LIBRARY DOCUMENTS DIVISION A & M COLLEGE 0F TEXAS COLLdEYIQ ' I' . Summary and Implications A study was conducted in the Blacklands area of Texas to determine if family patterns concerning the use 0f money follow traditional values associated with subsistence farming or values associated with commercial farming. The six sample counties in- cluded in the study were Collin, Hunt, Johnson, McLennan, Milam and Navarro. The rural family in the Blacklands is part of a social system in transition marked by strong cultural conflicts. Social and economic changes have pushed parents toward value orientations associated with a commercial farming culture. The acceptance rate of new values varies from one family to another. Cultural norms concerning right and wrong adjust- ments have been slow in developing. Until a more clearcut basis is developed to define social roles and determine appropriate goals, adjustments probably will continue to show extreme variation from one family to another. The desire to maintain traditional values is not unique to rural families of the Blacklands. A reluc- '-: tance to change habitual, convenient pa, is common in many areas of the nation. A, the _Blacklands feel they are being forc, their children toward new values more a an environment of explosive social y: economic developments. Parents resent = pressure to change their own personal y because of developments outside their, beyond their control. The parents’ stro _ attachments to the Blacklands together? definition of the causes of their probl sulted in considerable resentment. i‘ Although adjustments are taking f tendency to place responsibility for th on external forces has impeded organiz, to the problems of the area. Most adj were the result of people acting as indi example, in the economic realm, adjus, following type are being made: there .; migration, particularly of younger peo "‘ working part or full-time to supplem u income; farm operators are doing off-ff, lement farm incomes; farmers are increasing the , 10f their farming operation, sometimes by pur- ‘ing, but more often by renting additional land; f there is a shift away from the traditional row- 4 farming to more livestock enterprises. Some adjustments have proceeded more rapidly ‘ v others. For example, 45.7 percent of all farm f ators in the six-county sample area reported that 959 other family income exceeded the value of I- products sold. The proportion of farmers so “rting ranged from 37.3 percent of the operators 5 ilam county to 56.7 percent in Johnson county. Interviews with parents revealed that many ers were delving into capital resources to main- an acceptable current income and level of living. 3' ation of capital resources and other methods of itment have produced expectations among the " ts that their children will migrate to the larger p. Such expectations may account for the lack ore serious purposes on the part of parents V d training their children in the use of money particularly toward training them in the opera- i’ and management of a farm. ‘The study indicated a lack of perspective or standing on the part of parents concerning as a training instrument. Training did , but it was incidental to other considerations. -i'cular practices with reference to providing chil- I with spending money or opportunities for de- _ making resulted from habit and convenience. l} parents pictured themselves as the decision ers. TAmong children 7 or 8 years of age, one-third ose interviewed reported they received allow- _ For children ll or 12 years of age, 23.5 per- received allowances. Of the 205 in the 15 to r group, 22.4 percent said they received allow- Only 10.3 percent of the parents said they their children an allowance. Those who pro- spending money on request felt that this method he study revealed a lack of serious purpose on - t of the parents concerning the use of money training instrument. Their actions, however, l’ ed a definite movement toward accepting and i» g practices that are associated with a com- pl farming culture. This indicates the parents’ ifor guidelines, such as those that follow, as a in help educate their children to accept the q ibilities associafted with living in a commercial phasize the educational aspects of developing tilizing the planning process within the home. ydicate that experiences in decision making and A money are relevant for children regardless of enabled them to know how the child spent the money he received. Interviews with the parents revealed the follow- ing patterns: a reluctance to accept the principle of an allowance, an inability on the part of the few who did accept the idea to continue the practice on a regular basis, a reluctance to change habit patterns as a child grows older, a reluctance to differentiate tangibly among children of different age levels and a greater concern with the way teenagers used money than with the way younger children used money. Parents’ reluctance to follow a definite plan of providing spending money for their children extended to their personal financial affairs. For example, 38.3 percent of the parents said that a definite plan for spending the major part of their income was the best way to handle finances. Nevertheless, only 13 of 175 parents said they actually used such a plan. Close supervision by the parents of the child’s use of money virtually eliminated the possibility of mistakes and also reduced the sense of responsibility felt by the children. This pattern gave the children a feeling of security which they liked. The children I at all age levels received spending money in some manner, bought things for themselves and had saved money for some specific purpose. There was little rebellion against established patterns, even by the 15 or 16-year group. In fact, they seemed to like the comfortable pattern provided them by their parents. Almost all the children, including the 15 or 16-year group, said that the amount of spending money they received was just right. The parents’ ideas concerning the use of money by the children were somewhat different from those of the children. The parents presented a picture of control and direction of their children’s activities. The children appeared to be unaware of such re- straints. They displayed feelings of strong personal security, high morale and an almost complete absence of resentment toward parents or the local area. IMPLICATIONS their future occupational choices. Show the negative effects of projects for youth where responsibility, financing and disposal of projects are prerogatives of the parents. Explain the necessity of enabling children to develop new values more suitable for the age in which they live. Point up fallacies in using immediate personal satisfaction and the absence of conflict within the family as primary instruments for evaluating family patterns. Emphasize the desirability of parents adjusting their training patterns as the child matures. Summary and Implications .............................................. .. 2 t Introduction ....................................................................... .. Area and Sample ............................................................... -- 5 Cultural Environment of Modern Commercial Farming 6 Attitudes of Parents .......................................................... .. 6 Attitudes Toward Money ........................................... .. 7 Budgets and Plans ...................................................... .- 7 Attitudes Toward Children’s Part in Purchasing Decisions ............................................... -- 8 Practices and Attitudes Toward Spending Money for Children ................................................ -. 9 Money as a Reward or Punishment ......................... _. l0 Family Security and Income ...................................... .- l0 Training Given Young Children .................................... .- l1 Attitudes ....................................................................... .. 11 Spending Money and Buying Experiences ............... .- ll Other Experiences with Money ................................. .. 12 Occupational Choices ................................................. .. l3 Attitudes of Sophomores .................................................. __ l3 Background .................. .............................................. __ 13 Spending Money ......................................................... __ l4 Work Experiences _______________________________________________________ __ 14 Buying Habits ............................................................. __ 15 Decision Making _________________________________________________________ __ 16 Future Plans ________________________________________________________________ __ 17 Acknowledgments ______________________________________________________________ __ 18 . __ 1s STUDY INVOLVES a partial analysis of the rural ‘family as part of a social system within a particular L lture. The main objective is to determine if ily patterns concerningthe use of money follow itional value orientations associated with sub- rnce farming or value orientations associated with ercial farming. Values, in this manuscript, are ted as principles guiding human action and con- 'ng: (1) a conceptual element, (2) an emotional Went and (3) criteria by which goals are chosen. _Values associated with the two farming systems used as reference points for analysis of attitudes y practices of the families who constitute the le for this study. The dynamic aspects of such ms as they exist in reality are recognized. lValue orientations used as characteristics of sub- nce farming include: AA desire for independence which is usually associ- v with farm ownership. iAvoidance of debt. ;Pronounced emphasis on enterprises to meet ,:_‘ family needs. indifference to excessive accumulation of wealth. » ittle or no formal planning of farm or family 'ties. e he higher ranking of applied rather than formal tion. eluctance to change established patterns or 'ces. igh value placed on friendship, hospitality and i - time} 1 alue orientations associated with commercial yng include: ng-range plans and budgets of time and money. i tilization of latest methods and research. ccumulation of capital for expansion. _p se of credit to increase profit. 1' rong belief in formal education. " pronounced emphasis on efficiency. l" H. Metzler, “S0cio-economic Aspects of Manpower ents: Low-Income Rural Areas,” Rural Sociology, Vol. ‘ 3, September 1959, pp. 226-235. ' Role of Money in Rural Family Living BARDIN H. NELSON, Professor Department of Agricultural Economics and Sociology Both capital and management are regarded as key determinants for success or failure of a com- mercial farm. Since modern farming is characterized by the values listed under a commercial farming culture, it would seem logical that young people trained to farm should be oriented toward these values. There- fore, a second objective of the study is to determine the extent to which young people actually receive training to enable them to develop a sense of personal responsibility and adequacy in the use of money and the making of managerial decisions that involve financial risks. Specifically, the following questions were asked: “Do parents provide their children spending money by a predetermined plan which affords the children an opportunity to experience planning and allocation of their personal resources?” “Are children given more freedom in using the money which they receive as they grow older?” “To what extent do older children (15 or 16 years of age) have opportunities to earn their own spending money?” “To what extent are children given opportuni- ties to make decisions and selections of needed per- sonal items?” “To what extent have the children had experi- ences in saving money for specific purposes?" “What are the attitudes of older children toward specific managerial decisions involving varying ele- ments of financial risk?” “Do the attitudes and practices of parents on the use of money by their children reveal an aware- ness and acceptance of money as a training instrument for the development of responsibility?” AREA AND SAMPLE The study was conducted in the Blackland area of Texas. Sample counties include Collin, Hunt, Johnson, McLennan, Milam and Navarro, Figure 1. Two schools per county were selected at random from among all rural schools in each county. Personal interviews were conducted with all children who were in specified grade levels at these schools. Schedules were collected from 140 children who were either 7 or 8 and 11 or 12 years of age. These 5 Figure l. Sample counties covered in this study. children are referred to as the young children. Half of these children were classified as rural farm and half as rural nonfarm. There were 66 girls and 74 boys. Schedules were taken from 205 high school sopho- mores who were 15 or l6 years of age. One hundred and nineteen lived on farms while 86 were rural non- farm. There were 106 girls and 99 boys. The age groups used were (7 or 8, 11 or 12, 15 or 16) to determine whether there were differences in attitudes and practices at these age levels. Where responses of the 7 or 8 group were not significantly different from those of the 11 or 12 group, these two groups were combined for analyses. Schedules were also collected from 175 parents of children previously interviewed (107 mothers and 68 fathers). Ninety-eight parents were classified as rural farm and 77 as rural nonfarm. % or 1940 1 - Purchased,“ nIInI--”’ \l-”' ' l 0 Q<\\\\¢' ~ __- ¢lf"’ _ _ V _ 75 “-~—-— NonpurchaseclA 5O l l l l l l l 1 l l_ l l l l l 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 ‘OPERATOR AND FAMILY LAIOR AND OPERATOR-OWNED REAL ESTATE AND OTHER CAPITAL INPUTS ‘ALL INPUTS OTHER THAN NONPURCIIASED INPUTS Figure 2. Trends in percentage of purchased and non- purchased farm inputs, 1940-58. Courtesy of Agricultural Re- search Service, U. S. Department of Agriculture. 6 y since 1945 while nonpurchased inputs . CULTURAL ENVIRONMENT OF Mo, COMMERCIAL FARMING Changes since the end of World War focused attention on farming as a busine than as a way of life. The total capital in in farming and ranching has increased tremf Furthermore, the number oflbusinesses depe raw materials from agricultiire has increaspf total number of workers employed in p‘ distribution and service industries constitutesyfy important part of labor in Texas. Each . farmers and ranchers spend from 750 i? 1 billion dollars buying intermediate ;»_ services used in the production of Te products? Farm families in Texas also spend fri 500 million dollars per year for clothing, and other related needs. If the moveme, cultural uniformity between rural and urv, continues, rural people will turn more sources to fill their needs. For example, i111; families purchased only 28 percent of their 1955 they were purchasing 60 percent?’ Sixty-three percent of agricultural in nation were purchased in 1959. Purchi a include feed, seed, commercial fertilizer, power and hired labor. Nonpurchased inp y family labor, barnyard manure and homéf feed and seed for which no direct mone is made. Purchased inputs have steadil decreased, Figure 2. Price inflation hasf an important role in farmers’ capital r‘ to meet operating costs, Figure 3. Since 1940, more than 40 percent of, in farm production has been the result/i crop yields per acre, Figure 4. Appro " of this increase in the nation can be increased use of fertilizer which is one results of technical developments that ha’ farmers’ capital requirements. if Since money plays a more prominent??? affairs than it did in earlier years, young.‘ should be trained in the use of money, y ing, risk bearing and other managerial ATTITUDES OF PARENQ The main occupation of 52 percent§ of households (91 out of 175 parents was farming or ranching. Three w laborers and two worked as ranch f “Production Expenses of Farm Operators by; Revised 1957) , Farm Income Branch, USDA, “M. Orshansky, Trends in Farm Family Food hold Economics Branch, ARS, USDA, Novem _‘ ington, D. C., p. 2. l A est source of employment other than farming skilled trade. Twenty-six were employed as icians, welders, auto mechanics, carpenters, iters, pipefitters or machine operators. Varying i: of business such as grocery stores, service sta- ,2, laundries and junk yards were operated by l3 clerical work provided employment for 8. The pining were school teachers, railroad workers, law rs and members of the armed services. i, des Toward Money in attempt was made to determine parents’ des toward money by the use of the following ents: }“If we were really honest with ourselves, we have to admit that money is the most important ; in life.” JjiWanting more money really keeps many of us " enjoying the more worthwhile things of life.” i‘Chances for a happy life are pretty slim if you fjust enough money to live on.” About the only way we can do good is through e of money or things that money can buy.” 7I‘It’s only natural to look up to a man who has a lot of money.” jI often wish I had as much money as some rich (I know.” I worry about money all the time.“ parents were asked which of the following state- best represented their feelings about the pre- statements: (1) “That’s very true,” (2) “That’s I true,” (3) “That’s slightly wrong,” or (4) i. 's very wrong.”5 otal scores ranged from O (most money centered) (least money centered). Only l9.6 percent of ithers are classified as money centered as con- with 72.9 percent who are classified as not * centered. The remaining 7.5 percent did not ete all items of the scale and are not classified. were classified as follows: money centered, rcent; not money centered, 69.2 percent and ssified, 2.9 percent. sitive answer patterns for parents by sex and ce are shown in Figure 5. Men and women i" code, positive answer patterns and scale values from lstatements, see Dorothy Dickins and Virginia Ferguson, I and Attitudes of Rural White Children and Parents ing Money, Mississippi Agricultural Experiment Station f al Bulletin, 190,43, April, 1957, p. so. ‘told Pedersen, ffflrmerly of Mississippi Agricultural Ex- _t Station, made" an analysis of a random sample of ‘fto the seven statements by 25 fathers and 25 mothers I" Kentucky, Mississippi and Texas. He used the method by Robert N. Ford, “A Rapid Scoring Procedure for yAttitude Questions,” reported in Chapter XII, Socio- 4 tudies in Scale Analysis by Riley and others, Rutgers City Press, 1954. i’ BIL. DOLLARS Total farm production expenses 00:00 ¢ o - n | on . | ¢ Q no » - | - ¢ - | - - ¢ Q .- 2O . . . . - . - - - . . - . . . . . - - Q ¢ - » ¢ . - - - - . .- TOTAL PURCHASED FARM _ INPUTS AT 1939 PRICES - ''''''''''''' o 5'0‘: '0.o’o'o'o.o'o'o'o°o'o'o'o°o.0 0.0000 0 .0 0 0.0. o ...._....._...-..,._..... ..,..._._._..._..._.,...,..“A. 1940 l945 l95O l955 1960 Figure 3. Inflation and farm production costs, 1940-59. Courtesy of ARS, USDA. . respondents indicated similar attitudes with 72.9 per- cent of the women and 69.2 percent of the men classified as being not money centered. The most significant difference in response patterns was between rural farm mothers and rural nonfarm mothers. A somewhat higher proportion of the rural farm mothers were not money centered. Parents’ attitudes toward money are the type more commonly associated with subsistence farming, that is, not money centered. Budgets and Plans Thirty-eight percent of the parents thought a definite plan for spending most of their income was best. Fifty-seven parents, 32.6 percent, thought it was best at least to keep in mind a few simple things such as spending a certain amount for groceries or saving a certain amount. Those who thought no plan was necessary accounted for 17.7 percent of the total, Figure 6. Only 13 or 7.4 percent of the 175 respondents said they actually used a plan in their expenditures although 67 respondents thought it was best to have one for the major part of their income. The plan was made by the husband in 6 of ‘these 13 families, in 2 families the wife made the plan and in the 7o 0F 1947-49 A 130' 7 ‘n. h To lZO llQ 100W 9Q 1 1 1 1 l 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1950 1955 1950 1955 ‘BASED ON ALTERNATIVE LEVELS OF CROP YIELDS AND I959 COMPOSITION OF ACREAGE. ‘euro on 1950-59 menu. °a4sso on ran-so ma“. Figure 4. Trend in crop production per acre, 1950-65. Courtesy of ARS, USDA. i TOTAL RURAL FARM RURAL NONFARM woo 9o - -- -~ - — FEMALES 80r- -- ' " Q MALES 1o - -- ~- - PERCENT a u: m o o I I Q._ n Q “no N-IO 30"" ~- m § 20 _q9 € - F Q2 E § O I0 07 0707070707070707074 26,5 707070707074 |6,2 f3 b: =1 S 0 0 >~ O 3 4 5 —)(-.NOT CLASSIFIED Q N Figure 5. Answer patterns of parents to statements about money. money centered.” remaining 5 families the plan was developed jointly by husband and wife. Nine of the 13 families who used a definite plan were farm, families. Two of the farm families said they were buying their farm through the Farmers Home Administration and were required to follow a plan and keep definite records. The four rural nonfarm families who kept records included two mechanics, one service station operator and one man in the Air Force. The following are typical reasons given for not following a plan or budget. “It is very difficult to make definite financial plans when there is no regular income.” “A plan would probably be a good idea, but we have never tried it.” ' “It probably wouldn’t make much difference, since we do the best we can anyway.” Seventy-eight percent of the parents thought a common purse or joint bank account was the best plan to handle family funds, Figure 7. There were 140 families who used checking accounts and all of these used their checks to keep records. However, only ‘85 kept any other kind of written record of expenditures or income. Most of these 85 respondents 8 l2-5 D:O'O'§'O' 01 J L L Q l0 L L L A 0.7070707070707070‘. 32,2 L v 9- ‘Q I0 v L v 4 v n -70’0707070707070707070‘4 32.5 7070707070707070 22,5 _0‘0'0'0'0'0'0 707070707070‘ |7,9 Q 45* v D A n» or >l< O m u Scores range from 0 “most money centered” to g said the reason they kept written records was J them complete their income tax returns. The failure of parents to use plans and for time and money is more characteristic i sistence farming than of commercial farming Attitudes Toward Children’s Part in Purchasing Decisions Of the 175 respondents, 147 said the wifn the final decision concerning the purchase. for a teenage youngster. One hundred and five said the wife also actually selected th Only 1O respondents thought the teenager’ have a voice in the decision to purchase Fourteen thought the teenager should select once it was decided to buy them. When a decision is made regarding the of a new car, 16.6 percent thought the childre participate in the decision. “Husband should make the decision” was the respo percent while 25.7 percent thought the husbv‘ should make the decision. 7 The parents did not feel strongly about their children with more opportunities to 3 cisions involving spending. Those who excl children from decisions or selections, event items like toys, gave “convenience” and Q s l s: no.-no1¢a-¢-¢.---¢'¢'-'-'.'¢'a: ... .-.;. . i. usve ‘ ssr o no 2o 3o 4o so so f0 slo so noo COMPLETE PLAN PARTIAL PLAN i-I-I-I-I-I-f-I- NO PLAN N0 ANSWER Figure 6. Percentage of parents who believed in some form l»! dget plan and those who actually used such a plan. "r reasons. The following statements are illustra- i “The children were in school.” ~ “My wife knew what size and color socks they ed. Those boys of mine never remember things that.” a “If you let one do it, they all would want to do same thing.” f Training given to children in buying decisions fctual selection thus was incidental and unplanned Q for personal or family items and showed lack Jprious purpose on the part of the parents. This aracteristic of a subsistence rather than a com- Tcial culture. tices and Attitudes Toward ding Money for Children ? Several studies show that the present democratic fly system does not emphasize the obligations of 1 en to their parents. On the contrary, obliga- " of parents to their children are strongly empha- Where this emphasis has been misinterpreted ean virtual emancipation of children regardless FIClT mental and emotional maturity, the results f ently have been disastrous. Such results have aled the need for reappraisal of the various roles in the family. ‘ Q This study indicates that parents were not giving f: children allowances or spending money to use “out parental consultation. Only 10.3 percent said gave their children allowances, while an addi- 6.9 percent gave their children spending money use 5 ' as 4e was sstnsvs asst o no 2o 30o 4o so so 7o so so loo common PURSE OR BANK ACCOUNT om: HAS MONEY 25552555; BOTH HAVE OWN MONEY NO ANSWER Figure 7. Percentage of . parents who believed in certain methods to handle family funds and those who actually used such methods. regularly, but did not consider it an allowance. In- come level apparently influenced this pattern since almost two-thirds of the parents giving allowances indicated annual net incomes of $4,000 or more per year. No parent giving an allowance indicated an annual income of less than $2,000 per year. The interviews revealed: (l) an inability to continue the practice on a regular basis, even on the part of parents who favored allowances, (2) a reluc- tance to put into practice ideas which allowed chil- dren as they grew older to share more fully in family purchasing decisions, an inability of parents to change habit patterns as a child grows older and (4) a reluctance or inability to make tangible dif- ferentiations in responses to children of different age levels. When asked how they thought their children used money, 163 of the 175 parents said they spent it wisely. However, when asked to explain their rating, half said they took precautions to see that their children spent money wisely. The parents’ feeling that the child might spend money unwisely was a primary reason given for not providing allowances. For example, 104 parents said when they gave money to their children, they told them how to spend it. The children were protected from mistakes therefore and spent their money wisely. Parents did not cite their own income as a specific reason for not giving allowances, although income was undoubtedly a de- termining factor. Nevertheless, the emphasis on wise handling of money by the children and the pattern used to assure such wise handling indicated an emphasis on money ordinarily associated with a commercial farming s culture. However, the parents’ failure t0 follow a definite plan in providing children with money is characteristic of a subsistence farming culture. A reluctance to change established patterns or practices is also associated with this culture. Money as a Reward or Punishment Parents did not favor giving money to a child as a reward for positive actions. Ninety-four of the 175 parents said they never rewarded their children by giving them money. Only 68 of the 81 parents who gave rewards considered it a good idea. Typical reasons expressed by parents against using money as a reward are: “It makes them expect money for doing what they should do anyway.” “They begin to expect money for everything and won’t do anything unless they are paid.” “Children should not have to be bribed to be good.” “They should feel their obligations are binding and should not expect money for performing them.” Although the parents did not favor using money as a reward, neither were they in favor of withholding spending money as a punishment. Of the 175 parents, 152 said they had never punished their children by this method. This would seem to indicate attitudes common t0 a subsistence farming culture if these results mean that parents did not wish to emphasize monetary rewards or punishments. All but l4 of the parents said they talked to their children about the cost of things used, like clothing or toys. Almost all parents reminded their children occasionally of the cost of larger family possessions such as the car, furniture and other house- hold items. This shows, however, that children were shown money was important, although they were not rewarded or punished by it nor permitted a decision- making role in its expenditure. Family Security and Income When asked how their financial status f time of interview compared to their status l. preceding year, 100 said it was approximat same, 59 had improved and 16 had deterii Their outlook on the future was almost i_ with their appraisal of changes in their si‘ during the past year. The, majority though present situation would continue indefinitely. A financial outlays tended to reinforce their 1,. concerning future expectations. Only 32 ing payments on a home, and only 25 were i payments on a farm. Twenty-five were buyi '5’ ment, and l0 had purchased stocks or bon, largest group, 71, were those who had acc ‘ some savings during the year. Better crop co and better job prospects were the reasons the optimism of those who indicated their s had improved. “Prospects look bad for wo the reason given by all who expected their S; to be worse. The relatively small number who pl expand or accumulate capital for expansion; subsistence farming culture rather than a c1! farming culture. Life insurance was the .3 lar form of personal insurance, and was 119 of the 175 parents. Hospitalization C‘ was held by, 87 parents. An additional 69 i carried what they termed burial insurance. 4 insurance was very common with ll5 havi fire insurance and 136 automobile insuran; These parents had a strong sense of__ security. Their security level seemed to bea? (1) past performance of the Blackland area, A living standard and (3) a high income level“ with other Texas farmers. For example, 62 of the rural farm and 75.3 percent of the V, farm parents reported net incomes of more I for the year before the interviews. : I 1 Family net incomes from $2,000 to _ year before the interviews were reported cent of the rural farm families and 40.2 TABLE l. ANNUAL FAMILY INCOME BY RESIDENCE AND BY ATTITUDE SCORE TOWARD MON Attitude score Income Rural farm Rural nonfarm 0 1 2 3 4 5 * Number Percent 0 1 2 3 4 5 Under $2,000 4 2 5 5 7 5 1 29 $2,000 to $3,999 0 l 6 9 l0 12 1 39 $4,000 to $5,999 0 1 0 2 4 2 l l0 $6,000 and more 1 0 1 2 4 4 0 l2 Not reported 0 1 1 0 5 1 0 8 Total number 5 5 13 18 30 24 3 98 Percent 5.1 5.1 13.2 18.4 30.6 24.5 3.1 29.6 1 0 4 0 5 0 39.8 0 3 2 6 8 ll 10.2 1 l 1 4 3 3 12.2 0 l 1 2 l 5 8.2 0 0 2 l 2 2 100.0 2 5 l0 13 19 21 100.0 2.6 6.5 13.0 16.9 24.7 27.2 ‘Scores range from 0 (most money centered) to 5 (least money centered). *Not classified by attitude toward money. l0 irural nonfarm families. More rural farm families p» percent) had earnings less than $2,000 than did rural nonfarm parents (15.6 percent). Only 10.2 ent of the rural farm families reported incomes the $4,000 t0 $5,999 group compared with 22.1 lent of the rural nonfarm families, Table 1. In general, responses in the interviews were yacteristic of a subsistence farming culture al- _' gh some respondents held certain attitudes and g1 practices common to a commercial farming ure. For example, they did not support previously Pussed concepts such as long-range planning, ggeting of time and money and rapid change in- ing the latest methods of doing things, particu- when economic pressures (defined by them as ide forces) forced them to change. They were i favorable toward such ideas as friends are more rtant than money, and current changes and new are too disturbing. ‘Parents thus seemed to face cultural conflicts. ditionally, they were oriented toward subsistence ‘£1 with one primary cash crop. Cash crop re or other disasters could be dealt with satis- rily because of a relatively small need for capital. p; present farming environment has changed the itions under which the farmers formerly operated. equently, they have been forced to accept certain g es associated with commercial farming. The sity to change has created some resentment 9h in turn has made a smooth transition from one to another almost impossible. It is difficult, jefore, to determine normative attributes (what Y ipconsidered right and proper procedures) under farming cultures in the Blacklands. A RAINING GIVEN YOUNG CHILDREN udes " To determine attitudes toward material versus f aterial things the children were asked the follow- Yfive questions: Ll. “Susie saves her little brother from getting over by a car. She did a good thing. Do you fk Susie ought to get anything for saving her little ‘ er? Yes ...... -- No ........ -. If yes, what? If no, why H 2-4. “If you could make three wishes and they yd all come true, what would you wish for?” 5. “When you grow up, what kind of job would l‘ like to have? Why?” LQStatements related to material things were coded “d those of a nonmaterial nature 2. When a ion could not be made as to whether the answer material or nonmaterial, the answer was given a j of 1. jChildren who scored less than 6 were classified paving a material attitude while those scoring 6 ll“ I2 YEARS 7'8 YEARS o no 2o 3o 4o so so 7o so 9o loo MATERIAL ATTITUDE a NON-MATERIAL ATTITUDE NO RESPONSE Figure 8. Percentage of children with materialistic and nonmaterialistic attitudes. or more were classified as having a nonmaterial atti- tude. Figure 8 indicates that 75.5 percent of the 7 and 8-year-old children were classified as having material attitudes as contrasted to only 56.4 percent of the 11 and 12-year group. Spending Money and Buying Experiences One-third of the 7 and 8-year children reported that they received allowances, while 23.5 percent of the 11 or 12-year group received allowances. Most children not receiving allowances obtained spending money by asking their parents for it. More than half (58.5 percent) of those who obtained spending money * --. ~ , _ '1 >: 3 ~ at» a. "3232. ‘~55 .- .- . 0on0 .00 q 0 o || - I2 5555255 22' 6 YEARS 33.9 0.0 4 .44‘ 3 9 3 s§s§=,=, 2 5.0 7 - 8 1:55:12 _ , . . .§:§ \_ o 1o 2o so 4o 50o so 1o so 9o noo ‘to: AND OVER 3413;223:235 * .25 T0 ‘l \‘ LESS THA'N$.25 NONE Figure 9. Percentage of children receiving various amounts of spending money during the week before the interview. l1 s; Y 9- 4 H-I2 YEARS 7'8 YEARS I l: P 62-5 0 IO 20 3O 40 5O 60 70 80 9O IOO DECIDE BETWEEN 2 DIFFERENT THINGS FOR SELF g-DECIDE CHRISTMAS PRESENTS TO BUY -:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:- PARENTS TALK WITH THEM BEFORE BUYING SOMETHING FOR FOR FAMILY BUY OR HELP BUY CLOTHING FOR SELF GO WITH PARENTS TO PICK OUT SOMETHING FOR WHOLE FAMILY Figure l0. Experiences reported by children in decision making and buying. by requesting it from their parents said they had to explain what they intended to buy. The children were asked the following question. Answers are shown in percentage figures. “When you want things like candy, gum or toys, what does your mother usually do?” l. Buy the things for you.” 25.7 percent 2. “Give you the money and let you buy them.” 68.6 percent 3. “Some other way.” 5.7 percent Nearly 40 percent of the children said they re- ceived money to spend two or three times each week. Only 8.6 percent said they did not receive some spend- ing money each week. The children were asked the following question also. Answers are shown in percentage figures. “If you go to the movies: l. “Do you usually pay the money yourself?” 31.4 percent t 2. “Someone else pays money for you?” 45.0 percent 3. “Never attend the movies?” 23.6 percent In a forced choice question, the children were asked: “Which way do you think is best: (1) to ask for money for things you want to buy or (2) for your mother or daddy to give you money without asking?” 12 To ask for money was the choice of 42.1 pe, and to have their parents give it without askin the selection of 54.3 percent. The remaining 3. cent were undecided. "Y: One hundred and thirteen thought the a, of spending money that they received was suffi Only two felt they did not receive enough g thought they received too much. The rem. seven were uncertain. Figure 9 shows the ll; of money which the younger children said t s; ceived during the week before the interview. Work which the younger children had d?‘ money included: yardwork (36) ; picking (35); other types of farm work (25) ; selling thin housework (20); washing dishes (19) and good grades (13) . To determine whether children participf discussions concerning family purchases, the were asked the following questions: 1. “When your family needs something the family will use (a television set, a radio, j or a sofa) what do your mother and daddy do?” 2 a. “Buy it and surprise the chi1dren.” {A b. “Talk about it with the children buy it.” (83) if 2. “Have your parents ever talked about buying something for the whole famil» they bought it? Yes (97) No (41) N0)‘; <2)” 3. “Have you ever gone to a store mother or daddy to help pick out somethi the family? Yes (88) No (51) No Answ‘ Thus, many children had been cons participated in the selection of a family ite _ experiences of the children in decision ma. buying are indicated in Figure 10. Other Experiences with Money y L. Ninety-six of the 140 children recalled to a store with money to make a purchasefi} mother. However, only 31 said that if th some ice cream or candy, they could charg’. grocery or drug store. (I Most children sometimes ate in the at school. Only ll said that they were-f money to pay for their lunch. The children were asked if they usual’, Sunday school. One hundred and sponded that they did. The largest grou their parents gave them their contribu-p Only 20 said that they used their own spe for church or Sunday school. Two saidyéfi lites they used their own and sometimes their i ents’ money. . The percentage of children who had ever saved i money, and who were saving money for some “ose at the time of the interview is shown in re ll. Practically all said they eventually bought item for which they were saving. The most popu- item for which children had saved was bicycles. A upational Choices l The children were asked whether they would p er to be farmers or urban workers when they up. Girls were asked whom they preferred as i re husbands. Exactly half preferred farm work. ‘an work was chosen by 49.3 percent, and 0.7 per- it (one individual) was undecided. r ATTITUDES OF SOPHOMORES (ground F Families of the 205 sophomores were very stable a residential standpoint. Forty-two percent of f_ll9 rural farm and 36 percent of the 86 rural {farm sophomores had lived l0 years or more at 'r present residence. Furthermore, 73 percent of rural farm students indicated they had lived on 15 years or longer. Since they were 15 or 16 of age, their responses indicated that 73 percent ose classified as rural farm had lived on a farm their lives. Only 10.5 percent of the rural non- 9;» sophomores had lived on a farm 15 years or er as contrasted with 44 percent who had never U on a farm. For 79 percent of the rural farm students, farm- fwas their fathers’ major occupation. It was also pplementary job for the fathers of an additional j percent. Only 20.9 percent of the nonfarm omores indicated that farming was their fathers’ occupation. However, 33.7 percent said their (rs had farmed in previous years. The main ins for leaving farming as given by those whose rs had previously farmed were: “Cou1dn’t make ing” and “Was offered a better job in town.” responses are more closely associated with a 1| ercial farming culture. One result of the family's increased money need been the growing proportion of wives employed 'de the home. The increase for the nation as Cole from 1950 to 1958 is indicated in Figure 12. (‘third of the mothers of the 205 sophomores were oyed outside the home. Some examples of work were doing follow: factory work (14); cafe fess (7); sewingf{_(5); nursing (4). Such a high F of employment for wives is not characteristic of sistence farming economy. p ood production for home consumption was an rtant activity for the families of these students. f, g rural farm students, 91 percent indicated that u- :2 YEARS 7_ 8 80.6 YEARS 59-4 o |o 2'0 5o 4o so so 1o so 9'0 loo EVER SAVED SAVING NOW Figure ll. Percentage of children who had saved money and those who were saving at time of interview. their family had a home garden. More than two- thirds (69 percent) of the rural nonfarm group had a home garden. Chickens for home consumption were produced by 81.5 percent of the rural farm families and 31 percent of the rural nonfarm. Other meat was produced also by two-thirds of the farm families and by one-fourth of the nonfarm families. Milk production for home consumption was reported by 69 percent of the rural farm and 51 percent of the rural nonfarm group. Information concerning “live-at-home” programs confirmed data obtained in a study of attitudes of 318 rural senior students in the Blacklands area. Seventy-five percent of their families had home gardens compared with 81.5 percent of the families of sophomores covered in the present study.“ Such a strong emphasis on production for home consump- “Bardin H. Nelson, Attitudes of Youth Toward Occupational Opportunities and Social Services in a Six-County Area of the Blacklands, TAES Bulletin 953, College Station, April 1960. g FARM 1950 -1958 z f‘ RURAL NONFARM i URBAN Figure 12. Percentage of wives working outside the home, 1950-58. Data taken annually in March by the Bureau of the Census, U. S. Department of Commerce. Courtesy of ARS, USDA. 13 tion is characteristic of subsistence farming. The cultural conflict previously mentioned thus mani- fested itself in many ways. Only 3 of the 119 rural farm students reported that their families produced no items for home con- sumption. Of the 86 rural nonfarm families, 20 or 23.2 percent produced no food for home consumption. These activities are important for the student because practically all those reporting them indicated that they helped with this work. Only 10.2 percent of the sophomores from‘ families with “live-at-home” programs said that they did not help with the work involved in the activities. Spending Money More than three-fourths (77.1 percent) of the sophomores received no regular allowance from their parents. Of this group, 39.5 percent stated that they obtained spending money from their parents by ask- ing for it while a slightly smaller group (31.7 percent) said their parents gave them spending money, but not on a regular basis. Further probing revealed that 82.4 percent of those who asked parents for their spending money were expected by the parents to provide rather specific accounting as to how they were going to use it. This, and earlier studies by the writer, revealed a tendency on the part of parents to become more concerned with the children’s use of money as they grow older. While this is similar to the commercial pattern, nevertheless, this type of concern did not allow the older child to experience a sense of increasing responsibility. Of the 205 sophomores interviewed, 189 attended church regularly. When asked where they obtained their church contribution money, 37 percent said their 50.5 s65 " v0.0 78-0 _ \ I25 2 20.0 - |4.0 ll.5 32.0 |3.5 ‘Q0 |o_5 v.» v» l °> é’ é‘ é’ é’ \ Q \ e s e f t? 5 <22 g v: i? ‘P’ <8 é‘ ‘F c? e e ALL STUDENTS l RURAL FARM RURAL NONFARM LESS THAN $|00 - NONE Figure l3. Percentage of students earning money during the school year. 14 $IOO OR MORE parents gave it to them for that specific pu Those who contributed their own spending t’, accounted for 50.8 percent of the group. The ing 12.2 percent gave from other sources, or di contribute to the church. The fact that one-h the 15 and 16 year old students contributed t church from their own spending money is remar; when one considers that less than one-fourth re I allowances and only approximately one-third? opportunities to earn money. Work Experiences Although most of the students hadnot l any money during the school year before this,‘ this does not mean that most students did no; work experience. It indicates that a fairly hig portion of the students who worked did not immediate monetary compensation for their] For example, 66.5 percent of the rural farm mores earned no money doing farm work th: before the study. However, 59.6 percent of the? farm group indicated that they helped with fa ti. after school and 79 percent indicated they wor the farm in the summer. Furthermore, two-t, those who worked on the farm indicated thp helped on a regular basis. However, these S frequently referred to the increasing number 0 curricular activities at school which allow little time for such work. Of the 94 farm __- who did farm work during the summer, onlyf ceived pay for that work. The use of family t with little provision for direct compensation characteristic of a subsistence farming cultured Other types of jobs performed by stud, cluded baby sitting (20); service station at (l3); grocery store clerk (ll); waitress (1 miscellaneous (60) . The baby sitters were di’ evenly among the rural farm and nonfarm ' However, only 4 of the 13 who worked ati’ stations lived on a farm and none of thej§ worked in a grocery store lived on a farm. ' From the standpoint of developing respi the pattern of previous work experience of; dents leaves much to be desired. Experience money, either earned or provided by somi may have widely different effects. *- Only 12.4 percent of the students ha? $100 or more doing farm work and only l, had earned this amount doing nonfarm W0, the school year before the interview, Figure economic motives assuming increasing im the total cultural pattern, consideration given to the effect of doing work witho i the attitudes and personality developme individual. For example, consider the c?) of the following remark which is typical Li; pressions made by the students: “Most =_ other jobs pay better. A lot of them have, off the farm and like the regular checks coming jso they will not likely farm.” Such remarks al an orientation of the students toward a com- jcial culture. This pattern extended into other areas. Among 205 youngsters, 138 (67.3 percent) belonged to I Clubs for an average of 2 years and ll months. "arger number (165) belonged to the FFA or for an average of 2 years. As part of their club '1, the boys and girls named 171 projects which had conducted. Of the 171 projects, 59 were as specialties. When questioned concerning idisposition of the product, 54 of the 59 sopho- s said the product was used at home. Of the pf products which were sold, the students reported three returned a profit while two showed a loss. jarently, field crops received a somewhat similar J ent because 4O percent of the individuals con- ling field crop projects did not know what hap- d to income derived from their projects. Projects are utilized as a training method because: kills involved in projects become more relevant personal and thus more meaningful to the stu- , (2) the young person is given an opportunity xercise both authority and responsibility and t e learning of skills and the exercise of mana- l responsibility affords the young person an rtunity to develop leadership traits. Parents p more understanding of the purposes of projects juth organizations in order that their help may ssitive rather than negative. s arents financed 36.3 percent of the projects. l; contracted by the students accounted for 27.5 of the project finances, and student savings fthe source of 14.6 percent. Miscellaneous sources nted for the finances used in the remaining y IS. l 0st students thought they had plenty of spend- joney although only 22.4 percent of the sopho- »- received allowances and only one third re- J pay for farm work or other family enterprises, ‘e l4. s; Habits lnsiderable conflicts may develop between a er and his parents because at this age, he begins (‘l he is entirely capable of taking care of him- l all matters, including the use of money. An fxious parent may be concerned with possible (uences of the independence of this child, who 2' ays been so tjdependent, but is not aware that l, socks don't-I. exactly harmonize with green s.” Some parents find it difficult to believe jeenager is ready to accept responsibilities accom- p g independent actions. i_ ying practice may be used to good advantage fans to acquaint the teenager with the responsi- RURAL FARM RURAL NONFARM I FEMALES E MALES ~80 Figure l4. Attitude of the 15-16 age group toward amount of spending money they received. bilities of independent actions. study was asked, “When you want something like a new sport shirt, a belt or a new pair of socks, what do you usually do?” The same question with differ- ent items of clothing was asked the girls. The re- sponses are shown in Figure 15. To determine if the action pattern was different for more expensive items of clothing, the students were asked: “When you need a new jacket or a new dress or suit does your mother or dad (1) buy it for you, (2) go with you to buy it, you go alone to buy it, or (4) other -” The largest group (165) said that their parents would go with them to buy the jacket or suit. The parent referred TOTAL RURAL FARM RURAL NONFARM MALES FEMALES MALES FEMALES m BUY wnu MY own MALES FEMALES V/////. ASK FATHER OR women MONEY TO suv rrsm FOR ME ASK FATHER OR MOTHER- OTHER WAYS FOR MONEY AND BUY new Figure 15. Percentage of students using various methods of buying needed items of clothing. 15 ~50; PERCENT J. O c Each boy in this know what their families would do. RURAL FARM RURAL NONFARM |oo — - I00 9O — — 9O - FEMALES E MALES 80 — - 8O 7O — - 7O +- 60 — - 60 l- 5 517 55.2 5 Q 5O ~ 4a.: »' - 5O o m 0:4 .0. $ fl- 40 - 2;! g1; - 40 “- 30 - m - 30 2o _ :5: 2° ' 5:5 s - 2o |0 - 5:} :5: 5:5 :5: - |o .0‘ 0.4 .0. 0.0 .0‘ 0.1 '0. 0.0 2-6 I‘! I.Q o Figure l6. Attitudes toward going into debt 0n a major purchase. t0 was the mother almost without exception. Twenty- two students said they would go alone to buy it while only 1l said their parents would buy it for them. “When your family needs something that all the family will use (a television set, a radio or a living room suite) , what do your father and mother usually do?” The response of 35.1 percent was “Buy it and surprise us.” The answer of 62.9 percent was “Talk about it with us.” The remaining 2 percent did not As indicated in the section dealing with young children, 40.7 per- cent in the 7 to 8 and 11 to 12 groups said their parents would discuss the matter with them before purchasing the item. TOWN JOB VERSUS FARMING RURAL FARM RURAL NONFARM IOO IOO 9O — — 9O 8° - — FEMALES m MALES - 80 7O - - 7O 6O - - 6O - '5 5 so - as - so u: o 42.3 _,:, a E‘ _ 38.5 0:4 :0: _ u’ a. :1; 1;: Igi; 0- 3o - g2; $31 I32; - so 0:0 - to: 20 - 1;! 1:2; I$ ;I;I ~ 2O ‘o: 6:4 :0: £0: " § 3 Q R -I0 ti: It‘ it 222' o Figure 17. Attitudes toward alternatives involving varying degrees of risk. l6 Decision Making a A05 GROUP i fiZZZ1951 18% 18-19 5% 20-24 9% Figure 18. Percentage of farm youth enrolled l. 1951 and 1958. Data from Bureau of the Census, U. A ment of Commerce. Courtesy of ARS, USDA. I if To determine attitudes of the l5 to l toward specific managerial decisions invol ments of financial risk, each student was l, 5 following narrative: “]ames’ dad told him; was thinking of borrowing $4,000 from thei buy another tractor and some additional in order to work more acres of land. He as what he thought of the idea. If James we boy, which of the following do you think have said: (1) I think it would be a very ment, (2) I think it would be a wise in; (3) I’m not sure whether it would be the , A to do or not, (4) I think it would be foo. a into debt on this farm and (5) I think it very foolish to go into debt on this farm.” .0 More farm and nonfarm students would be a wise investment, Figure 16. 0g is the fact that 61.1 percent of the farm gir‘ it was either wise or very wise as compar percent of the nonfarm girls. The residg had a reverse effect on the boys with 55.8 f the farm boys viewing the investment as wise as contrasted to 68.1 percent of theno The most common explanation given, who viewed the investment as wise or ve s‘ “A farmer has to go into debt to get an A typical explanation by a student W decided is: “It’s been pretty hard for my '1 a living farming. It would be hard on ; to go into debt that much. He might tractor and farm more acres. I don't like Remarks made by those students w as a very foolish investment are similar tOé ing: “You might not be able to repay’; You can’t tell about the weather or so get sick. You might be able to pay it f» would be old as Methuselah.” Some students thus indicated a relui into debt, which is an aspect of the subs ing pattern. At least half of the stude hasized the necessity of accepting the capital risks lved if farming was to be a permanent occupa- -l choice. The 15 and l6-year group revealed a ic awareness of recent farming trends and indi- An also that their basic orientations were toward mmercial farming culture. 2- The students also were told the following narra- if “Bill is a young man who has just married. would like to farm, but only owns 75 acres of j. He thinks at least 160 acres in the Blacklands needed to make a good livelihood. One of his ; bors tells him that he would like to move to l and would sell his 100 acres of land for $10,000. (has been offered a job which would pay $275 month as a clerk in a hardware store at the county Which of the following alternatives do you Bill will most likely follow? (1) buy the neigh- farm and continue farming, (2) farm the 75 : he already owns and let the neighbor’s land go, I don’t know what he would do, (4) farm part- on the 75 acres and take the job in town and Itake the job in town.” J Responses of the farm and nonfarm sophomores ‘hown in Figure 17. {A typical reason given by those who favored buy- (the neighbor’s farm was: “A fellow has to take nce if he ever expects to have anything.” Only students selecting this alternative mentioned other ns than the necessity of taking risks. These two a considerable emphasis on the security of farm 1:" ship. ‘The largest group selected farming part-time and p: the job in town as their alternative. In gen- {their reasons are quite similar to the following: ‘farm part-time on the 75 acres and save money it the town job to buy more land in the future.” .; hose who selected the job in town emphasized curity aspects. For example, a rural farm girl stated: “I’d take the town job because you know you will get $275 per month, whereas in farming you never know what you will make.” The basic orienta- tions were toward a commercial culture, with few exceptions. Future Plans The percentage of farm youth enrolled in school has increased considerably since 1951, Figure 18. The increase is particularly significant for the age groups 18 to 19 and 2O to 24 years. Educational training increases a student's awareness of additional alterna- t1ves. The 205 sophomores were questioned concerning their interest in attending college. More than one- third, 94, planned to go to college. Only 7 students planned to major in agriculture as contrasted with 18 in engineering and 17 in business. There were 49 students who desired some type of specialized training in addition to the 94 who planned to attend college. Business training ranked first, with 26 students giving it as their choice. Mechanical training was next, with 8 students indi-..._. eating it as their major interest. Thirteen of the 205 students indicated that they plan to get married as soon as they graduate from high school. Twelve of these l3 were females. The sophomore students exhibited very favorable attitudes toward higher education, but did not value it as highly as students previously interviewed in East Texas (TAES Bulletin 859, “Attitudes of Youth Toward Occupational Opportunities and Social Ser- vices in Cherokee County”). Blackland students possessed a high confidence level based on: (1) their faith in the Blackland area and (2) their nearness to Dallas, Fort Worth or Waco where jobs could be obtained. 17 Acknowledgments This study was originally a subproject of Southern Regional Project 5-20. Major responsibility for preparation ‘of schedules was carried by Dorothy Dickins, head, Department of Home Economics, Mississippi Agricultural Experiment Station, State College, Mississippi, who served as chairman of a subcommittee composed of Virginia Fer- guson, assistant home economist, Mississippi Agricultural Experiment Station, State College, Mississippi; Lucile Magruder, assistant professor of Home Economics, Kentucky Agricultural Experiment Station, Lexington, Kentucky; and Bardin H. Nelson, professor, Department of Agricultural Economics and Sociology, The Agricultural and Me- chanical College of Texas, College Station, Texas. When the regional project was discontinued, the subprojects were continued as independ- ent projects of the agricultural experiment stations of these three states. [Blank Page in Original Bulletin] i mum nmou Q us: wuntlflfli I nu nun LAIOIAYOIIES A coornnwm some" Location of field research _units of the Texas Agricultural Experiment Station and cooperating agencies ORGANIZATION MOPERATION Research results are carried to Texas farmers, ranchmen and homemakers by county agents and specialists of the Texas Agricultural Ex- tension Service joclay i4 Kedearcé .95 jomorrowi/S mare State-wide Researc .. I ‘k The Texas Agricultural Experiment Sta -, is the public agricultural research aged of the State oi Texas. and is one of parts of the AcSM College of Texas. A IN THE MAIN STATION, with headquarters at College Station, are l3; matter departments, 3 service departments, 3 regulatory services ‘A administrative staff. Located out in the major agricultural areas of 2O substations and 1O field laboratories. In addition, there are 13 co stations owned by other agencies. Cooperating agencies include ' Forest Service, Game and Fish Commission of Texas, Texas Prison? U. S. Department of Agriculture, University of Texas, Texas Tech College, Texas College of Arts and Industries and the King Ran v experiments are conducted on farms and ranches and in rural 11-,’ THE TEXAS STATION is conducting about 450 active research projfifilsi; in 25 programs, which include all phases of agriculture in Texas. ~ these are: Conservation and improvement of soil Beef cattle Conservation and use of water Dairy cattle Grasses and legumes Sheep and goats Grain crops Swine Cotton and other fiber crops Chickens and turkeys Vegetable crops Animal diseases and pa vi Citrus and other subtropical fruits Fish and game ‘ Fruits and nuts Farm and ranch engin Qil seed crops Farm and ranch busing Ornamental plants Marketing agricultural y Brush and weeds Rural home economics ' Insects Rural agricultural econ Plant diseases Two additional programs are maintenance and upkeep, and centr i, é AGRICULTURAL RESEARCH seeks the WHATS, ' y, WHYS. the WHENS. the WHERES and the HO V,‘ hundreds of problems which confront operators 0H,‘ and ranches, and the many industries depending? or serving agriculture. Workers of the Main St p and the field units of the Texas Agricultural ment Station seek diligently to find solutions to 5, problems. ii