ANALYSIS OF THE AVERAGE COSTS OF PRODUCTION OF SUGAR BEETS—SUMMARY FOR THE NINE £3 
STATES INVESTIGATED AND FOR IDAHO BY AREAS 
TaBLE 12.—Analysis of the weighted average costs of production of sugar beets’ 
SUMMARY FOR THE UNITED STATES AND IDAHO, 1921, 1922, AND 1923 
[Per acre of sugar beets harvested] 
ADO) 
rae Equip- Gross 
od Io Mi i [Minor , S05t5, 
ap net -  |Irriga- i exclud- | Cred 
labor | Seed cial | Li | ry depreci- ig | Taxes general sxglug | in 
of forth: gdb ation, | costs i 
Ma- opera-| | lizer an 
chine To | | shelter charges | 
opera- ~ 
tions | Day | Horse 
ind in- 
direct 
labor | 
Ares and year 
Tnited States: 
3-year average. [$17.37 1$23.02 1$12.58 |31. 43 1$3.39 $0.51 $3.94 [$1.11 
1921. .......| 17.05] 24.08 | 11.07 | 1.62 | 4.03 | .52 3.84 | 1.10 
1922 coo i652 | 27 1.32 13.19 | .41 (4.01; 111 
1925 18.49 123971 14.17 {1.28 | 274 | .59 | 4.03 | 1.12 
idaho: 
3.year-average..| 22.01 | 28.34 { 11.24 |... | 8.23 [..._..| 495 2.69 
1921. oem. 20.66 1 28.74 | 9.54 io. 3.230.495! 2.60 
1922." lo1.28 | 2580 | 12.35 |... 3.23 |......| 4.95 2.€ 
1923. 230721 29.37 112.24 | 1 8.28 j.....1 4.95] 2.60 . 
B4. 4€ 
4.97 
4.4 
4, 50 
51.69 ($3. 14 
1.67 |? 
1.74310 
1.66 | 3.07 
pt 
7 p2. 97 
7c 1.2% 
7.73 3.70 
76.73 2.99 | 
IE 
6.64 1.5813.76 
6.64 1.58] 3.76 
6.64 1.58 13.76 
6.641 1.58) 3.78. 
1.65 
1.5% 
1.55 
1.55 
2 
, 
89." 
3 
4 
4. 
4 
{ 
“win Falls— 
4-year average 
1921... 
1002, cnn 
923... 
Lickfoot— 
T-year average 
1921... 
1922... 
1923 ea] 2 
amount by which 
the average re- 
turns to growers 
from the sale of 
sugar beets ex- 
ceed the average 
costs of produc- 
tion of sugar beets 
Capital 
cherges 
Net 
Costs, 
'exclud- 
ing 
capital 
.charges 
Aver- 
Net 2p r= 
costs, turns to 
includ: ne No allow- Allow 
ing Tom ance for 
Vmter capital [the sale | made for ngs iy 
‘est at {charges of sugar land rent- al and in. 
6 per beets? | aland | crot's 
Land | cent interest per cent 
charge | on on other | 0% Sy ar 
other capital capital 
-capi- employed|,;; 15veq ow 
‘tal 8 SUSAI- | in sugar- 
beet pro- beet pro- = 
Quetion |'gycii0n 83 
0h 
70.79 
70.78 
pg 
73 74 
313. 43 131. 76 
14. - 
$85. 98 
R7.7” 
$87. 88 
68.7" 
90. 4. 
so My | 109, 91 
$17.09 
—1.97 
23.20 
36.17 
$1.90 
-18.45 
7.90 
22.71 
11.69 
1,0 
3.73 14.01 2.16 97.90 | 106.00 
mong 16.30 2.16 97.54] 70.26 
: AER 95.73 | 122.70 
7, 11.83 12.161 99.46 | 130.76 
24.27 8,10 
—8.82 -27.28 
43.13 26.79 
45.29 31.30 
35. 32 19.65 
2 —24.22 
JZ 42.09 
8 41.21 
7 3.48 
Rp —29.42 
"08 16. 53 
JT. 62 23.30 
an 
c 
a 
Ji 
2 
I~] 
: These data are weighted on the basis of the acreage harvested. in ascertaining the State aver: 7... sac; the. years tne averages for the individual areas were weighted 
on the basis of the harvested acreage investigated in these areas. To obtain the 3-year average for Idaho th: data for Idaho for each of the years 1921 to 1923 were weighted on 
the basis of the total acreage harvested in the State in each year, respectively. In obtaining the average for the United States the State data for the 9 States investigated were 
weighted on the basis of the total acreage harvested in each State, respectively. 
h ? The Shores, returns to growers per acre of sugar beets harvested shown in this table were obtained by multiplying the prices per ton shown in able 9 by the yields per acre 
shown in Table 53. 
Nore.—A minus sign (—) preceding a figure means that costs exceed returns by the amount indicated. 
See pp. 8-14 for explanation of cost items. 
,» 
= 
14 
5 
oR