efforts, finally evolved strains that were fitted to the northern climate and thus their success seems to have accelerated the capitalization of the land. They had estimated that although the land was now valued at its full value based upon its ability to produce wheat, yet it could be made to produce greater returns if more intensive cultivation was pursued. It therefore seems certain that the upward trend in the value of land had as one of its chief causes the gradual adaptation of the country to those crops that were more profitable. Other factors, of course, are not to be overlooked. In the first place, weeds had become a drag upon productivity. Other crops must be used to clean and condition the soil. Bare summer fallow was for a time and still is an important means of cleaning the fields. However, this was too expensive a method to be used on high priced land. With a bare half of his land sown to his money crop it was imperative that the remainder return at least a small income sufficient to reimburse the owner for holding it. It is doubtful whether the wheat farmer desired to change his methods and rotate his crops so as to obtain greater returns. The motive force for this change seems to have come from without and is due primarily to economic forces. The lands to the eastward, because of their increasing yield, due to more intensive methods, had gradually increased in value. The increase in population and the consequent greater demand, although this did not make itself felt until about 1912 when remunerative free land was no longer obtainable, has been a considerable factor in raising the price of land to its full capitalization on a minimum if not on average production value. The effect of this increasing capitalization in the East was first felt in North Dakota when those who were not able to purchase land where they lived moved westward, seeking the cheaper lands which would allow them the more 2 The introduction of new varieties of corn that were adapted to the short growing season of North Dakota brought about great increases in corn acreage and a subsequent increase in live stock. It seems that a great part of the corn was used as ensilage or fodder for cattle. easily to obtain a homestead. These immigrants naturally were forced to pay a price commensurate with the land's known productivity and the measure of the value of this land was naturally based upon its ability to produce wheat. It seems that the immigrant did this willingly, expecting to apply that system of agriculture which he had learnt in his old home and which he thought would bring him returns large enough to not only make a good living but easily pay for his farm.3 Another force which seems to have aided this movement towards intensive farming has been the desire on the part of the Scandinavian, notably the Norwegian, to make his farm his home. These people, possessing a more or less fearless spirit, have not hesitated to go into debt in order to improve their surroundings. The consequent embarrassment then when they found themselves unable to pay because of the diminishing returns of their wheat crop forced them, since they are possessed of a tenacious desire for a home, to resort to more intensive methods in order to retain and pay for their possessions. Since this nationality composes about twentyfour per cent of the entire population, their contribution, notably to the number of cattle, has not been negligible. In this case it seems to have been the younger generation which has adopted the more intensive methods which they seem to have acquired through the observation of those who had come in from the South. Thus the tendency to diversify seems to be due to the capitalization of the land which is brought about in two ways. The volume of this immigration is not easily ascertained. It seems to correspond somewhat with the emigration to Canada. This movement also has not been ascertained although the two seem to be complementary. However, it has been noticed that those who came in from the corn belt invariably attempted to raise those products with the growing of which they were familiar. Although they may have failed at first they continued to experiment with different varieties until they had ascertained that one which seemed best suited to conditions. The beginning of this immigration and the derivation of the hardier varieties of corn come within the same period, 1911-1915 (Corn in Montana, History, Characteristics, Adaptation, in Montana Agricul. Coll. Exp. Stat. Bull. No. 107). First, by immigration into a country where no free land exists. Second, by the desire on the part of the younger generation to possess modern conveniences. However, this movement towards intensive farming is most recent. It was not until 1912 that the raising of corn and potatoes reached even noticeable proportions and even now only four per cent of all cultivated land is devoted to these two crops. Even the raising of cattle, either for dairy products or beef, did not bulk large in the income of the average farm until the war brought added inducements in increased prices. Yet even the change, small as it has been, has had a most salutary effect upon the farmer who has subjected himself to it. When it is noticed that this change in methods has been almost entirely confined to the eastern section of the State, and when it is borne in mind that during the Non-Partisan League agitation the great strength of the League came from the western part of the State, the results of the change in methods of farming are all the more important in divining subsequent tendencies. Thus too, it seems that diversification has a steadying effect upon the farmer. He becomes more cautious of political quacks and cure-all formulas. He has become a business man. He studies his market and the abilities of his soil, he is a farmer and no longer a mere cropper. 5 This implies that the wheat cropper, the man who gambles his all and all he can get on a single crop, who is willing to take a chance with the weather and all the numerous risks consequent upon such action, has been the one who has been responsible for this latest debauch in radical plunging. There seems to be no doubt but that the wheat cropper must shoulder the blame, and it also seems that the poor crops of the western counties during the years 1916 to 1921, in driving him from his lands, contributed in a large measure to the overthrow of the League. So it seems that a change in the method of See Plate IV and Appendices II and III. See Plates VII and VIII. |