnessed similar conditions. Some temporary setback was expected by the reduction of forage and ceeral areas in order to put in cotton in 1919, but this was partially offset by fencing and bermuda pasturage.
Now that the weevil has practically completed his infestation, we naturally look for renewed enthusiasm in pig production. It would Well pay every county to adopt the slogan
''SPEND A THOUSAND-SAVE A MILLION.''
The idea of this is that a thousand dollars per county put into young thoroughbred shoats will eventually save a million dollars loss from boll weevil in cotton. As the agency responsible for calculating the increase and value of farm products, we have noticed nothing more remarkable than the increase in value of these animals following weevil infestation and the rapidity with which those counties recovered, which adopted intelligent and far-sighted plans to combat the pest.
104

GEORGIA GROWS TWO FLEECY STAPLES
The Empire State, second of the great cotton division of the South, is never thought of as a wool producer, yet it furnishes four hundred and eighteen thousand pounds, worth at present valuation about two hundred and ninety-two thousand dollars. Compared with the great range sections of the west this is a mere bagatelle, but as a minor and very profitable side-line it is worth considering. It is also well up with our neighbors. It outranks the output of South Carolina and is only a little below that of North Carolina, Florida and Mississippi.
For eight years after the census the number of sheep in the State constantly dwindled. A better understanding of the causes of this decrease can be had by consulting the map showing the three separate Georgia sections. It will be noted that the areas of greatest production are along the north line and in a broad belt across South Georgia. Between these two lies the major part of the State, comprising most of the cultivated area, which has few "woolies." To put it succinctly, we have two range sections, the northern or mountain, and the southern or flatwoods, with an intervening region where a very scant number of farm sheep are found.
The mountain or range section lost sheep steadily by sale for consumption to large nearby cities. The southern dwindled before the constant advance of settlement. With the new farmers came negroes and dogs, neither of which are favorable factors in sheep raising. Indeed the counties once largest producers have settled up so closely as to make the range plans previously followed entirely impractic~ble. Either the sheep owner must fence up and take care of his animals or move on to the great southeast, where the range is still untramineled.
In this latter section, comprising that part of the State from Savannah to Florida, west of Valdosta, there has been a reaction with a material increase in the number of sheep. One or two large land companies have fenced up great ranges and put sheep on them. Others have moved in and turned their flocks out on the almost unlimited grazing area. The consequence is that the State decline has been largely affected by this one region of greater production.
During the last two years, with the great advance of mutton
105

and wool prices, renewed interest has been taken in this subject all over the State. Many small farm flocks have been started in the middle belt, particularly the sections invaded by the weevil. It is history that those sections seek all auxiliary sources of r evenue.
Black indicates area greatest production.
Unshaded area least p1oduc tion AOr unreportedQ.
Graddations between shown by i11termediate shadings.
(Data on which this n1ap is based f urnished by the Co-operative ICrop R e porting S ervice, and table appears elsewhere in t his Report .)
106

EIGHT DOLLARS PER CAPITA VALUE POULTRY PRODUCTS
For the year 1919, Georgia poultry and poultry products reached the tremendous total value of $8.00 per capita or about twenty-four million dollars. This amount is greater than that for any other of our products except corn, cotton, swine and dairy products. This is based on farm prices of poultry and eggs as recently officially published by the Co-operative Crop Reporting Service for Georgia.
Measuring the progress in the last 10 years on a basis of valuation, this represents an increase of 200 per cent. This vast cha:t]ge may be attributed to many things. First, South Georgia has been developing very rapidly; second, the number of families has been increasing at a steady rate; third, diversified farming has followed closely on the heels of weevil infestation. After that pest has reached a section, the logical step is to produce everything required at home or for nearby markets. Many counties have not only become self~sustaining but are now exporting considerable quantities of all types of poultry and eggs. Splendid examples are Bainbridge, Thomasville and Moultrie.
Going back to the last Censw;;, only 33 per cent of the eggs produced were sold by the farmers but this year over 51 per cent, or more than half of the amount produced, were dispostld of. This means eggs are a cash crop worth five or six million . dollars, with poultry placed at a like amount. Of course it is true that prices have gop.e up like skyrockets. The Census basis was 20c per dozen for eggs and 35c each for chickens. When the questionnaires were sent out, the State price was 40c for eggs and 75c for chickens. These prices have jumped tremendously even in the short time that the schedules have been back.
The relationship between the numbers of poultry sold and the amount consumed on farms this year is another striking feature. Georgia has always been known as a chicken eating State and the home consumption is rather large. The farm population consume many more pounds per capita than the town folk. In spite of this, the surplus is theoretically almost large enough to furnish our own population. Faulty distribution and a few large cities alone prevent this from being entirely accom-
187

Georgia's Cattle Industry
It Is Growing Every Day
108

plished. In the last three years large amounts of eggs and chickens have been shipped to Florida. The northeastern poultry section has become a steady producer for the New York market. The northwest not only supplies the large towns of_that section but ships many thousands of cases to the northern cities via Chattanooga and other Tenne;;;see points. It may be remarked that Tennessee does not deserve all the credit she gets for being a leading poultry State. A small portion, at least, belongs to northwest Georgia.
The time was, in the past, that the poultry crank and the housewife chicken fancier- were looked upon with extreme condescension. These days are long gone and the condescension bas changed to decided envy.
With seasons and facilities such as bless the Empire State, there is not the slightest reason in the world why we should not lead the Union in this line. At present the one drawback is the high prices and shortage of grain. With the extension of the corn area and the increased production of corn and other cereals as commercial crops, this may be expected to disappear.
LIVE STOCK, 1919-VALUE $201,840,500.
Along with an increase of one percent in horses and two percent in the numbers of mules, there bas been a net increase in price of three dollars per bead for horses and sixteen dollars per bead for mules. In searching for the reason for this advance in price of work stock, three important points stand out: First, that other livestock bas not increased in value per bead; second, that the major portion of the horses and mules are imported; third, that this increase along with the increase in la,nd values ;, the direct index of the financial situation of the State and the profitability of the past crop season. A large part of the one hundred million dollars for the work animals represents what could be saved to the State by producing these animals at home and in view of the universal weevil infestation, it is our duty to point this out.
Other farm stock bas barely held its own on a valuation basis. Milch cows are practically the same in price. Other cattle, sheep and swine sliow an infinitesimal decline per head in value.
109

There has been a steady though small increase in numbers of dairy and other cattle together with an improvement in grade which is not apparent from the price.
SHEEP CONTINUE DECREASE.
F or the past ten years sheep have steadily diminished in spite of all effort to the contrary. This decrease is not uniform all over the State but applies principally to the extreme northern, southwestern and southern range sections. The southeastern range section alone shows ability to hold its own. There are relatively few farm sheep in Georgia and in this grade of animals that are considerable signs of awakened interest.
120,000 INCREASE IN HOGS DURING 1919.
.The features of interest in the swine situation are the very uniform increase in numbers all over the State. This would have been very much greater had not the cholera ravaged the herds to an unusual extent. In the face of all discouragement the Georgia growP.rs have gone ahead and registered a very creditable advance. Unfortunately. also there was a slump in prices which has acted as a backset. Even at that no farm industry in Georgia can show a greater profit during the past year than this. Per cent of increase is 4.

0~

0~

0>~

0> .-< 0> .-<
.-<~

0

"0">

"0">

a"";
.-< .-<~ '

~

~

"' "' ... 'd
OS "'
~ ~... .

'ods., ~~

.-< 0> .-<
l'l
... 0~ "'
.... c:;l os~

=OS
>..,

l'l >O..S,

... 0
~A

,..o ~A

::s~
~- A0

.z0

z 0

:":s'

:Q:s)

p~ .

p~ .

~....
0
8

0~
"0">
.-< l'l
... os- _0~., "OS'
=--~A0
~....
0
8

Horses 131,0001 132,000 156 159 20,436,000 1 20,988,000

Mules . 344,000 351,000 200 216 68,800,000 1 75,816,000

M Cows 452,0001 461,000 65 65 29,380,0001 29,965,000

Other

I

I

Cattle 763,0001 771,0001 27.30 27.20 20,830,000 1 20,971,000

Sheep . 135,000 125,000 5.80 4.90 783,000 612,000

I I :::;wine .13,043,00013,165,0001 17.50 16.90 53,252,0001 53,488,00()

Total

I

No. . . . 4,868,000 15,005,000

1193,481 ,0001201 ,840 ,000

110

$613,000,000 VALUE GEORGIA CROPS IN 1919.
The Empire State produced over six hundred million dollars worth of agricultural products exclusive of any livestock in 1919, almost three times that of last census year and more than at any time in history, according to the Co-operative Crop summary r eleased today by the union agency of ,State and Federal Departments of Agriculture. This is more than fifteen million greater than in the previous year, iu spite of the worst crop season in a decade, and record boll weevil damage.
The year has been marked agriculturaly by the placing of minor crops, such as tobacco and sugar cane, on a commercial basis and in a iarge number of counties. The season of 1918 had already seen peanuts and velvet beans become principal crops. With the wide spread of the boll weevil further diversification is expected. Indeed, the early ravages of the insect caused heavy abandonment of cotton in 1919 and this was largely replaced by food and feed crops.
Among other features of the report are the huge totals reached by sweet potatoes, pecans, sorghum and peaches.
Many important facts can be discovered by study of the figures, particularly when this is placed on the simple basis of valuation per acre. Peanuts, sorghum, sugar cane and sweet potatoes give splendid returns which will compare very well with cotton. This suggests the use of these and other crops used with them in rotation as solution of the problem of what to do now that the weevil has come.
The estimates appended are derived principally from figures of a corps of local correspondents of selected and trained men numbering from ten to thirty to the county, revised by the crop reporting board at Washington and the local Field Agent. They are based not only on estimates but on surveys of many thousand farms. For the major crops they are usually within four or five per cent of the truth, with a still closer estimate on cotton.
111

GEORGIA. CROP SUMMARY 1919.

ll.. 0
~ 0

< ~
r>:l 1>-i

...

U1
r>:l
~
0 <

i"l<' o.>.. a)< ""C)
~

..~s..
C)
::1
"0."..
ll..

,....,
J
A"' .";..!.'

~
c;:3

... "'ll.."'

-+"oj 0 ::1
E-4e;j

."2'<~

:>

ol
:>

0..

Corn . .. ... . .... . /191814,5901 15.0 168,8501 1.651113,6021 24.75

1191914,8201 14.5 169,8901 1.601111,8241 23.20

Wheat Harvested.l1918l 2801 10.2 2,856\ 2.66 7,5971 27.13

119191 240110.5 2,520 2.63 6,628 1 27.62

Oats .. . .......... 11918 550 20.0 11,0001 1.19 13,090 23.80

11919 1 5401 20.0 1110,80011.15,12,420123.00

I Rye ......... .. . 11918 30 8.8 264 2.10 554 18.48

.

11919/ 33/ 8.9 294l 2.121 800 24.21

Potatoes . ... . ... 11918 23 70.0 1,610 1.851 2,9781129.50

(Irish ) . . ..... 119191 23 1 70.0 I 1,6101 2.171 3,4941151.90

Potatoes . . . . . ... 119181 130 92.0 111,96011.25 14,9501115.00

I (Sweet) . . . . . .. 11919 142 92.0 13,064 1.10 14,3701101.20
Tobacco . . .... . .. 119181 4.5 800.0 13,600\46 1,656 \368.00

(All) .... . .. . 119191 31 530 16,430 21.5 3,532 114.39

Rice, .. . . . ..... .. 1918 Both Types . ... 11919

1.2 1.21

26 24.4

I

31 1 1.751 291 2.75

541 45 .50 80 67.10

Hay, Tame . . . ... 11918 696 1 1.241 863I23.50120,280129.U (In Cowpeas) .. 11919 557 1 1.10 613125 .30 15,509 27.83

Hay . . .. .. ...... !1918 13 1 .91 1) 12121.50 258 19.56
(Wild) . ... .... 11919 13 1.10 141 I 3991

Cotton .. .. ...... 1191815,341190 I 2,122127.5 /291 ,831 52.25

(H:uvested ) .. . 11919!fi .220 I152 I 1,658 35 .7 296.827 1 53.02

Cotton ......... 1191815,341 1

I 913167.801 61,9011 11.59

(Seed] P eanuts

.. . .. . . . 11919,5,2201 .. ...... . 11918 314 28.0

! I

714 8,792

178.00 1 1 1.60

55 ,690 14,067

1 1

10.65 44.80

(Harvested) . . . 119191 202 1 25.0 \ 5,0501 2,461 12,423 \ 61.50 Sorghum . . ... . . . 119181 15 91.0 1,365 .89 \ 1,215 81.00
(Syrup) ...... . 11919 161 92.0 I 1,4721 1.02 1,501 1 93 81
Sugar Cane . . ... 119181 50 1175 I 8,7501 .971 8.487 169.70 (Syrup) ...... 119191 54 1181 I 9,7741 1.091 10,6501197.32

Velvet Beans .. . . . 119181 4001 8 I 3,200 1 1.001 3,200/

(Harvested ) .. . 119191 3001 6.2 I 1,8601 1.361 2,568

P eaches ... .. ... . 119181 I

I 5,895 ! 1501 7,5461

119191 I

I 6,0921 2.501 15,2301

Apples . ... . ..... 119181 I 119191 I

II 1,7131 1.651 2.8561 636 1 2.451 1,558 1

Pecans ....... . . . 119181 I

2,728 1 .35 1 9541

119191 I

I 4,630! .41 1 1.8981

All Other Crops .. 11918 1 /

I

I I 30,0381

1919 1

I

I I 45,7781

TO'l'AL VALUATION OF ALL GEORGIA CROPS. EXCLU. SIVE OF LIVESTOCK .. . .... . ... . ... 1918-598,195,000

1919-613,240,000

Thousands omitted from all acreage, production and total valuation figures except In the grand total. Yields per acre in standard units, bushels for cereals, tons for hay, pounds for tobacco and pecans, pounds for lint cotton, etc. Valuation based on Dec. 1 Price to farmers (except fruit, etc.)
112