GOOD FARM MANAGEMENT 3N 0:423:95va ANS MACKiNAC COUNTERS gkixcmam} Yhasis for i!“ Dayna of M; 3. WC; ESAN 3TA?3 CC’LLBGE Wiiiéam Eéward Eickimn 2946 . 1‘ .0\LA\\HI0\IVM‘III ‘.\|I1l.j 1 . .‘1‘ 1| 0-0" ’10! lig‘lafis s‘az‘u. R}1 ‘3 ‘3‘ I’m 00 ‘w...’}. 01.19.... ...L a . Mu 1‘13 h. 1' .‘Il~\n‘~l,1l . , .11!f‘1 0.- .1.1. $75!... ‘9‘..V; 1th." .Io .., .. u0.p)alqb1 1| . n 1 1 . . . . I II II 1. .. . Y I y .. l ’7 c y . r. .. . 1 y . .1 =1 . . . a I u , .. I 5 79111.3 .. Y . .1; . V .. .17..r11.. .. -. . . .i 1.0 o .39. Yd . u y n .. 5.. . .1 .. Q... to ’1. I IWIII...;7u-U.7Hl 1. v I , . . 1.1.“..421 .. . if: . .3 $04? .f. . . y 1 111. 1.3155002... 1'7".“ .73 1. P04}. Y3§ .1111 14 ..D 5.7. "a 7r ~ r Curd vary-11.1%-. A (“a p % bu. ,w. s?“ w5§wl \ 0 to V l. sown” I ’4 v. . i , J t . . . o . . . J r V . . a . 1 ".1 1 1 “Horn“. 1. .‘J‘ln .1 . .y Iv 9.» 0L r r - I u .71“ 1 ‘7 r . P/IIVVJW .1'.v..w.~f.,.l fir “HANNA“ unw‘Ii. 0 WV 01.7":YW 77.1.1.1W.‘ QT. LY“ ”Lrvbffirl of% ("711; J‘VerleiuLt . J. vvnr‘m". WW“ pig“. pHI. 0:4 1» . xv”: ”0..an . . Y L t . 1 . 5 . v. V . . 2 . V In a! . . 7 .‘(LWYT Z , .0 JD .1 ,T a. I 313.0 v7 4. VI .!A . .I 111111 10 l 3.). i 1., .t I. .. v - ..0 .. 1Q...) ,J.-.1.U»Ivr!vu.1-1.1.Juu....!..0,'.ls\ . «.1, 1!. Hr7 . » .“rw? ”le.!\. n»..u!0f.:.1u_ 7...;“11'4YH-aiwvcmrbfit‘r.133~.-.V7U$Lw.vurY4! Sféfbp‘vlplfioLflu . rIYlJJvY .. 5 P r .. 7:5“. u...7.. " . rop to FINES wilI be charged if book is remove this checkout from returned after the date stamped below. 5 L A I R E m G N I N R U Tl E R P ace 1n boo your record. LIBRARIES This is to certifg that the thesis entitled Good Iarn Management in Chippewa and Mackinac Counties. Michigan presented bl] William Edward Dickinson has been accepted towards fullillment oi the requirements for ll. 3. degree in- Farm Management 2 6; 04M Ma—jor professor August 22, 19h6 llate__ _ M-T95 GOOD FARM MANAGEMENT IN CHIPPEWA AND MACKINAC COUNTIES (MICHIGAN) by WILLIAM EDWARD DICKISON A THESIS Submitted to the School of Graduate Studies of Michigan State College of Agriculture and Applied Science in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Farm management 1946 THES" GOOD FARM MANAGEMENT IN CHIPPEWA AND MACKINAC COUNTIES (MICHIGAN) r\ [‘3 9" K j “.4. i" h a ! Uc'd . ‘4‘. ‘~ ' VITA William E. Dickison Personal Age: 24 Religion: Protestant Birthplace: Sault Ste. Eerie, Much. Height: 5' 10" Nationality: Scotch—German Weight: 180 lbs. martial Status:Married Health: Excellent Education High School: Sault Ste. Eerie High School, 1940 College: Cadet training Indiana Central College. B. S. 1946, Michigan State College. College Activities Student Grange, Overseer; 4-H Club, Treasurer; Block and Bridle, Treasurer; Ag. Econ.-Farm mgt. Club, Vice President and Agriculture Council Representative; Sears Scholarship Club; Michigan Country Life Association. Affiliation FarmHouse Fraternity Practical Training and Experience Farm: WOrked on home farm.until enrollment at MLS.C. in 1940 'Work: Timekeeper at Great Lakes Dredge and Dock Company, Summer 1942. Military Enlisted U.S. Army Air Force, December 1942. lst. Lt., Lead Navigator with Eighth Air Force, England. Discharged October, 1945. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT The author is indebted to the Extension Service and the Farm management Department of Nflchigan State College for per- mission to use the farm.records for Area 15. The writer wishes to express his gratitude to Professor E. B. Hill, Head of the Farm management Department, for his counsel and suggestions on the preparation of this manuscript. Credit is also due Professor L. R. Schoenman, Director of Con- servation Institute, ar. L. H. Brown, Farm management Depart- ment and mr. L. B. Abel, County Agricultural Agent of Chippewa-mackinac Counties, for their advice. -1- GOOD FARM MANAGEMENT IN CHIPPENA AND MACKINAC COUNTIES (MICHIGAN) William.Edward Dickison INTRODUCTION One purpose of this study on "Good Farm management in Chippewa and mackinac Counties (Michigan)"is to show the pre- sent situation and trends in factors affecting good farming in the eastern portion of the Upper Peninsula of Michigan. Some of the factors affecting farming in this area are: cli- mate, type and location of soil, size of farm, amount of tillable land, amount and kind of livestock, amount and kinds of crOps grown, machinery investment, building invest- ment, markets and transportation costs. The second purpose of this study is to present suggestions for the improvement of farming in this region. For many years Chippewa County was one of the greatest hay producing counties in the United States. The early agri— culture of the county consisted mainly of raising hay, a few acres of small grain and a few potatoes. During the last few decades hay has decreased in importance due to loss of markets and higher transportation costs, although on the basis of acreage it is still the leading crop. Farming has become more diversified with an increase in dairying and live— _ 2 - stock raising. Along with this, small grains and cash crOps such as peas, flax, wheat, barley and oats have appeared.. Chippewa County lies in the extreme eastern part of the Upper Peninsula of Nflchigan. Sault Ste. marie, the county seat, is the third oldest settlement in the United States. The first white man, Jean Nicolet, came in 1854, although it is possible that Etienne Brule may have preceded him here in 1818. At least five standards have flown over the area, Ojibway crane totem, Spanish, French, British and American. The fur trade was the main industry until about 1870 when lum- bering began. With the establishment of the lumber camps in 1870 a small amount of land was brought under cultivation. By 1880 there were 117 farms in the county. The number of farms increased slowly until 1985 reaching a total of 1,779 farms. In 1940 the number of farms had dropped to 1,584. About 85 percent of the original farmers came from Canada and traced their ancestry back through Canada to England and Scotland. This ancestry has an important bearing on agriculture in Chip- pewa and mackinac Counties. Chippewa is the second largest county in Michigan and contains 1,575 square miles or 1,006,720 acres. Besides the mainland, it contains three fairly large islands, Neebish, Drummond, Sugar Island, and numerous small islands. A small amount of first class agricultural land is found on Neebish and Sugar Island. r-r _ o - Directly south of Chippewa County is mackinac County. mackinac County contains 1,044 square miles or 688,180 acres. According to the Agricultural Land Classification map of Mich— igan (1941) there is little farm land in mackinac County. The areas of first and second class land are found in the clay plains south of Pickford, a small area north of Engadine, and a few other scattered areas in the central and western parts of the county. The above counties comprise what is called, Type of Farming Area 15 by the Farm.management Department at muchigan State College. This is a cattle, hay and spring grain area. - 4L.. 10. 11. 12. 13. 11+. 15. 17. . Beans, Sugar Beets, . Cattle, heep, and 16-. ' TYPE OF FARMING AREAS IN MICHIGAN ‘ Natural Line Basis O . my? Area 15 - (Shaded) I ‘7’ a” 0 . £81 I " ' ' 5" i“ ,, . . l ' HMOUIWE U6! *9- h, ' L Name I Corn and Livestock ( ‘ Small Grains and Livestock Southwestern Fruit and Truck Crops Poultry, Dairy and Truck Crops Dairy and General Farming Dairy and Cash Crops Dairy, Hay, and Special Crops and Dai ry Forage Central Potato and Dairy Torthern Fruit and Dairy ?orthern Potato and Dairy General, Self—Sufficing, and Part-Time Cattle, Potatoes, and Self— ; ' ' I Suffimng i .. .L .. “row ”-an rxvmas'ro 0 uw mm ”I Cattle, Hay, and Spring tam ' l:_ -i—jjé:\\/’ i ' 057:0 ‘ Grains ' Dairy‘and Potatoes I _ , Potatoes, Dairy and ANau .42me » . arc/(sav— lwriw mm Part-Time 3 . . - - V _ __ 1___ J _ -' mum w, | 7.2%?!" [Lum'T/FM - - i - i I J _ L - l g I I “T , Al {c.11vr'. elm)... flulITPinw, villa. (El. .p‘ls. . o ‘ .! n I .u. . . — I , .. R I ~ . I. Isa...‘ y.'x|u|n,t u .l . . t . .i .I 4 i, r . a . CI u u v . . .- s t ,. n . . . . .. l -5- PHYSICAL FACTORS The overall climate of Chippewa and mackinac Counties show the effect of the Great Lakes. The surrounding bodies of water tend to modify the climate and lengthen the growing season. In view of the above the summers are not as hot or the winters as cold as the interior of northern Michigan. Extreme ranges in temperature are not as prominent in the above area as in other inland areas having the same latitude. The average growing season in Chippewa County varies from 142 days at Sault Ste. marie to 148 days at Whitefish Point. The growing seasons are usually a few days shorter in the farming areas around Rudyard and Pickford than those along the lakeshore such as Bruce and 800 Township. Other local areas in the interior of the county may vary consider- ably from.this. The average January temperature at Sault Ste. marie is about 14° F. and the average JUIy temperature about 64° F. In mackinac County the growing season averages 144 days on mackinac Island and 141 days at St. Ignace. In general, the growing season is~slightly shortened as one proceeds inland in mackinac County. The average July temperature at St. Ignace is about 66° F. and the average January damaged,“ Spence gamma 833 3.?on no summon .H .wE once-EEG Hpopon . V _ 3280 EB G m... - .N. _ W Mo @83on A a. A_ . Bead ._. 8.3389 .1111! IF .. ' _ .. _ _ rt... tlLrtlll l I. 4 1. rt! -..__ Ir. $5 a. 1 H pump 3%. Hi}... .. lame ”4e . It. . _ - -1- w n _ moaned-5m ”I .30 . i. lllll I llllll III I 1...! I... den. com t) 3H ; bum _ cam." _ 11 J a 43,935., :8ng .3850 03.282 nomeom wnggm mo 533 .m .ME 5.32 H _ . _§ofln now M 1.6mm. team. damage _ lllllllll _ . .. _ _ .. temperature about 190 F. The average annual precipitation in Chippewa and mackinac Counties varies from 28 inches in the southern part to 52 inches in the northern part. These climatic factors: length of growing season, average annual precipitation and average annual temperature have a direct bearing on the type of farming practiced in this area. For further information see Appendix Table 1. Productive capacity of the land is one of the more important factors in determining the success or failure of a farm enterprise. Under present economic conditions it is estimated that 30 to 40 percent of the land in Chippewa County is suitable for farming and that the other 60 to 70 percent is suitable only for non-farm purposes such as forestry, game reserves, hunting grounds and recreation. At present about 15 percent of the land in mackinac County is suitable for farming, the other 85 percent is non-farm land. Soil classification maps for both Chippewa and mackinac Counties have been drawn giving the location of farm land, forest land and other land not suitable for farming. Addi- tional soil information is given on pages 2-15 inclusive in the Appendix. - 9 _ The greater part of the farm land is found in Bruce, Dafter, Pickford, Rudyard and 800 Townships in Chippewa County. Small areas of farm land are found in Kinross, Superior, Raber, Hulbert, 800 City and Sugar Island Townships. T Bay Mills, Chippewa, Detour, Drummond, Trout Lake and White- fish Townships have very little or no farm land. most of the farm land in mackinac County is found in VV._1 . - . — — v——wfi.1 .- "’Flla.‘r1iAJ‘ ‘. .. I350!“ " .1 . A few-3.7". A _. marquette and Garfield Townships. Scattered areas of farm land are found in Portage, Newton, moran, Brevoort, St. Ig- nace and Clark Townships. Bois Blane, Hudson and Hendricks Townships have no farm land. The productive capacity of the farms has a strong cor- relation with the quality of the soil in Chippewa County. In areas of good farm land there is a marked increase in the value of the farms as shown in Figure 5. Farms in the better land areas of Chippewa County are worth 5 to 4 times as much as those in the non-farming areas. Almost all the till— able land is found in the better farming areas. See Figures 1 5 and 6 for further information. T The close correlation found in Chippewa County between farm values, tillable acres and type of soil is not as marked in mackinac County. The townships in mackinac County have a mixture of farm land, non-farm land, and the land areas are not sharply defined. However, the two townships _ 10 _ having the most farm land also have the highest valuation per farm and more tillable acres as shown in Figure 4. Figures 7-10 inclusive show the change in number of farnm and land in farms by townships for both Chippewa and mackinac Counties. Even more marked is the correlation between the farm land and the location of farms of Farm Account COOperators. All of the farms COOperating with the Michigan State College Farm management Extension Department are located in areas of good farm land. In general, it may be said that these farms are better than the average and follow more of the approved practices. Tables 1 and 2 show the size of farce, land value and tillable land in townships having Farm Account Cooperators. TABLE 1 — Size of Farms, Land Value and Tillable Land of Farm Account Cooperators in Chippewa County. Township Size of farms Land value Tillable acres Bruce 504 acres 9,850 218 Kinross 178 " 8,185 101 Pickford 828 " 7,575 218 Rudyard 190 " 4,989 125 800 City 80 " 2,070 54 800 Twp. 284 " 8,855 174 -11- TABLE 2 - Size of Farms, Land Value and Tillable Land of Farm Account Cooperators in.mbckinac County Township Size of farms Land value Tillable acres Brevoort 158 acres 5,500 122 Clark 180 " 2,480 80 marquette 104 " 2,905 92 The trends in both counties is toward fewer and larger farms, with the expansion taking place in those areas having the best farm land. ‘With few exceptions, those areas having land unsuited for farming purposes show a marked reduction in both tillable acres and number of farms. This seems to be a desirable trend that should be continued for the best econ- omic use of the land. L”... . z . .. bfi—v O ,_Fig, 3... of farms per township , in Chippewa County, 0-4}...- (In. Michigan. 1939; "" - ». F.Data from.Agricu1ture w—v .. ...Datam: .1 .-:.-cu r- argument mgr .. thupgs. 'F' -—‘ - -" - I ‘Fig. 4. Average value of farms per township in mackinac County, "W” 9.2...” Data framqigmiculture Census of Michigan 1940 Average_va1ue _ ": Census of Michigan11940' 4—4... On—‘-. I-— Im- a I -.-_ I I I c I ' I I ..... 2 1 i . ‘. . . ' I I. O n I I . I D I I I : 3 ' I o-c I- -— n-ol-u I- It. : ,; \l, : ..: I I I . l . I O I I '| O I I A. 1 ' i l, -. : . . . ’ 0 I ‘+- "I I *o— -' " A ' ' ..o -l 9 c z I l I . ' . t.— .' 0‘: I 3' I g . I . g: -, '-" 1 __.'_ R - I v . -J‘JP ilar r, 1M. . .043 @332 go 338 manages? sod 3.8 .83 34.48% .598 goddamn 5 @3338 hp mam.“ mo 05m owmnobm dud mend.“ 5 mmuom Jam.“ mo hog .N. .mE -14.. R...” I wanna.“ Mo 05m mgnmhq I was.“ g 3.84 wand.“ .Ho .02 38% M E500 game W em mm a bi .— 8H 0 {Leach -u-.. mmmmn " mmms " " E35” 83.389 stillnllulll Ill. s3 “I-.. 42 use 84. mm _ mm mmOaHHH mam 8m...“ 6: 1::I-l m IL mam" mm as 334$: 80.9 mm a _ noflmmum ham mafia mo 03w mwdnmbd I magma Eoppom may 5 mono... I gun Mo .02 I 858 0.92: 85E mos a 3 I./ mad": pm 8mm 4M lllll J to... _ m . .. _ Emma gm a fiflofié .39 3332 mo 95.3 3938294 38.“ 38 .33 4848.3 .958 . gamma 3 “Waggon ho. was.“ no muwm omega .98 mad.“ 5 meow 68.3% Mo 9352 .m .mg . .— mmum _ , amp.“ E80 «E88 .. m3 . . A M a .74 mm .3” . 48am. am 4. . _ a u a..." p: .. -mmmmlmmfitri. % fl .9 . FeWfiEL I. I WWH pummel I _- -u - 2: meme 3 A . 3H I mam.“ no on? emcee; . FF mm _ mm " mm?” a I _ .l 0H: I .flm l III 8o Ham mange 3 3.3. a. 8 . an L1 $43.3 _ m9 _ 4m EH I. H .HO 02 fingga 8-H _ O . P98. 3% womumfuo r... . .. “Pumas m 2330 _ has ." mm? ,mggeommtln .. u N. . 3 (CW 00% 85.3 no 05m mwflmbd ... Puma.“ 330m 0 gm" dd wand I 9.3%..“ 0.86.9 wand.“ mo .02 I 8.33.“ mos €33.33 a -16.. .93 @483 no «880 maggot? son.“ 38 .82 88323 .338 333% .mmflmgop .3. mg.“ no 03m mmmnobw can .33.“ 5 mono.» 59an mo gong .m .wfim wand.“ .Ho 03m ammuobd. I 089mg aoppom mans.“ 5 3.84 .. enema” 3.3.3 wand.“ mo .02 .. mama.“ mos 3H ... was.“ no Sam awake: . momma .. an.“ 3 wound Ham .. madam mo .oz 3% . _ _ . _ :2 _ Sm _ WW3 _r mouse 1 d _ --IIIII 3.3 _ _ ad ” E 28 mm ..qom _ Saga 33.28 _ .33 53.5.“: mo 3280 955?».qu 309M 38 .4.me SE .hfiBoo egg 5 magmas» B. manna no on? 03.85 63.3% a...” manna .3th mo 93324 .04. .mfi -17... Q|"‘l flu” _ _ _ mm _ mm “ .8 .88 2.. $3. 88. flimsy: B u a “ 8H “ 383 _ tog" 039,65 . .pm ” Imam. _ ¢m gm _ Qv _ . ago: _ _ L _ mm I mama. mo 03m mmdnmhq 80.8 I mad.“ 5 mound 30 I wand.“ mo 62 3% mafia.“ no on: omdhokq I 0.33m son—pom 2..me 3 3.34 I magma 33% wanna go .02 I 933m mos a? 50% W nvma 39m _ 8H _ E _ _ 83.3 _ a: 8 o 2 .81: $de _ Ea Tllltlll II _8 __ NWH _ MOE om. mmmn .5 Iqmm ”dong" 33mg " 09.238 -18- CROPPING PROGRAM General The early agriculture of Chippewa County centered around hay. The market for this hay almost disappeared with the passing of the lumber camps and the arrival of the truck and automobile. Increased transportation costs have also tended to make hay farming less profitable. For the most part this hay Was number one timothy that made excellent horse feed but was of little use for other livestock feed due to its low protein content. Despite all this there are still fields that have been in timothy sod for over 50 years. Certain economic con— ditions such as a feed shortage combined with drought may cause the price of hay to rise to $20.00 a ton or higher. Under these conditions raising hay is perhaps the most profitable use for the land. This type of farming does not give a steady reliable income, and has all the disadvantages of one crop farming. The possibility that hay prices may rise tends to keep some farmers in the business where otherwise they would shift to some other type of farming. Figure 11 shows the importance of crops raised in Chippewa County on an acreage basis and Figure 12 shows the importance of crops raised in mackinac County. Over 60 per- cent of the tillable land is in hay and pasture. ,,_.-.xarga RthA‘OI‘P'W' ','__...A;I~E_“'.E.' J... . e-‘l “Tu-o - 19 - Climatic conditions and type of soil limit the crops that may be grown in Chippewa—mackinac Area. In general the clays and clay loams are well adapted to the production of hay and small grains. The lighter sandy loams are adapted to potatoes, root crOps, small grains and hay. The area is too far north for the successful production of corn, there- fore small grains form the bulk of the feed crop. ray. Red Clove; — Red clover is probably the most widely grown legume in Chippewa and mackinac Counties. Two varieties, medium red and mammoth red are commonly found in the above area. Medium.red is earlier and finer stemmed than mammoth red. Both of these clovers produce a high quality legume hay which make excellent livestock feed. Alsike Clover — Alsike is another legume commonly found in the eastern portion of the Upper Peninsula. Al- sike Clover will tolerate a more acid and wet soil than the red clovers. For this reason it is especially adapted to the heavy wet soils of Chippewa County. Alfalfa - Alfalfa is not widely grown in Chippewa and Mackinac Counties although it is gaining in popularity in mackinac County. Certain well—drained areas in Chippewa County produce good yields but in those areas that are not well drained it is more advantageous to grow clover. Y‘ .. .!.u u a rur— .».o«- 1.9,.-.»- wmmnrfil‘nun'gu 21130» P‘ F* _ go - Sweet Clover — This legume is well adapted to the area but because of its coarseness in comparison to the other legumes it is very seldom used. T'mothy — This non—legume is the most widely grown hay in the area, but due to its low protein content it is not recommended for livestock feeding other than horses. Hay Nflxture - The most popular hay grown in Chippewa County is a mixture of timothy and red or alsike clover or both. ‘When the mixture contains a high percentage of le- gumes it makes a valuable livestock feed. .Q£h§£_§§y§,— Other non~legume hays grown in the area are Blue Grass, Brome Grass, Red T0p and Reed's Canary Grass. Quite a bit of quack grass is found in some fields although it is an unwanted weed. Emergency hay crops grown are: Sudan Grass, Oats, Peas and Oats , and Vetch and Oats. mama ‘Qatg - Mbre acres of oats are grown than any other of the small grains. One reason for the popularity of oats may be traced back to its value as a horse feed. Another and more important reason is its resistance to rust. Oats are the earliest planted spring grain. The most common varieties grown in Chippewa and mackinac Counties are: ....Mn' '11.; ssnr.q-‘.--. ..rm.-.mu in}. r v ,_ H AA___-. IF“... Inn-4.. IT 0- Ilinollltulwlbh‘ III! Snail-J KA __ en _. ._ .-. C .. ._. . . . a... . ..dd ... u . .. . a . .. .. . cfl§1W3§1 .69. ,m. .. ._ - . 1. .M. . . . ..fi +_ .1. .. P ._ Hm... .... ._ n u . . a . no . ,. [w w . u. a h . w W» p... 1 0| +l Hp p. _. 1O in .. LrwttLI” 1 all lit-10": 0.. 0.. 0.. 0 O. Q . 0.. 4 .i n H w .H _ to. . 0. 0 . 0. . hut: .. w. .. 1......h.- .a. Him...fl..:h1-,~. ..11. 1..-... O . 0 o O. Q ”0 . . C .g 1. . . . . .... . 4a. gm. 0.... .. Am. a .. .H m w -.w - ...- ”A . .. . . . _ - kc. . ._._ . . - ...? ._.- n a . . . s _m m . o l ”H W. H . - 1.. 11 .L. .. It. 4 . - .M . -rmziLlwilLr .11“ _. . ML. :. b . 0.. w . .. ... . . t dflfidn-§u m . .s. .. . . n A - . 1. n R - 1 o . .a m . . ....... 1...... . .. .. 1.. .11. .11-“. 11.13.-.- -. _ .1....1.-1..-.1....1_...11. - .... . Rum ..m __. .. .4 . . . . . . . C. ., ......v . ..- . .. z ... . _ mama. .0 ,0: .l___ n . .7. .0 u 0.0 ally-Ono llloO-tll ..4.ILP. «$1.. “1.1 .. 1|. 1!! jlfiflhimffl-VII |II. .hluugblllll. III onlnolrlhuoolJILI‘II‘JIL-JL - C . e s ..m e I. u o . . “ .... -agm. V. ..r: .. _. 1 - .. A” . new . .... m g . _. i .._.. I m . . . PI T'- I‘ihlitlillu nI OMIIO oll0|05 In on. ..I ll. I! o uA. I.“ 0: L ... |-.-oI.-0..1HII.19.0 Ola-l0 r0l.n00 I fol-IPL 1... .PTJ- .. d .. Q. :.. .. . .. .. y u. . .... m . P .. E . .- _. ,am .~ ... .m . I: .. “m .33on .5 . ....m . i 1 — .. - .Hu. . _— .._ .n l __f . c . w . will ..Illll'tln.1lluclm tlllltllt Lil . r 1 vi! “[1114]. t HIT .m? . _... . ..wi ..hw _ ....w ._ H m. m L !. o. . .-.o. ._. - .7. t 8 o. .4 ..o_. 1... | v T... 915.0 - . . . . __ . . . . O ...—”._.. .12.- .1 ...a.. l 4 . ".0 II: 0. .0 t .F. . . Do 01 0 u . ._ 1.0“. ... . s. . _. . . . . n u 4 B. . e . u m . ... u _4 v ~. ._. .n n . - . .. u M... . _ ... _ I III I l Ulilt ’LITFEIII'IIIIILEIIIIDIII l'ol'lll ..II0 I'D- I III-III. lit". I'll ...} -33... '1 lI'I ll. ... .... .. . In I; .....II ..- nl. I: it... I .11 ..03 |. 'I Illl ll_l| Il'l'll'l..l ' .I ll. '4'. ll.. IIJIIIIII I'll II IIII ' ‘l llll' I I III II' II .l'!‘ I 1 ll .1 11.14 ‘ , . .. . . . . . ._ .3 J I I 0 0. n . O. I . . _ ._ . .— I .- II '. O O I "II Quill-DI. t ..l. . . 1 C . . u .. . ._ y I I u I . _ _ . I n I . . II I . I _ . . - ._. - ,I I 0'. II. I. I IQCIItIII‘ \.I I _ — ... he} A-l1‘ J" r-‘llll ! l l S _. 7Chi¢fien - Nun ' 60,000. I I O h I . IIOI - It'll-0.00"...- . _ _ . our. I o . I . . _ . a. . . . . I r~much1g 1.1... {o I I 1 l 411.01.11.11. - . I I. ‘ H I‘M W .. _ - ‘ . . 1" 0".“ .l ' .00! 0|!“ 0 I. I u. 60" I 1 I. A 5M _ . . .. _ . II . OOI O .‘ I m J _ 7. ._. . 6| . .. ._ F _ F J. . H . H . .3? .. 1 L D L r F r . h bk . 4.. J __ ”fl 4 A .4 .. 4 o. IIOIIIIOI I. I ll 11. {pU1 .1111— . I . - . . _ o . I _ .... 0 . 193 0 $ . rt- 11. 1.3.1.1... l 0 '| . .... .. -... ..I '>,... . )0. ‘ t I . . o O ' .D-) ..I I L I I 4 .~ 4 Ifickinéc=pofin£1e§;=Mfl¢h1gafi I I 1| 0’! . _ o . . rlll ‘IloFlli‘ulO'Lti O... L m I'll .i . . . . C . I_ o o * .n. o I - fl ._ F ' a _ . __ '1 I l I O 4 I . I ll. a 0| 9|. I . 1 I , .r . . . 0 . . . .. . . m . . I _ I . o ..... I 1 u . u . .— . - . . . 'l’l I. ‘1' .0 II... [If IIII'II'II'I I '0 I I. - I O ..... I...- II" [If I'll-II DI... - I If. lltl'IrI _ . . . f __ FIIIII II-fl [fill .l .. _ . n . ‘II I III It'l'l I. I u 1 lll‘lIllll [I £§.?§o' - A! — o 1 a .._ .._ n T'IIOOIJIIIQI'III o . n m . _ Juan-M .01 h . I __IIIOIJ—III—l—Iq. III! II, _- I I I III—u— —- I I l I-v-T-I — our— -F' ———I-' Inc III—.._.II ... .- I I F ‘; ._4;oao ‘Lbsg _ 34 _ gar'migm' 6,000'. I . o . g l . t6~ I “.3 I . o n ...d“,. 1’ I 1" .V . . ._.-{1" 0-40.- I I o I . .” -~' IIIII .VH-- '/-—é“-’+‘ H ‘ | , ' I 1 ' ' -‘. ~ I O I ' 1 ‘ I 1 l )- I I -o l. h ‘ I ;‘. —. I. .. . o—o , o o I. f- - _- o 4 '4 o I‘ll-b- .F r ' ‘ Q I I h F I l 1 I .1 c . I I I I . ,- I I ,. 1 I f .r-0— 4: DJ I A l J I a Q .0- I - O —- 0 ~ ‘ . '1 I ' .1 . p I 1 T T .T'. , 1 ‘1 O I . , . i a I 1..- - 1H I 31; I-II—IIn—;-.——I l‘__“- ._- I—-III 2% Soc 0113 . Trmm: Lana soafibmmflflp -;"Sg@x;hfland._ ' Fig, 15, ;_ Chippgwa, I - I o O '9. - - ' .Fig. 163.. Pounds 'Micfiisan 2-999348 ‘; per 'téfiifiéhipé} 7009211, 195915? l #—0- I (If- :milk per anima1 by towhships mackinac County, Michigan 19319’32 . l OOOOOOO . I ; . Y I I' I I . ..; F 2' - - .. I. 1 F‘ 13.. I o I ' I l i I I ._.-1” l' J. I 0 1 C- . V l - 1 l. ..l V! A; t . II-I —I- -- — - L of milk 931? apimial d ”404‘“ .. -55.. BUILDINGS, POWER AND EACHINERY General Figures 17 and 18 show the value of building per farm in each township of both counties. While Figures 19 and 20 show the value of machinery per farm.for each township. Here again one can see the strong correlation between type of soil and building and machinery investment per farm. In most cases farms with poor soil also have low building and machinery investment. Building and machinery investments per farm are considerably below the state average in this area as shown in Table 6. TABLE 6 - Building investment per farm and machinery and equipment investment per farm, 1940 Item Chippewa mackinac State Building investment 3 1,509 $ 1,244 $ 4,865 machinery and equipment investment 522 473 648 Buildings A good share of the farm.buildings in this area were built from.timber grown on the farms. In addition, the buildings were constructed mainly for hay storage and have few facilities for livestock. This may account for part of the lower building investment per farm. _. “‘Aannnluflr‘zlhnw'n‘ "Kim QL’LMAAOOVMSI..._.-.- .~¢-o- 4 .l A . . -_. . V ‘ .. ~ » 4 -‘333—*‘:.'-’_.;.— mwhw 1|“ (1'. ..nam:.:!: .Ai’. “qr , .... Lilia! l‘ «.r L C3 ,. -56.. Bower and machinery Very few combines are found in Chippewa and mackinac Counties. The nature of the soil and climate are such that combines are not too successful for fall harvesting of grain unless the grain is first cut and placed in a windrow. Combines may gain in popularity as more efficient methods of handling the grain are developed. Tractors have been increasing in number and horses declining. Tractors have changed the general picture of farming in this region. It takes a lot of power to work the heavy wet soil which tractors can do more efficiently. In addition, moisture conditions are such that the soil must be worked in a short space of time for the best results. Horses are unable to do this in the required length of time. Horses will probably always be an important source of power in this area. They are able to perform.many tasks where it is impossible to use tractors such as winter manure hauling. This use of horsepower distributes farm work throughout the year and creates greater labor efficiency. v-‘VF‘W’ “-mn.vflu—v- I ” ,._ 7’ ...—...- . ;-_ 7., .. .o :- hD-J-luY *u.nmrw7‘ “I ~uz....'.~u~u-vuz-4.”.-.3'1 .- < ‘ ‘7"1' J.“- -i-- «w Mommas-rum. . ~ , .rv u -.....Inl OFII" ‘WE:I.-I m:-.a--..._ .. .. ..W'fia-q: .. . - - I -- -- .. - - - 1.. ... ..... .._.... ...!4- . . S. ’ WY . o . ... . WW... _ ._. y W, ._ a _m . n. . .m.. t 9 m 8. f .. .. WW. .. . . .. ...... w. MW . . A 4.. ......r! ,u . _o . o . . _d . . 1.... r. C ft. m .. .1... AW. 1 . W ......... o . I . h a. .. kw . ._.bh: .9. I ...A ...! ..I. I I I IL I. II. .I .I I «lb “1 WAY! rmpoy. .I. . I I. In I. I..I IIALtIAW|.A I |.I.. _ _ S ..e . .9. . a ..L . ._ . __ d .p 3. CW 01 n. h. . . W .._ HI m. prfl. 1 W0“ 1m - . ..... up: . d - -.- .. s - eW. .. w. . - - - - ._. 1 C. m E ,u M. . . .W E .1 . c .1. .. l . .t . W _ _ _ WM mam ...m. h. 4%.. n, v... - .u a. . . 4.. W . - ow .. Iii... AI.+.WAA..i-.A..z «It... .....I..A.A.IA:.W.H.I._.1WW~-+....I..1.-.!!!”iii}... .. -III...I............I......!...A.......L_ - _. .. .. .. . . .. .. O... m -...__nna . I . céAm W. ...aaga as. -_ Mm. WW. .... . i 5.... . .. - - ..W .. -.... - .. .. - ... --.... .. . q... f ......m. ... I. ..4: I -A - .....TAA .A_..-|....u...A......._ . . H . _ Cw. we. a . _m WW . ..._.- W . . magnum, . . F p ...m . . l, ...; I I II I.. v-.. o .AAA Ayn-E4 AHA .Wulpll. . ..1 T p n . -.. ... .3.“ “i . --...rmwu. . - U - . i. 3H1§ .n AWLJAMIILII. .. _.u .I. ... .l . . -.. .. . . 1W . . .. _ . 3 /_ . , . hog ,. . .. . l7 — v I I . . ... - ..I. I. I I .II IIIIIJLIIAILLIIIWA A o . .-l A . .I ..I lfiIAIII IArIAA |.lIl.f..||.u AtnlnLJuAiiA. ...TI .. .838 W .._ .. ”.383. .56 can . W 2:3. sum . W W - .......... w ................... i .--...s. . I I. . - ..- ._- .-.. i W . . ... . . .Efimflo -. . . . . EB .... . 1.. F L m tit L. ...W H- .I...l.. “.21......I.A.4 «1.. . W . W W .r W... o o. a o. a .o... .o“ 7 mo. ._om «or so“ . 8. .5 9” 9 . 6 . 7Q . . . 1. . 8” .5 8. i. J .. L. a! 2. J . .1. 1' c l I l u o OII .. I U l I8.. 9 1. I A'lx Ill; 0| 0 AI" W . . W. W m n _ W -u W . M-.- IIIIIAFIIIIIAIA. . W. LI .. F! p F? .u t W. l. - 38 — F r_uunu .-., - .. V W. W ., . - ”1 .W ...- u 1 DOllaI‘S . P"); A L. X ‘ A‘- i 600. . s“ , g F . ' ' '. 9 ' j‘ ' ‘ .. .--590 ¥_F1g. 19. vMach— inery investment t"""‘i' " "T'- . 400; . . : 4 perfarm in Chip~ PBWa Cfififity: 31Gb? igan by toWnships . . . ' _ ' ~ " 1959... 4 ~—J '0 i - A I i f Dollars : .. -6flig_.i_-.l_-,i ..... --_ --_ - - ‘ ‘7oo_ Fig. 20. _wachipefiy inf. J .. 6.00 I J I __ ' ! vestment par farmain 599W . . . 3 - ‘1 .-. ! :. L 'h l mackinac County, Richigan. i a 400.. L ._- -- - _%;{5 ..z.. by.t9waabirs;l9§9€:rf i;...g . J : ; i -ii. - _- - : I I I l g I r = ' ! i J. . J - 5 J . ‘j : 4 3' ’4 r+~—~u W7“; 7~L~ ‘f"*fifi ~~ ;J a ';. E~ .5 ° l J. 2 - J r I _, . I A . _ . _ I . I l _n—AQ—‘A—---J -- .nn—u—n-‘un- .-_.—QJ— ...__—-—..--— .‘A4yilnli1.i‘ft.r'inIKDrIA\A J! A . ‘1\ V'4 -59... NMRKETS Chippewa and mackinac Counties are located a great dis- tance from large terminal markets and consequently have had to depend on local markets to a large extent.‘ Lack of competition has tended to keep prices down at most points in this area. Figures 21 and 22 show the location of principle markets and processing plants in Chippewa and mackinac Counties. All of these markets are located in the larger towns and on good roads. Farm.accounting records of this area show that farms sell- ing whole milk are high in income. Table 7 shows the number of farms selling whole milk, butterfat and butter. TABLE 7 — Productssold on dairy farms in Chippewa and mackinac Counties Number of Number of Number of Number of farms prod— farms sell- farms sell- farms sell— County ucing milk ing whole milk ing butterfat ing butter Chippewa 1,225 131 852 151 mackinac 420 129 189 57 In view of the fact that this market for whole milk is limited it is doubtful if many more producers could retail an“, ‘rr‘vzrw-e-w - 40 - their own milk without creating a surplus. It seems desir- able that more processing plants such as bumter or cheese should come into the area for efficient marketing of dairy products. The completion of the cheese factory at Pickford, which has a daily capacity of 100,000 pounds of milk, should improve the farm price of milk. It should also in- crease the winter milk production by furnishing a more desirable market which would encourage the producers to feed their cattle better. Processors have been importing milk from points 125 miles away, and paying substantially higher prices than those paid to local producers. Figures 25 and 24 show the number of farms in each township selling whole milk, butterfat or butter. The town— ships having poor land also have the additional disadvantage of a lower market as there is little Opportunity to sell Hulk and hauling charges to distant processing plants are higher. The main reason for this additional disadvantage is their location in extreme parts of the county. The beef produced had to be shipped to terminal markets, namely Detroit, but with the starting of a local auction most of this beef never leaves the county. It is expected that more beef will be sold locally with completion of a packing plant at Pickford. There is a ready market for all .. ..:.-_--nAI Imam“ ”' 111'.-. .. . .. _. _ .. -... _. .. - *'3|3.....~.T7"'...--'-““.v J4 . ' “w" . - .-.mnwv‘r.nlm .i .. ..u .AMAw '1' A: ... AI!“ ..."l ‘ ;:Ava.-mr"-.-——'lb———‘«_—_- . ; .. ' .» ‘. 'T ..‘.v -'v'v‘.‘ ‘-".’.‘.I..~I.-E :“ -41- locally grown beef as thetbmand is greater than the supply. Sault Ste. marie furnishes an excellent local market for all locally produced eggs and poultry products. This market for fresh eggs and poultry products is further in- creased by the summer tourist trade. Hay produced in Chippewa and Mackinac Counties is sold in many states. The bulk of the hay has been going to Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia, Florida, Georgia and the Carolinas for use at race tracks. Hay is shipped to other areas when— ever a shortage occurs. In 1944-45 about 1800 cars of hay were shipped which brought in approximately $ 670,000. In 1945-46 over 2,000 cars were shipped which brought in approximately $ 640,000. The average value of hay in 1945—46 was $18.00 a ton. The entire flax crop is marketed in Minneapolis and St. Paul, Minnesota. .._.—u-po'rquuou.~rr-g.n‘ :2 ~41: Imlfim_..aurgu-—— -AILDMN'j: “l‘-~ dengue $280 Efimflo 3 Emma mflmmooam a8 3.25 manage .3 83.....qu Am ea W .... v g8 E8 a ._ as... W cam fiancee £88 20838 . «3m 333 3.333. M00333 a :3... m ..IIIILllllJ Ill WAII . damages .338 Senses 5 381.3 Shannan no gonads .8. .ma P—-—_— H.580 god: No. of farms 200 175 75 50 Fig. 25. Number of farms selling milk, t butterfat, and 22, butter by townships 2 2» in Chip; wa County, Michigan 1959 Data from Agri— f mflmreCmmusof 1 Michigan 1940 :— ‘ Whole Milk w- . . f. Butterfat W 1 “x . x. . w‘-, . 5 9\91 r““¥ Butter No._of 100 .75 50 .N am 2 t - I J l . - "fit. 7132... Twp. -\\ . -lfinmmn ~Nbam: .L; I r —-&—-—I-r- “-..-han— Ibrummt .Hldunflphm Hammett I 2 1 - Newton; ’ ~h~. Mmmnmtte. J - @mdfleldw~ Fig. 24. Number of farms selling milk, butterfat, and. butter_by townshigs in Mackinac2County, Michigan '1939 Data from Agriculture Cene sus of Michigan 1940 ’Whoie Milkwwm Butterfat Butter J; 1.3 . "TWfI mg EYES: A . navluA-wa-i-fiéJ-rtzr - ‘nzzz‘r: gr ifl‘libf‘i" F" .....f 3.... ...-.735 fi Tl. an, .«fa.‘s—-.Muqq~n-ou I . I .. ,. ........q...u-'n--'- 1 ‘. .'.4....I-..-wua-r» 5' .. . .' ' 4 —J‘“«Iv ‘—.~ — RAB-VarJILI-f-WWQ‘EJ mew-... ..-.. ..,A f! .3132! :1 1 23.2. 96””! . -45... CONCLUSION From this study we can see the effect of the various factors: climate, type and location of soil, size of farm, amount and kinds of crops grown, amount and kind of live— stock grown, building investment, machinery investment, markets and transportation costs on farming in Chippewa and mackinac Counties. Climate limits the type of crOps grown thus indirectly determining the type of livestock that may be raised. The most successful farms are located in areas of good farm land. A farm located in an area not suited for farming has little likelihood of succeeding. Those areas not suited to farming under present economic conditions should be removed from farming as soon as possible and other more profitable use made of the land such as forestry, hunting grounds, game reserves and recreation. The size of the farm.end amount of tillable land are factors in successful farming in Chippewa and mackinac Counties. Farms under 160 acres in size with less than 120 tillable acres do not have sufficient size of business to support a family. most farms in Chippewa and mackinac Counties are under- stocked. One reason for this is that the farmers came from Juan-Ia-III-amTS-‘UIAWA- 4‘71 II“! It . 11....” AI A‘fi.“ o mm'A-I-QA'JJ games-9.. rrmw-wzxzr ' magnum: ';;.b~""m2‘.3:b.f" -46.. a country where small herds were the rule and find it hard to change their way of farming and adjust themselves to large herds. Other reasons are the poor markets, small amount of grain raised and poor quality of roughage. Improvement in quality and yields of crops could be ob— tained through the use of more legumes, better drainage, more fertilizers, additional organic matter and better pre— pared seed beds. The solution to the disposal of the sur- plus hay raised in this area would be to market it through livestock. Since over 60 percent of the farm income is derived from livestock and livestock products, increasing the quality and quantity of livestock should increase farm income. This im- provement in livestock should come through the use of proved herd sires of good breeding and better feeding methods. Emphasis should be placed on cattle, poultry and sheep. Hogs should be raised for home use and not as a commercial enter- prise. Lack of machinery and buildings causes inefficient operation of many farms. A method of correcting this would be to increase livestock production which would in turn in- crease farm inccme, thereby enabling the farmers to make the necessary building and machinery improvements. IfinfiufihIamWVEN-K-IW "' “ '- ' ..‘ .r_.;, I ......“up —-u-IIA.A ..h." A1,... . -. .AA.""‘ 7 " '...- *h‘ald- nmu rat... _- .. IT. .2 J» ' 1 . a '1..'?'....'.“‘ ._ A . , .... ...—mu...” . . ..- ....uww. -n-u 'u. . -2. ...—..- . .. '7 . umvu-J”"19.’5’3i :l. 'Prf‘. . -'~ .. .. Murm‘ . -4-.' ~ :‘4 ,.... - ‘R‘Pfiijvf‘ ~ ‘l.~l‘ hlI‘Y. 2' 71355.: .-. -47- With the arrival of improved in Chippewa and mackinac Counties centive that is necessary for the ing practices and methods thereby agriculture economy of the area. market outlets farmers may be furnished the in— adOption of better farm? strengthening the general 95375732.??? Tfj.‘.-.I .! ”fr..." Jun-5.2113353] 1...; 1 1 A." E: '__ {Ad-{’U'MJ'n-wnu .. A -4 .T.I.TTNTE'V“.'.'II .IKTW‘PEWZEFuIMdB-IWYWLQW _Au.A."AnA.-.-A-—.-.-7- 1. .. . ...A.. ‘ ‘ ...'. ...I...~At~ .IVH' ‘ "Y" ”'1‘" ( tr’Ma—q ~ .. ADA; .vv-u-m—n haul JAW2._&.'.A .ae:r.1m..~ MAL”.- um 'j" ..nA.n3......nn:_n...i..i..... .. [I ....A..n...........4.:.....x.o..:..:1 Wu...v.....n....... ..., J ...t .1” n . . ...lfl.:..:... .. .....,... J . 21.42.34 JJWJ..II.t«L|...\|-I»...].r.|t.i\:1.;..1 . . .....A ... .. ... . H. .. a... .. ... ., ......:..,:.~.......:,1...., . .....TI, ....-... ... Hilltllw11rlrit. .Iiu Antlifrt ., .Illxlliuhu 5.1:..trrr 16.91.}? .4 ... .“ ,. . ... H.. .; 4A.. .. .. .H.... I . ... 2.1.1.1141. J‘Qa.fiI+I~u..-EIE ((11154111115. v1.3.1. ~Ltobt,.iifa«vi.€fiu APPENDIX . 1le r... ...lu ‘ .51.-..I llfi‘i‘ TABLE 1 — SUMMARY OF CLIMATIC FACTORS l Temperature Growing Average an— season nual precip- January July itation. Station Average Average Days (Inches) CHIPPEWA 0 Sault Ste. merie 14.2 F 84.10 F 142 88.85 0 - Whitefish Point 17.60 F 59.4 F 148 82.88 MACKINAC mackinac Island 18.5° F 85.4° F 144 50.59 St. Ignace 18.8° F 66.50 F 141 24.98 ‘lf Climate and men, Yearbook of Agriculture 1941, pp. 914-915. P'W-F‘QV.‘ 1 ‘ ‘ . .. . . ._ V X: . - r- r-wwft‘fl .L'.'9~'.'_.' ..r- ‘ . 4.31.31 -2... CHIPPEWA COUNTY SOIL82 The most important agriculture soils in the county are the Ontonagon series, which comprise about 11 percent of the area; Bergland series, about 8 percent of the area and Bruce series about 2 percent of the area. Mineral.soils comprise about 80 percent of the total area of the county, organic soils about 18 percent, hardrock about 1 percent and inland lakes and streams about 1 percent. About 65 per- cent of the total area of mineral soils in the county con- tain the normal amount of moisture for the region, while the other 35 percent hold water until saturated or waterlogged. The mineral soils having fair or good natural drainage in Chippewa County are the following: Ontonagon, Blue Lake, Strongs, Rubicon, Alpena, waiska, Shelldrake, Eastport, Emmet, munising, Bohemian, Longrie, Onaway, thnswood and wallace series. The mineral soils existing under conditions of poor drainage in Chippewa County are as follows: Saugatuck, Ogemaw, Brimley, Trout Lake, Bruce, Bergland, munuscong, Detour, Newton and Granby. The alluvial soils are the Ewen series. The organic soils, mucks and peats, are: Carbondale, Kerston, Greenwood, Spalding, Houghton, Rifle and Tahquamenon. g/ Taken largely from Soil Survey of Chippewa County, Michi- gan 1927, pp. 9—44. W1» .-.-. .. - ~ mm ‘11! J "39'. .‘m 133 -' -3- Ontonagon Soils Ontonagon gilgy Clay Loam - Ontonagon silty clay loam.is one of the red clay soils extensively used for farming, oc— CUpying level plains in the eastern part of the county. The soil is acid and requires artificial drainage. The slope phase of this soil type occurs on short, steep slopes that are more profitably used as pasture land than for cultivated cr0ps. Ontonagon §i13.Lgag - Ontonagon silt loam is the lightest textured soil of the Ontonagon series. It is not high in humus, but is moderately productive and durable umder culti- vation. The soil is strongly acid, and is distributed throughout the lake bed clay plains 1n the eastern part of the county. Ontonagon Clay - Ontonagon clay is the heaviest of the red clay soils on the lake bed plains of the eastern part of the county. The soil is fertile and is less acid in the plow soil than other soils of the Ontonagon series. The land is nearly level and drainage is slow because of the heavy texture of the soil. Effective drainage is the chief need for improvement. 6:3«Wfi‘mf*fl??tff‘_ .- '-'( I“! 'I'i' ls.“1l"|.'. In} ‘al'...A10" ' 43w» ...-9- mrmampuu wimp” . . _. . r .“ .,,.._.,.A—_-m.—-:'Iq4le,...4~.. ....;.,. _ 4 _ Bergland Soils Bergland gla1.- Bergland clay is a dark colored, heavy soil closely associated with and closely related to the Ontonagon soils. It differs from.the Ontonagon soil pri— marily because of poorer drainage. The soil is neutral or alkaline in reaction and is very fertile. At present the agricultural value of the land is low because of poor drain— age and high cost of reclamation. Bergland gilgz ELEIHLQ§E_7 Bergland silty clay loam is characterized by a covering of black mucky organic matter as much as six inches thick overlying mottled grey and yellow silty clay loam. It is slightly acid or alkaline in reaction and is fairly fertile. Under natural conditions the soil is waterlogged. The chief obstacles to the extensive use of this land for agriculture are the costs of clearing the land and maintaining effective drainage. Bergland Silt Loam - Bergland silt loam is a little more loamy and friable than others of the Bergland series. It has about the same agricultural possibilities as others in the Bergland series. - 5 _ Bruce Soils Bruce Fine Sandy_Loam.— Bruce fine sandy loam is a dark colored, fertile but poorly drained soil which occurs in fair- ly large bodies on the low-lying flat plain southeast and south of Sault Ste. Eerie. The soil is loamy, has good tilth and fair yields have been obtained. The principal need is artificial drainage. gguce Silt.Lgam - Bruce silt loam is very similar to Bruce fine sandy loam but contains more silt and is produc- tive if drained. Other Soils Eunuscorm Fine m Egg - Munuscong fine sandy loam has a dark grey or almost organic surface covering similar to that of the Bergland soils. The soil is fertile, not highly acid, and has little agricultural value at present be— cause of cost of clearing and draining. muniging Stony Loam — munising stony loam has an ex- cessively stony surface soil characterized by boulders and very large blocks of rock at the surface, underlain by a pale red bouldery sand and clay mixture. The soil is strongly acid and too stony for farming. «wan-owns, IP,‘§?}'11-I-F.~r . w... _ ”munamm9931.&nnml Mali-If 1!. 11}... IMAIMPIH‘F‘I we; _ _ .v 1' " . .._.. ...”..ww'jf :‘r'; Ana \Mnfl’ .‘. 771i! wru- .qamszx may? gnu... pug-rt Junk" ‘14)- x -6- munising Stony Sandy Lpam - MUnising stony sandy loam is similar to munising stony loam. The soil is acid. Onaway Stony Loam - Onaway stony loam comprises well drained, excessively bouldery land underlain by pale red stony sandy clay. Since most of the land is excessively stony very little of it has been cleared for agriculture. Strongs.Lgagy”§agg — Strongs loamy sand comprises mwst of the well-drained gently rolling sandy hardwood lands of the county. Due to its low moisture supply it is better suited to the production of trees. .ElE§.L§§2H§§EQZ.L2§E — Blue lake sandy loam is similar to Strongs loam sand, but it contains a higher percentage of clay, is strongly acid and moderately fertile. The stony phase is similar to Blue Lake sandy loam but contains a greater quantity of stones and gravel and is not well suited to agriculture. Ogemaw Sandy Loam - Ogemaw sandy loam is a wet sandy soil underlain by a red clay substratum at a depth of three feet or less. This land produces fair yields except where it is excessively wet. -7- fighigon Sand — Rubicon sand comprises the deep yellow sands of level dry areas such as the pine plains in the western part of the county. The soil is dry to a depth of three feet or more, highly acid, low in lime and other elements of fertility. The land is not used for cultivated crOps and it ranks very low in agricultural value because of its moisture deficiency and low fertility. Rubicon Eigg Sagd - Rubicon fine sand is similar to Rubicon sand but it contains a higher proportion of fine sand and very fine sand. None of the land has been utilized for farming due to low fertility, high acidity, moisture de- ficiency and low content of organic matter. Bohemian Very_Fine Sandy Loam — Bohemian very fine sandy loam is composed mainly of pale red or salmon colored very fine sand and silt to a slight depth. The soil is acid, fairly fertile, but low in humus and nitrogen. 'gmm§§.§ggquggamy.§agg - Emmet stony loamy sand con- sists of dry or well-drained loose sand to a depth of three feet or more. The soil is low in fertility, low in moisture and generally acid. It is of little agricultural value. Longrie Stony Loam - Longrie stony loam consists of brown sandy material from one to three feet thick resting on - 8 - limestone bedrock. It occurs in small isolated bodies in the southern part of the county. Because of its unfavorable situation, thinness and excessive stoniness it has little agricultural value. Detour‘Sgggy.Lgam - Detour stony loam comprises ex— cessively stony, but nearly level land in the southeastern part of the county. The soil is moderately wet and fertile but because of stoniness is little used for agriculture. The shallow phase differs from.the stony loam in having only a very shallow covering of soil material over the lime— stone bedrock. gphnswood Stony Loam - thnswood stony loam is very similar to Detour stony loam. It is moderately fertile and fairly moist, but too stony for profitable agriculture use. Kalkaska Saggynggam_e Kalkaska sandy loam comprises brown light sandy loam underlain by comparatively dry loose sand and gravel. This soil occurs in small bodies in the southeastern part of the county and has only slight agri— cultural value under present conditions because of low moisture content. The gravelly phase is similar to the sandy loam and has little agricultural value. Kalkaska Loamy Sand - Kalkaska loamy sand is less loamy with a reduced moisture holding capacity than Kalkaska sandy - 9 - loam. The soil is acid and has only fair natural fertility. Brimley Egyy_Fine Sandy L9am.- Brimley very fine sandy loam occurs chiefly in small bodies in the eastern part of the county on the old lake-bed plains. The top soil is light brown or variegated ash grey and yellow brown. It is strong- 1y acid and the moisture content is sufficient. Where the soil is utilized for cultivated crops it has produced fair yields when properly handled. Tygut Lake Stony Fine Sandy Loam - Trout Lake stony fine sandy loam is a poorly drained or semi-swampy sandy soil rest— ing on bedrock of limestone at a depth ranging from twenty- four to forty inches. The soil is not excessively acid and is probably fairly fertile. It occupies only a small aggregate area in the vicinity of Trout Lake. Granby'gand - Granby sand is a wet swampy sand soil slightly better drained than the muck and peat swamps. It has a higher lime content than Newton sand which it closely resembles. Granby sand has practically no agricultural value because of poor drainage, small size of bodies, and its association with other poor soils and location. Newton Sand — Newton sand is a wet swampy sand soil characterized by a thin mucky covering. Areas of this soil are widely distributed occuring mainly in narrow strips - 10 - bordering swamps or lakes. The soil is strongly acid and under present economic conditions has no agricultural value. wallace Fine Sand - Wallace fine sand is composed of dry fine and medium sands characterized by a hardpan subsoil. This soil is entirely free from stones and gravel and is strongly acid. It has little agricultural value because of unfavorable relief, low fertility, location within swamps and small area. Eastport Sand — Eastport sand is the low—lying strips of sand directly along the lake shore in the southeastern part of the county. most of this soil is alkaline and has no agricultural value. Shelldrake Sand - Shelldrake sand comprises the low ridges and level strips of beach and lake-bed sands lying directly along Lake Superior and White Fish Bay. The sand is grey or pink salmon in color and acid. At present it has no agricultural value. Saugatuck Sand — Saugatuck sand comprises the wet sand soils of low fertility occuring on flat sandy plains and on the border of swamps. It has a rust colored hardpan subsoil. This type of soil is low in fertility, strongly acid and is widely distributed throughout the county, but it has prac- tically no value for cultivated crops and only fair value -11- for pasture. Alpena Cobbly Loam - Alpena cobbly loam is a coarse dry limestone soil which occurs on low narrow ridges marking the position of old shorelines of former glacial lakes. It occurs in small bodies and has very little agricultural value. Waiska Cobbly Lgam_- Waiska cobbly loam is a poor dry soil, strongly acid, occurring in small low ridges in the northern part of the county indicating the benchlines of old glacial lakes. The acreage of this soil is small and the land has no agricultural value. Ewen Silt Loam — Ewen silt loam comprises the heavier alluvial soil of the county which occupies low semi—swampy bodies. The soils occur in narrow strips, are excessively wet, and have been used only as pasture. Ewen Sandy Loam — Ewen sandy loam is the sandier alluvial soil which is fertile, but because of poor drainage and small area has little agricultural value. Coastal Beach - Coastal beach comprises the narrow strip of beach along the shores of the lake sand, mud flats, shingle or limestone bedrock that is bare of vegetation. It has no agricultural value. -12- Rock Outcrop.- Rock outcrop is the limestone bedrocx ex— posed at the surface occurring chiefly in the southern part of the county and on Drummond Island. Total area is five and five-tenths square miles. Organic Soils Carbondale Muck — Carbondale muck is a nearly black or dark brown loamy or granular muck high in organic matter and alkaline neutral or very slightly acid in reaction. This soil comprises about 1/4 of the total of organic soils in the county. At present it has practically no agricultural utilization other than a limited use as pasture. Rifle Peat - Rifle peat is a dark brown coarsely granular or woody peat nearly neutral or acid in reaction. It is very high in organic matter and is the most extensive organic soil in the county. It has little or no agricultural value. Kerston Mpck - Kerston muck lies along stream courses and consists of organic matter and alluvial mineral matter. It has no agricultural value at present. Spalding Peat — Spalding peat is a strongly acid brown or yellow organic soil. It occurs mainly in the northwestern part of the county and has no value at present. 5'3..- uudulafi'fivtfiszi: ._.... - 13 _ Qgeenwood Peat — Greenwood peat consists of brown or yellowish fibrous coarse textured nearly pure organic matter showing very little decomposition. The soil is strongly acid and has no value at present. ‘goughton‘mpck - Houghton muck is derived from brown spongy or feltlike finely fibrous peat. It ranges from acid to alkaline and has no agricultural value at present. Tahguamenon Peat — Tahquamenon peat occurs in wet marsh- lands. It comprises a surface mat of living roots and very slightly decomposed dead plant matter derived from.the pre- sent vegetation and has no present value. Brown, 1946 — LITERATURE CITED Agriculture Census of Michigan, United States Department of Commerce. Agriculture Census of thhigan, United States Department of Commerce. H., Colton, B. R., An Outline of Statistical methods, Barnes and Noble, Fourth Edition. L. H., Michigan Farm Organization and Practices, Type— of—Farming Area 9, Special Bulletin SS6, Michi— gan State Agricultural Experiment Station, '2 pp., illustrated. L. H., Michigan Farm Organization and Practices, Type— of—Farming Area 14, Special Bulletin 557, Richi— gan State College Agricultural Experiment Station, 55 pp., illustrated. Yearbook of the United States Department of Agriculture, pp. 914—924. Hill, E. 3., Minneman, P. G., 1954 - Organization of Farms in Southeastern Michigan Special Bulletin 254, Michigan State College Agri— cultural Experiment Station and United States De— partment of Agriculture, 51 pp., illustrated. “0“ ""“" .. 0' ‘c ' 3': 92'-.. 5.... - .n-u-“\."...:2“.“.‘3’. .33. ....1-..«— lO. Putnam, G.‘W, 1951 — Successful Farm Practices in the Upper Peninsula, Special Bulletin 215, Michigan State College Agricultural Experiment Station, 69 pp., illustrated. ""'"'""" ’ 1927 - Soil Survey of Chippewa County, Michigan, Bureau of Chemistry and Soils, Michigan Agricultural Experiment Station and United States Department of Agriculture. wright, K. T., 1943 — Dollars and Sense in Farming, Special Bulletin 524, Michigan State College Agricultural Ex- periment Station, 44 pp., illustrated. u". . {IQ-‘3; 'Tbvlnl. Ilbpl . 2-1 I e - I ' ll\\- I l v H II. (2.4 x . I l s u u .I \ y\.. a ...o. . . t. ‘05]. . b 2‘ > L . . O Q. . .n .. . .5 . \V .\, a , r u a a n‘ s \ I a e s t . . l . . . n . . . n l .1 4 . . . l 5. s 1‘ QJ \nm- AK“ 1; u . o A. o . _ c v I . I . . . l s I} Q fivM‘ . t": I M 1 .o. 1.. e a . |._ I ..a.. but .4 cf‘ ‘\ IN . I » n a.“ a I Q’Lnn - sh . s. .V\ .I I. (\‘n v Q IL. \ . .. .... . v. I. . ...... . . A. s -|. | av o n I 1 _ N 1“ u s n . .4! u \ .p. p o I \ 4 .. u . .. t .. 2 . - .. . a .... 1: . ...II x A | .\ J! V .k\ o .6 § 1 u an _ . 1.. |\ _t\.\. a 't.. h ‘5 7 . . .1 no . - I 1 . p . . ‘ L a . . . n . . t ‘ Q . . i ‘ . I .. . . . . . . . . - \ . . - . .. . . .. o . ‘ u . .w. . . . . . ~ .. . - a. 5 . I n .4 . . . ... . o . ~ 0 1 O ‘ _ . . .4 . ' o \ I . v . .. . . s . A \ _ v . . o . - . . . .. . . § .0 I ~ . - . n I ' a s I .. .. . . x C u u a u c r .. . . v e . I l .I Q s H. _ . . . n 4 . . w _ . I u l .. o . . . , . .. . . . t .4. .. . . . . , . ’ulbv\u .. . . c 4 . . u. y .. . . . .. . . ., .H. ... m. .... ...... ...... fez . .. ’ . 1 u n (lav... . . .....-....r ..v.. . r\ . . . . . Y. s D. .H: -.-.T 3,...”.“ ‘ ......ar new. a” .... . seesaw... r. yd”. r’vz'mWV-‘v—VW—vx _ .- ,___ _.__ _. -.:1nii.uaw. “-.olu043n'u’d'1fi‘w'z v f _- .... \! :1“ :1. _f"3':‘.“"” n'. \1 ,fi'; fé..-7~‘1E. “:57 MY I. " ' Q ~ . h“ it 1948 g???“ "I ’1' 1 s E V 4 ‘.'.> 18 at I“ \ o - t .I - I" ‘ ..l- I 1 . ..1 . . nu ... .1 . . ...... ...........__. A}... 7.14191'.‘ ......1‘11 134‘...»ujqqnhl...1i..1rw‘5tdd. 1.2.1.6.. 111w In.;..l.:.. 1.! ....» ... I :u. ..smmn TENN ‘th..~lld;... ...“.Jfifi. ...k e UH...~N‘ ._ .....u .. ... Nix-... . I111... ._l”...I1‘4 ...-...... JO... . y. u... . . .I in. . .. . .. . . . . o . . .. . .. . . .. I . All? 172,}... F1... “Nanny... gin. I . u. .. ... 1 ...-r... . . . .4 .! .. ... . . . .1 . . . .. _ . . a . IFKIan l1 . l -.. Eu?1n.ald. . I. III. aifhfitf. ind. Lev}. ..s..5-51v.!l.mufi...n $N"!vlfl.§.k:az .1" u ....-.n. n... 1N... .._. J...» n. . ”.3. _. .. .x . . .1. E V ¢ \ . .... ......q h.\v.m.\oc.sl.nluusij1lll1|1 I|4|1l 1. .. rlnll’ 1" "71111111111111.11111“