€¦ · Table B-14. Counties — Farm Earnings, Agriculture, and Water Use [Includes United States, states, and 3,141 counties/county equivalents defined as of February 22, 2005

Table B-14. Counties — Farm Earnings, Agriculture, and Water Use[Includes United States, states, and 3,141 counties/county equivalents defined as of February 22, 2005. For more information on these areas, see Appendix C, Geographic Information]

County

Farm earnings,2005 Agriculture (NAICS 111–112), 2002 Water use, 20004

Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1

Farms Land in farms Value of farm products sold

Total(mil. gal.per day)

Groundwater,

percentof total

By selected majoruse (mil. gal.

per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

UNITED STATES. . . . . . . . 50,903,000 0.6 2,128,982 34.9 15.9 938,279 441 200,646 94,245 47.4 52.6 405,042 20.8 136,905 42,781

ALABAMA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,324,547 1.3 45,126 37.1 8.3 8,904 197 3,265 72,352 18.1 81.9 9,990 4.4 43 834

Autauga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,902 1.5 373 26.8 12.9 118 318 19 49,871 43.7 56.3 37 28.6 (Z) 6Baldwin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,173 0.7 1,062 48.2 8.1 181 171 86 80,697 82.9 17.1 35 78.1 6 20Barbour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49,846 10.6 531 17.7 18.5 191 359 61 114,056 24.7 75.3 7 85.7 1 5Bibb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,535 0.8 187 26.7 15.0 45 240 2 8,909 25.0 75.0 4 100.0 – 4Blount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,349 7.9 1,248 40.1 2.9 143 115 114 91,532 6.3 93.7 32 9.1 (Z) 32

Bullock. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,323 11.5 273 17.6 33.3 146 536 29 105,293 70.0 30.0 3 82.5 1 3Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,194 12.2 425 25.9 5.6 83 196 58 135,529 2.9 97.1 4 100.0 (Z) 3Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,467 0.4 673 45.8 2.4 75 111 43 63,975 18.2 81.8 25 84.9 1 22Chambers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,875 0.4 306 23.9 17.3 93 303 6 18,294 22.3 77.7 12 2.3 (Z) 6Cherokee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,899 6.1 546 32.1 9.0 121 222 34 62,125 42.4 57.6 6 22.3 2 3

Chilton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,365 3.3 667 35.8 4.3 98 147 13 19,651 68.8 31.2 5 72.6 (Z) 4Choctaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,718 1.9 244 27.5 12.3 55 226 6 24,873 6.4 93.6 52 3.3 – 1Clarke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 740 0.2 284 25.4 8.8 57 201 2 6,468 25.9 74.1 23 11.1 – 3Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,027 5.0 427 21.1 6.6 84 198 23 53,400 2.2 97.8 2 34.1 – 1Cleburne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,633 17.2 326 31.0 3.1 44 136 52 159,448 2.6 97.4 2 71.6 – 1

Coffee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,246 8.6 854 28.7 10.5 197 231 134 156,919 9.1 90.9 13 86.2 2 7Colbert. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,401 1.9 584 32.9 8.9 132 226 35 59,250 32.2 67.8 1,346 0.3 1 8Conecuh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,751 2.6 369 25.5 10.3 82 222 5 14,070 26.6 73.4 2 100.0 – 2Coosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,923 2.5 228 26.8 6.1 39 173 1 6,465 (NA) (NA) 1 47.7 – (Z)Covington. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,418 5.5 1,013 24.8 8.2 202 199 68 66,644 18.8 81.2 29 25.6 1 7

Crenshaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67,185 32.1 570 22.6 10.9 130 229 74 130,084 2.1 97.9 2 84.4 (Z) 2Cullman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98,278 7.7 2,301 48.5 2.7 231 101 337 146,658 2.9 97.1 41 1.4 (Z) 40Dale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,863 1.8 459 23.5 14.8 139 304 45 97,089 18.8 81.2 9 92.3 1 7Dallas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,843 1.9 490 23.3 24.7 236 481 26 52,622 33.7 66.3 54 24.9 1 10DeKalb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108,345 9.6 2,177 46.6 3.2 237 109 268 123,254 3.8 96.2 18 13.2 (Z) 17

Elmore. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,491 0.5 633 38.7 6.8 104 165 12 18,956 57.0 43.0 6 63.4 (Z) 5Escambia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,544 1.1 444 47.1 10.4 94 213 9 21,020 62.3 37.7 43 19.5 1 6Etowah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,106 2.1 974 52.1 2.3 90 93 48 49,003 5.5 94.5 271 1.9 1 23Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,531 1.1 365 17.5 8.5 75 206 12 33,249 12.5 87.5 3 27.4 – 2Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,813 11.8 929 30.7 5.3 146 157 107 115,601 1.8 98.2 5 37.4 (Z) 4

Geneva . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,136 16.3 998 28.6 10.1 227 228 103 103,092 17.4 82.6 4 74.8 1 2Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,691 10.7 349 24.6 23.5 128 367 20 56,473 1.8 98.2 361 1.0 1 1Hale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,626 11.5 433 19.6 18.9 161 371 44 102,464 3.6 96.4 6 100.0 (Z) 2Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,893 3.8 346 20.2 22.3 151 436 26 75,618 53.6 46.4 5 60.7 2 2Houston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,337 0.5 700 34.3 13.9 188 269 40 56,553 61.4 38.6 130 18.3 4 19

Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,926 3.4 1,375 40.4 7.1 229 167 70 51,141 14.6 85.4 1,563 0.1 (Z) 7Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,138 (Z) 463 58.3 2.4 42 91 14 31,181 12.2 87.8 103 19.1 – 59Lamar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,456 (X) 463 33.0 6.9 87 187 5 11,073 20.2 79.8 2 87.2 (Z) 2Lauderdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,981 0.6 1,485 45.8 4.7 208 140 28 18,943 40.6 59.4 15 19.1 (Z) 13Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,736 9.2 1,597 44.1 4.6 234 147 90 56,053 18.7 81.3 60 1.9 1 2

Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,212 0.7 336 34.8 10.7 74 220 29 86,131 (NA) (NA) 17 12.2 1 13Limestone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,558 1.9 1,235 44.5 7.0 226 183 52 42,338 57.6 42.4 2,121 0.2 2 11Lowndes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,736 6.5 420 28.6 23.3 197 468 42 98,862 15.0 85.0 2 77.4 1 1Macon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,961 1.9 368 25.8 19.3 129 351 9 25,573 73.2 26.8 5 18.4 1 3Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,690 0.1 1,117 46.6 6.2 198 178 38 33,693 70.4 29.6 54 58.1 2 50

Marengo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,967 1.3 508 21.9 18.9 189 372 15 28,724 11.6 88.4 23 22.1 (Z) 2Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,527 5.6 756 28.3 4.4 119 158 45 59,085 3.3 96.7 6 11.0 – 5Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63,088 4.2 1,686 53.4 2.5 161 95 186 110,464 2.2 97.8 19 18.3 (Z) 18Mobile . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,572 0.2 740 56.8 6.8 101 136 75 101,446 87.1 12.9 1,295 3.1 1 136Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,986 1.3 443 31.4 14.0 120 271 10 22,878 39.8 60.2 81 26.6 (Z) 5

Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,452 0.2 703 33.3 16.2 213 303 36 51,004 25.5 74.5 47 49.1 (Z) 44Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,038 1.1 1,308 47.6 2.6 149 114 79 60,717 6.1 93.9 162 2.7 (Z) 33Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,122 5.8 376 21.8 18.1 165 439 18 47,532 9.4 90.6 4 100.0 – 3Pickens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,415 5.6 493 26.2 9.9 143 289 74 149,923 2.6 97.4 3 89.3 (Z) 3Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,659 8.9 612 21.9 17.6 187 306 66 107,100 8.9 91.1 7 77.3 2 4

Randolph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,920 10.2 610 25.9 6.6 110 180 52 85,770 1.9 98.1 2 39.3 – 1Russell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,422 0.8 245 32.7 19.2 105 430 8 34,171 82.1 17.9 32 3.9 1 8St. Clair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,064 1.0 667 42.7 3.7 83 124 47 70,144 14.9 85.1 8 93.7 (Z) 6Shelby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,177 0.1 486 46.7 4.7 64 132 13 26,936 70.5 29.5 780 1.8 1 13Sumter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,729 2.4 443 26.0 21.9 177 399 13 29,451 6.1 93.9 2 100.0 – 1

Talladega . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,170 0.5 584 34.4 9.1 109 187 27 45,719 20.1 79.9 93 11.9 (Z) 15Tallapoosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –487 (X) 377 26.5 6.1 78 207 5 13,748 27.3 72.7 11 2.9 (Z) 11Tuscaloosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,236 0.1 547 36.4 8.4 103 188 21 37,501 30.4 69.6 35 26.5 1 27Walker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,101 0.4 543 47.3 5.2 75 138 51 93,742 2.3 97.7 693 0.2 (Z) 58Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,196 3.8 396 28.8 5.6 74 187 22 54,513 3.5 96.5 124 9.0 (Z) 1Wilcox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,067 1.8 306 20.6 25.8 160 523 5 16,480 20.8 79.2 24 4.9 (Z) 1Winston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,177 6.5 650 39.1 2.2 66 102 61 93,729 0.5 99.5 1 100.0 – (Z)

See footnotes at end of table.

618 County and City Data Book: 2007U.S. Census Bureau

Table B-14. Counties — Farm Earnings, Agriculture, and Water Use—Con.[Includes United States, states, and 3,141 counties/county equivalents defined as of February 22, 2005. For more information on these areas, see Appendix C, Geographic Information]

County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

ALASKA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,263 0.1 609 42.0 16.1 901 1,479 46 75,768 44.5 55.5 305 46.2 1 80

Aleutians East . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 3 0.9 – 1Aleutians West . . . . . . . . . . . . 437 0.2 36 19.4 50.0 707 19,639 (Z) 9,139 (NA) (NA) 5 7.2 – 2Anchorage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 251 48.6 10.4 47 187 28 109,610 51.6 48.4 42 31.8 (Z) 37Bethel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – (Z) 91.7 – (Z)Bristol Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – (Z) 100.0 – (Z)

Denali . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 14 1.1 (Z) (Z)Dillingham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – (Z) 100.0 – (Z)Fairbanks North Star . . . . . . . . 1,049 (Z) 187 24.1 24.1 110 588 5 28,262 82.3 17.7 43 34.4 (Z) 8Haines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 1 5.3 – (Z)Juneau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 168 (Z) 37 94.6 – 1 15 11 296,270 5.4 94.6 4 68.9 – 4

Kenai Peninsula . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 98 48.0 9.2 36 370 2 20,980 (NA) (NA) 9 90.0 (Z) 4Ketchikan Gateway . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 7 – – 5Kodiak Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 6 4.3 – 5Lake and Peninsula . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – (Z) 27.7 – (Z)Matanuska-Susitna . . . . . . . . . 11,641 1.2 – – – – – – – – – 4 98.6 (Z) 1

Nome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 1 63.8 – 1North Slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 140 64.1 – (Z)Northwest Arctic . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 7 0.7 – 1Prince of Wales-

Outer Ketchikan . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 3 0.4 – 3Sitka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 1 – – 1

Skagway-Hoonah-Angoon . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 1 47.7 – 1Southeast Fairbanks . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 3 21.5 (Z) (Z)Valdez-Cordova . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 4 67.2 – 4Wade Hampton . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – (Z) 79.1 – (Z)Wrangell-Petersburg. . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 1 3.4 – 1Yakutat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – (Z) 100.0 – (Z)Yukon-Koyukuk . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 3 7.6 – (Z)

ARIZONA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 836,378 0.6 7,294 58.0 17.6 26,587 3,645 2,395 328,413 66.3 33.7 6,730 51.0 5,400 1,080

Apache . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –11,330 (X) 363 41.0 19.6 (D) (D) 8 22,722 2.9 97.1 48 57.1 24 5Cochise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76,402 3.3 950 33.8 26.8 969 1,020 78 82,428 71.2 28.8 233 99.2 214 11Coconino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –8,388 (X) 213 49.8 22.5 (D) (D) 11 52,183 7.0 93.0 53 42.8 6 19Gila . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,675 (X) 164 59.1 10.4 (D) (D) 3 16,220 10.1 89.9 15 89.8 6 6Graham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,122 10.2 277 54.9 21.7 (D) (D) 82 295,668 95.1 4.9 172 74.5 167 5

Greenlee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 0.1 124 44.4 8.1 27 221 4 33,177 22.0 78.0 33 75.5 14 1La Paz. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,045 10.8 101 24.8 39.6 (D) (D) 87 857,653 99.3 0.7 879 32.9 875 3Maricopa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300,362 0.3 2,110 76.7 7.7 627 297 740 350,798 52.8 47.2 2,151 56.7 1,357 739Mohave . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,509 0.1 239 49.8 28.0 793 3,318 16 68,356 65.9 34.1 154 76.9 132 20Navajo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 416 (Z) 291 49.5 22.7 4,595 15,791 27 92,003 2.5 97.5 70 98.1 29 10

Pima . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,925 0.2 517 72.7 11.6 (D) (D) 69 133,228 81.8 18.2 300 94.5 89 170Pinal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227,225 9.8 687 51.5 29.8 1,162 1,691 425 618,281 41.8 58.2 1,052 51.8 1,010 34Santa Cruz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –349 (X) 152 21.7 27.0 133 874 6 38,355 4.5 95.5 23 96.1 13 9Yavapai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,866 (X) 575 66.1 15.0 720 1,253 37 64,960 (NA) (NA) 82 86.0 37 23Yuma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167,855 5.8 531 56.9 18.3 231 435 802 1,511,051 (NA) (NA) 1,463 24.9 1,432 29

ARKANSAS. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,005,559 1.8 47,483 27.3 14.5 14,503 305 4,950 104,256 32.7 67.3 10,900 63.5 7,910 421

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –24,163 (X) 502 10.0 51.8 390 777 96 190,833 99.1 0.9 1,138 55.4 1,125 5Ashley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,256 (X) 336 31.8 23.2 167 497 52 155,604 75.8 24.2 152 71.8 107 2Baxter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,803 1.7 572 32.0 8.0 103 181 12 21,143 3.7 96.3 6 30.3 – 5Benton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95,374 2.0 2,376 44.7 4.3 313 132 361 151,907 1.3 98.7 374 0.4 (Z) 18Boone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,195 3.8 1,305 24.1 9.5 284 218 79 60,822 1.5 98.5 4 40.3 – 3

Bradley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,102 5.6 222 35.6 3.2 29 132 21 96,752 31.6 68.4 3 61.1 – 2Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –59 (X) 116 22.4 5.2 19 165 2 19,276 8.2 91.8 1 100.0 – (Z)Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49,499 13.2 1,089 24.2 10.8 269 247 158 144,702 0.8 99.2 5 26.5 – 5Chicot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,196 7.5 357 11.8 39.5 269 753 70 195,650 66.9 33.1 222 78.4 174 2Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,730 1.0 374 24.1 13.9 98 261 13 33,885 13.4 86.6 4 11.2 1 3

Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,685 3.3 702 22.9 28.6 343 488 66 93,523 95.9 4.1 270 98.1 268 2Cleburne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,912 4.6 807 29.2 4.6 125 155 58 71,887 1.8 98.2 7 1.0 (Z) 7Cleveland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,498 27.7 220 30.9 5.0 36 162 58 261,850 0.5 99.5 1 100.0 – 1Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,202 4.5 339 28.3 6.2 55 162 37 108,696 (NA) (NA) 4 65.8 – 2Conway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,675 8.2 779 22.0 8.2 173 223 101 129,030 6.5 93.5 16 11.3 6 2

Craighead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,514 0.8 730 29.3 29.7 350 480 89 121,360 96.3 3.7 392 90.0 376 14Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,320 3.0 916 38.0 6.7 151 165 57 62,225 27.6 72.4 19 0.7 1 17Crittenden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,463 1.6 238 14.3 52.9 306 1,284 64 268,975 99.4 0.6 133 98.0 122 10Cross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –25,338 (X) 346 19.4 49.4 326 942 67 193,396 99.0 1.0 438 93.7 436 2Dallas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,300 1.0 125 24.0 13.6 26 207 2 14,232 (NA) (NA) 1 100.0 – 1

Desha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,228 5.2 264 14.0 55.3 285 1,078 72 271,326 92.9 7.1 415 79.3 384 2Drew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,109 0.8 296 19.9 19.9 116 393 27 91,605 71.9 28.1 64 86.7 60 3Faulkner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,420 (X) 1,317 35.7 7.1 225 171 20 15,226 28.6 71.4 13 10.7 4 9Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,087 13.7 832 25.8 9.4 176 211 96 115,163 2.3 97.7 3 0.7 (Z) 3Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,988 10.1 820 14.5 16.3 250 304 16 19,115 4.2 95.8 2 41.0 (Z) 1


619County and City Data Book: 2007U.S. Census Bureau


County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

ARKANSAS—Con.

Garland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,185 1.0 386 42.0 3.6 46 120 10 24,938 22.9 77.1 17 5.8 1 14Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,603 1.0 251 39.8 4.8 37 147 6 24,179 18.0 82.0 2 100.0 – 1Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,607 0.8 827 27.2 17.8 262 317 50 60,696 84.2 15.8 165 96.6 157 4Hempstead. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,994 11.5 783 25.3 14.0 204 260 144 183,434 1.6 98.4 6 82.2 – 5Hot Spring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,889 0.9 486 28.4 4.1 74 153 11 22,638 10.4 89.6 415 0.1 3 2

Howard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,849 14.6 642 30.5 5.8 110 171 135 209,858 0.6 99.4 7 5.2 – 5Independence . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,312 1.3 1,117 24.1 12.8 288 258 90 80,259 12.7 87.3 79 44.8 42 6Izard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,640 5.9 741 15.7 15.4 215 290 26 34,428 2.4 97.6 2 100.0 – 2Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –15,346 (X) 398 19.1 35.9 332 835 60 151,887 95.3 4.7 386 94.4 382 2Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –16,156 (X) 378 28.0 30.4 276 729 69 181,648 90.0 10.0 569 82.9 494 16

Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,753 7.5 694 23.5 6.3 118 170 98 141,866 2.3 97.7 6 16.8 1 5Lafayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,267 20.8 284 22.9 15.8 104 366 78 273,271 8.6 91.4 12 90.5 10 1Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,625 (X) 614 18.4 27.2 296 482 60 98,316 69.9 30.1 325 91.1 323 2Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,095 14.0 257 9.7 45.9 278 1,082 68 263,420 97.5 2.5 242 97.3 240 1Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,256 12.6 315 19.4 27.3 199 632 97 306,476 40.4 59.6 190 89.2 188 2

Little River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,249 4.6 424 27.8 13.2 147 347 40 94,075 14.2 85.8 4 34.0 1 1Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,667 13.2 962 22.9 7.1 200 208 114 118,569 2.6 97.4 4 22.7 (Z) 3Lonoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –13,306 (X) 777 26.4 23.4 361 465 98 126,069 71.0 29.0 485 81.7 422 4Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,165 21.1 1,270 19.8 10.6 295 232 108 85,291 1.5 98.5 2 50.5 (Z) 1Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,120 6.0 526 20.9 14.6 143 272 21 39,644 1.2 98.8 3 1.0 – 3

Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,602 1.1 516 29.8 14.5 158 307 38 72,756 22.4 77.6 90 7.4 86 4Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,595 3.0 388 13.9 54.9 469 1,207 136 349,302 99.8 0.2 193 97.5 183 7Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –9,194 (X) 250 14.0 53.2 232 928 50 200,884 91.3 8.7 256 92.2 254 2Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,298 21.3 413 24.9 9.0 78 189 43 103,024 1.5 98.5 1 64.9 (Z) 1Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,841 13.9 393 21.1 9.9 82 208 31 79,115 1.2 98.8 1 43.7 – 1

Newton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,211 4.6 613 18.8 9.3 131 214 7 10,848 4.6 95.4 1 94.7 (Z) (Z)Ouachita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,837 1.0 195 39.0 7.7 33 169 6 29,559 4.3 95.7 68 3.6 – 4Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,843 18.2 380 28.4 8.9 68 178 32 85,297 13.8 86.2 6 9.6 5 1Phillips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,469 6.4 301 15.9 49.5 329 1,093 83 276,947 99.2 0.8 469 43.9 199 4Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,507 19.7 393 28.0 8.4 68 173 46 117,690 1.1 98.9 2 21.1 (Z) 2

Poinsett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,231 0.5 448 12.9 57.1 382 852 92 205,600 98.3 1.7 666 87.9 661 3Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,811 16.5 845 31.5 7.1 146 173 82 96,568 0.5 99.5 3 25.5 (Z) 2Pope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,613 3.5 1,044 30.2 6.0 169 161 106 101,357 2.6 97.4 999 0.2 1 12Prairie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,864 (X) 431 15.8 41.5 308 714 64 148,418 87.3 12.7 355 76.2 309 1Pulaski. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195 (Z) 575 49.0 10.3 118 206 20 35,530 77.8 22.2 107 24.8 33 73

Randolph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,581 0.9 710 14.1 19.4 246 347 36 50,958 49.3 50.7 116 74.0 114 1St. Francis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,448 (X) 347 16.7 35.2 279 805 54 155,343 96.2 3.8 264 95.8 257 4Saline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 482 0.1 432 50.2 5.1 56 130 4 8,891 34.4 65.6 14 23.7 1 11Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,431 29.4 697 24.4 6.5 124 177 93 132,849 0.4 99.6 2 25.3 – 2Searcy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –580 (X) 615 15.9 13.5 183 298 9 15,145 4.1 95.9 1 62.1 – 1

Sebastian. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,523 0.3 812 37.4 5.3 122 150 50 61,599 6.0 94.0 30 0.3 (Z) 30Sevier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,463 12.0 590 29.3 7.8 124 210 114 193,617 0.6 99.4 5 41.8 (Z) 4Sharp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,423 10.3 680 19.6 14.0 178 262 40 58,454 1.4 98.6 2 65.0 (Z) 2Stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,702 14.8 681 19.5 11.9 164 241 39 57,050 2.4 97.6 1 42.9 – 1Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,267 1.1 342 44.4 3.8 40 118 59 173,015 0.5 99.5 18 100.0 – 8

Van Buren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,162 (X) 603 16.1 8.6 132 218 15 24,816 7.4 92.6 2 0.5 – 2Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94,270 2.2 2,800 41.0 4.6 368 131 314 112,012 1.4 98.6 28 4.7 (Z) 25White. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,927 (X) 1,823 31.4 10.2 394 216 50 27,446 42.8 57.2 129 38.1 116 10Woodruff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –11,130 (X) 225 9.3 59.6 275 1,221 53 233,969 (NA) (NA) 433 81.6 366 1Yell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,807 9.3 829 28.6 9.2 181 219 113 136,516 3.5 96.5 4 16.6 1 3

CALIFORNIA . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,315,861 0.9 79,631 61.7 10.5 27,589 346 25,737 323,205 74.4 25.6 51,200 30.1 30,500 6,120

Alameda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,021 (Z) 424 52.4 15.1 218 514 43 101,962 83.8 16.2 258 19.2 20 220Alpine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 14 21.4 28.6 (D) (D) 1 43,929 (NA) (NA) 15 23.3 15 (Z)Amador . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,933 2.1 451 43.2 10.9 194 430 21 47,078 57.8 42.2 32 58.7 25 6Butte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102,816 2.8 2,128 58.9 7.4 382 179 252 118,407 96.0 4.0 1,078 31.3 973 45Calaveras. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,978 (X) 576 50.2 16.5 261 453 13 22,307 32.4 67.6 17 22.2 7 7

Colusa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62,637 15.7 821 23.5 26.7 485 591 241 293,966 97.6 2.4 914 31.4 909 3Contra Costa . . . . . . . . . . . . . 786 (Z) 592 67.9 9.3 126 213 90 152,383 86.7 13.3 1,242 3.2 96 160Del Norte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,490 3.8 89 67.4 5.6 13 150 21 239,854 50.5 49.5 22 49.8 17 4El Dorado. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,090 0.1 1,116 78.0 2.7 117 105 16 14,071 85.7 14.3 55 22.0 18 36Fresno. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 692,773 4.0 6,281 58.1 11.5 1,929 307 2,759 439,328 77.9 22.1 3,745 49.6 3,490 196

Glenn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,837 13.5 1,283 44.9 14.5 506 395 230 179,392 74.7 25.3 684 34.2 675 4Humboldt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,954 2.0 993 49.7 15.1 634 638 97 97,603 45.6 54.4 153 38.7 71 34Imperial . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191,015 7.6 537 22.0 43.9 514 957 1,043 1,942,791 62.2 37.8 2,887 3.6 2,835 31Inyo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,309 (X) 85 47.1 31.8 227 2,668 14 163,165 59.9 40.1 121 70.9 67 3Kern . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 943,837 6.4 2,147 36.4 26.8 2,731 1,272 2,059 958,875 86.6 13.4 2,885 56.4 2,583 181

Kings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171,738 7.1 1,154 48.7 18.7 646 559 793 687,228 49.8 50.2 1,536 53.5 1,486 22Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,818 2.5 880 62.5 6.3 144 164 65 74,143 94.9 5.1 52 77.2 44 7Lassen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,816 1.3 419 42.5 28.6 482 1,150 28 66,888 56.9 43.1 485 39.8 477 6Los Angeles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 230,224 0.1 1,543 86.8 3.5 111 72 281 182,309 96.9 3.1 5,365 16.1 65 1,575Madera . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271,611 12.5 1,780 45.2 13.3 682 383 710 399,120 71.1 28.9 993 32.1 954 19




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

CALIFORNIA—Con.

Marin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,774 0.1 254 39.4 33.9 151 593 43 169,398 15.6 84.4 44 39.9 4 38Mariposa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,697 (X) 284 38.0 20.8 219 772 6 22,130 7.5 92.5 6 49.9 4 1Mendocino . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,703 0.8 1,184 48.9 17.2 707 598 95 80,276 90.5 9.5 57 44.6 42 10Merced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 509,056 14.2 2,964 50.0 11.9 1,006 339 1,409 475,457 42.4 57.6 1,880 34.0 1,744 48Modoc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,057 11.1 428 18.0 37.9 609 1,423 53 122,745 62.7 37.3 241 33.9 237 1

Mono. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,836 (X) 63 30.2 39.7 54 863 9 141,810 64.8 35.2 193 40.4 180 3Monterey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,071,659 9.8 1,216 42.5 21.8 1,261 1,037 2,190 1,801,086 98.7 1.3 1,782 44.9 835 43Napa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 195,838 4.6 1,456 70.5 7.2 238 163 429 294,650 99.1 0.9 81 25.8 53 19Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,578 (X) 599 78.1 4.2 82 137 7 11,903 75.1 24.9 48 23.7 32 15Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127,615 0.1 348 79.3 2.3 68 195 279 800,592 99.6 0.4 723 43.2 48 496

Placer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,585 (X) 1,438 78.2 3.3 131 91 37 25,847 76.2 23.8 189 19.9 126 59Plumas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,436 3.5 142 40.8 20.4 171 1,201 7 51,669 17.6 82.4 55 22.4 49 4Riverside . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241,965 0.7 3,186 81.1 4.5 572 180 1,008 316,470 66.2 33.8 1,688 26.6 1,231 410Sacramento . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77,036 0.2 1,513 70.0 8.9 314 208 239 158,140 68.1 31.9 783 38.7 410 303San Benito . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101,972 11.0 677 52.7 21.3 578 854 198 292,310 80.6 19.4 93 89.0 83 6

San Bernardino . . . . . . . . . . . . 89,796 0.3 1,386 77.9 3.7 514 371 618 445,776 19.5 80.5 653 63.8 183 372San Diego . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373,524 0.4 5,255 89.1 1.9 408 78 951 180,925 92.8 7.2 4,394 1.4 329 438San Francisco. . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 8 100.0 – (D) (D) 1 126,500 (NA) (NA) 253 0.9 1 81San Joaquin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 339,448 2.9 4,026 62.6 8.2 813 202 1,222 303,640 74.3 25.7 1,746 44.4 1,597 99San Luis Obispo . . . . . . . . . . . 134,155 2.3 2,322 54.2 16.0 1,318 568 396 170,712 92.4 7.6 3,111 6.0 179 34

San Mateo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64,309 0.2 306 61.1 6.2 42 136 173 566,516 99.3 0.7 103 12.9 8 94Santa Barbara. . . . . . . . . . . . . 416,887 3.6 1,444 60.9 14.2 757 524 717 496,715 95.9 4.1 427 76.0 347 63Santa Clara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129,870 0.1 1,026 75.6 7.7 321 313 208 203,214 90.2 9.8 342 44.3 38 287Santa Cruz . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 234,039 3.9 754 74.1 2.1 67 89 362 479,975 97.5 2.5 78 77.5 44 27Shasta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,259 0.5 1,126 64.1 10.6 334 296 22 19,496 38.0 62.0 434 40.9 295 37

Sierra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,414 (X) 52 13.5 28.8 59 1,128 2 43,635 (NA) (NA) 44 14.9 43 1Siskiyou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,998 3.2 796 36.1 23.1 610 767 109 137,391 78.0 22.0 562 24.8 510 8Solano. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,790 0.4 915 60.3 12.3 351 384 191 208,567 83.1 16.9 518 23.1 445 70Sonoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144,581 1.2 3,447 70.7 5.9 627 182 572 165,857 75.6 24.4 159 55.3 74 56Stanislaus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 488,025 5.2 4,267 66.4 6.1 790 185 1,229 287,932 46.2 53.8 1,615 39.3 1,401 116

Sutter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57,739 4.1 1,391 44.9 12.4 372 267 251 180,173 97.7 2.3 922 28.0 905 16Tehama . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,950 5.2 1,573 57.0 11.0 862 548 110 70,018 66.5 33.5 412 48.8 347 7Trinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 136 0.1 135 37.0 11.9 105 781 2 13,104 37.2 62.8 45 28.4 22 1Tulare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 879,873 12.9 5,738 61.2 8.4 1,393 243 2,339 407,560 51.1 48.9 2,409 54.1 2,248 82

Tuolumne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425 (Z) 358 57.5 15.1 150 418 24 65,835 4.8 95.2 33 13.9 5 7Ventura . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 578,799 2.7 2,318 73.6 4.4 332 143 1,019 439,544 98.7 1.3 1,111 17.3 230 157Yolo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,972 1.3 1,060 47.1 18.9 550 519 315 297,606 96.0 4.0 1,028 31.8 982 40Yuba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,176 1.3 863 50.5 10.3 234 271 115 133,422 78.1 21.9 372 26.6 358 11

COLORADO . . . . . . . . . . . . 721,421 0.5 31,369 32.8 29.0 31,093 991 4,525 144,257 26.9 73.1 12,600 18.4 11,400 899

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,912 0.2 728 40.2 28.2 701 964 99 135,536 87.7 12.3 134 20.2 45 75Alamosa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,676 6.2 318 14.2 34.0 205 644 94 297,016 93.7 6.3 225 55.7 223 2Arapahoe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300 (Z) 448 46.9 20.3 333 742 20 44,587 76.2 23.8 112 14.1 3 95Archuleta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,031 (X) 258 28.3 18.2 103 400 5 17,977 7.1 92.9 67 1.2 64 2Baca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,033 42.9 608 5.3 65.5 1,080 1,777 61 100,495 28.5 71.5 112 100.0 111 (Z)

Bent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,464 14.4 265 14.7 48.3 736 2,777 82 310,008 5.8 94.2 325 2.3 324 1Boulder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,943 0.1 736 63.6 6.8 108 146 33 44,617 66.4 33.6 182 3.2 105 71Broomfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 927 (Z) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (NA) (X) (NA) (X) (X)Chaffee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,814 (X) 212 35.8 13.7 71 336 9 40,264 25.7 74.3 72 1.3 69 3Cheyenne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,662 15.3 283 2.5 71.0 740 2,617 23 81,929 50.5 49.5 33 90.2 32 (Z)

Clear Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 9 – 55.6 (D) (D) (Z) 889 (NA) (NA) 2 32.6 – 2Conejos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,002 9.2 494 18.4 29.4 268 542 23 46,259 52.5 47.5 254 13.7 253 1Costilla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,175 18.0 205 26.3 24.4 354 1,727 26 128,024 86.1 13.9 100 50.5 100 (Z)Crowley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,194 36.9 217 12.0 44.7 375 1,730 53 246,009 3.0 97.0 98 1.0 97 1Custer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,107 (X) 158 18.4 26.6 122 771 3 17,348 10.0 90.0 49 0.9 49 (Z)

Delta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,455 0.7 1,063 54.1 7.8 262 247 39 36,761 36.9 63.1 679 0.7 672 5Denver. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 850 (Z) 10 100.0 – (Z) 4 1 128,900 (NA) (NA) 159 4.3 – 141Dolores . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,188 9.4 216 17.6 37.5 159 734 4 17,468 47.8 52.2 55 3.3 54 (Z)Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,538 (X) 903 50.8 9.5 199 221 12 12,829 56.7 43.3 43 36.3 11 27Eagle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,546 (X) 114 30.7 23.7 116 1,018 4 32,886 8.1 91.9 141 1.7 129 10

Elbert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,952 (X) 1,153 30.1 24.0 1,068 927 28 24,174 18.3 81.7 18 61.2 16 1El Paso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,342 (X) 1,175 35.7 23.1 812 691 32 27,203 43.7 56.3 138 12.2 15 114Fremont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,735 0.3 700 61.9 14.7 265 378 15 20,911 31.8 68.2 160 0.5 107 11Garfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –514 (X) 499 46.9 19.6 404 810 23 45,633 31.1 68.9 421 1.1 410 9Gilpin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 26 23.1 3.8 6 233 (Z) 8,192 (NA) (NA) 1 82.5 – (Z)

Grand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,549 (X) 173 27.7 35.8 220 1,269 7 42,156 14.7 85.3 110 1.0 108 2Gunnison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,963 (X) 186 24.2 31.7 165 890 9 49,134 10.7 89.3 242 1.4 239 2Hinsdale. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –334 (X) 19 – 21.1 9 457 (Z) 16,579 (NA) (NA) 10 1.2 10 (Z)Huerfano . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,517 (X) 292 13.4 45.5 608 2,082 8 26,068 3.7 96.3 68 2.8 67 1Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,494 (X) 89 10.1 74.2 438 4,917 16 178,461 5.5 94.5 323 (Z) 323 (Z)




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

COLORADO—Con.

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,649 0.1 457 65.9 8.3 90 198 20 44,853 90.3 9.7 144 11.6 22 99Kiowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,075 57.9 357 1.1 67.8 897 2,512 19 53,176 (NA) (NA) 29 92.6 29 (Z)Kit Carson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55,672 34.4 678 8.0 61.5 1,247 1,840 206 303,177 19.6 80.4 186 100.0 185 1Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 34 17.6 44.1 17 507 (Z) 10,735 (NA) (NA) 41 1.6 40 1La Plata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,941 (X) 923 38.7 14.1 563 610 16 17,294 24.4 75.6 221 1.8 211 7

Larimer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,447 0.3 1,564 61.5 9.8 522 334 101 64,639 32.6 67.4 272 9.9 212 57Las Animas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,282 (X) 567 7.9 60.5 2,305 4,065 21 36,838 3.6 96.4 122 2.4 118 3Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,391 (X) 455 7.0 69.9 1,428 3,139 36 78,262 33.7 66.3 20 99.1 19 1Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,638 12.0 930 13.1 47.8 1,111 1,195 350 376,401 10.8 89.2 309 18.1 306 2Mesa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,941 0.5 1,599 66.4 7.6 385 241 59 37,038 49.9 50.1 1,202 0.6 1,122 32

Mineral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –59 (X) 14 14.3 7.1 4 317 (Z) 11,857 (NA) (NA) (Z) 100.0 – (Z)Moffat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –831 (X) 443 20.5 37.0 1,018 2,297 20 45,551 5.5 94.5 209 0.6 193 4Montezuma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,601 1.0 829 39.2 14.7 819 988 15 17,516 44.5 55.5 429 0.3 421 7Montrose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,301 2.2 915 46.8 12.6 335 366 58 63,378 36.3 63.7 598 1.0 589 6Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56,999 10.9 761 15.2 37.8 758 996 448 588,650 14.0 86.0 288 38.8 278 5

Otero. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,360 6.8 488 31.8 24.8 546 1,120 106 217,195 11.0 89.0 282 3.6 278 3Ouray . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,249 (X) 96 39.6 30.2 108 1,126 3 33,688 12.2 87.8 82 0.4 81 1Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,841 (X) 217 20.7 28.1 298 1,375 4 19,346 5.5 94.5 28 6.1 26 (Z)Phillips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,484 25.8 334 9.6 60.2 471 1,410 89 267,311 48.4 51.6 130 98.7 129 1Pitkin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,482 (X) 84 45.2 8.3 24 284 1 8,976 28.9 71.1 43 1.1 39 4

Prowers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,873 17.3 531 13.4 50.8 862 1,623 183 343,832 15.1 84.9 429 22.5 420 2Pueblo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,663 (X) 801 38.2 27.3 774 967 42 52,000 26.6 73.4 246 4.3 130 35Rio Blanco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,045 (X) 245 27.3 33.9 377 1,537 13 52,739 8.6 91.4 217 0.8 215 1Rio Grande. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,937 10.0 344 17.4 29.9 171 497 74 216,520 92.4 7.6 285 60.1 284 1Routt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –14,893 (X) 593 31.5 25.3 450 759 25 42,430 8.5 91.5 271 1.1 264 4

Saguache. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,768 18.6 252 9.1 54.8 477 1,893 82 324,810 86.8 13.2 647 55.3 646 1San Juan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 1 – 100.0 (D) (D) – – – – (Z) 11.8 – (Z)San Miguel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,030 (X) 112 28.6 37.5 151 1,349 4 32,250 9.1 90.9 10 3.3 9 1Sedgwick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,827 28.6 188 5.9 60.6 274 1,459 58 306,920 30.6 69.4 112 55.7 112 (Z)Summit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,284 (X) 36 22.2 25.0 28 773 (Z) 12,917 8.2 91.8 5 51.8 – 3

Teller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,163 (X) 118 44.1 17.8 74 624 2 13,195 26.1 73.9 7 20.5 3 3Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,200 24.3 861 5.9 58.0 1,409 1,636 72 83,870 46.4 53.6 64 91.2 64 (Z)Weld . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229,559 5.5 3,121 31.5 21.3 1,812 581 1,128 361,376 18.2 81.8 1,064 13.4 1,020 37Yuma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73,429 36.2 864 9.4 59.7 1,354 1,567 543 628,108 19.9 80.1 321 98.1 320 1

CONNECTICUT . . . . . . . . . . 166,000 0.1 4,191 62.3 2.8 357 85 471 112,297 69.6 30.4 4,150 3.4 30 424

Fairfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,968 (Z) 287 76.0 0.3 13 45 30 105,477 72.1 27.9 (6) (NA) 5 158Hartford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,406 0.1 724 68.5 1.9 50 69 127 175,119 78.7 21.3 (6) (NA) 14 45Litchfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,814 0.2 789 55.8 5.2 94 119 30 38,141 52.3 47.7 (6) (NA) 2 80Middlesex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,393 0.3 326 71.8 0.9 18 55 44 135,589 95.9 4.1 (6) (NA) 1 6

New Haven. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,550 0.1 486 71.4 1.2 26 53 57 117,650 91.9 8.1 (6) (NA) 5 80New London . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,280 0.6 677 56.0 2.4 59 87 123 181,516 58.9 41.1 (6) (NA) 1 47Tolland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,259 0.5 398 59.0 3.3 37 92 28 70,746 53.2 46.8 (6) (NA) 2 6Windham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,330 0.3 504 51.6 4.8 61 121 31 61,631 25.5 74.5 (6) (NA) 1 3

DELAWARE. . . . . . . . . . . . . 283,786 1.1 2,391 52.3 11.0 540 226 619 258,826 24.3 75.7 1,320 8.7 44 95

Kent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55,301 1.7 721 44.5 11.7 185 257 129 178,467 42.3 57.7 30 92.4 12 10New Castle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,646 0.1 358 59.5 10.6 71 199 27 76,385 84.5 15.5 820 4.1 3 72Sussex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 212,839 6.6 1,312 54.6 10.7 284 216 463 352,768 15.7 84.3 473 11.4 29 13

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA . . . – – (X) (NA) (NA) (X) (X) (X) (NA) (NA) (NA) 10 – (Z) –

District of Columbia . . . . . . . . . – – (X) (NA) (NA) (X) (X) (X) (NA) (NA) (NA) 10 – (Z) –

FLORIDA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,604,522 0.4 44,081 64.9 6.8 10,415 236 6,242 141,609 80.8 19.2 20,100 25.0 4,290 2,440

Alachua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,668 0.3 1,493 64.8 4.9 223 149 59 39,293 64.1 35.9 58 99.0 22 28Baker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,980 1.4 204 62.3 3.9 18 89 25 124,632 37.4 62.6 8 76.9 5 1Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,376 0.1 116 73.3 2.6 11 94 2 18,595 87.2 12.8 323 3.8 4 51Bradford. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,495 0.5 378 64.0 3.4 45 119 18 47,389 9.3 90.7 5 98.7 1 1Brevard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,270 0.1 555 73.5 7.6 188 338 42 75,962 83.7 16.3 1,261 11.3 152 28

Broward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,924 (Z) 494 90.3 2.6 24 48 50 100,455 89.9 10.1 1,814 15.0 41 258Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,176 5.6 151 31.1 15.9 49 325 14 95,298 91.4 8.6 6 70.8 4 1Charlotte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,658 0.7 284 60.9 13.4 192 674 48 170,077 88.3 11.7 64 56.1 51 7Citrus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,303 0.2 432 70.6 3.0 47 109 7 15,292 71.2 28.8 425 7.1 7 14Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,816 0.2 340 73.8 3.8 79 231 37 108,976 10.2 89.8 34 98.5 8 15

Collier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97,089 1.3 273 56.8 21.6 181 662 268 980,352 98.6 1.4 230 88.0 169 52Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,352 (X) 688 56.4 4.8 90 131 47 67,975 17.0 83.0 14 98.5 6 4DeSoto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,292 6.2 1,153 65.9 9.5 388 337 180 156,198 83.5 16.5 133 92.9 118 11Dixie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,374 1.1 215 56.3 6.0 31 145 7 30,428 (NA) (NA) 3 99.1 2 1Duval. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,234 (Z) 382 69.9 2.9 31 82 22 58,775 31.2 68.8 814 18.6 12 119




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

FLORIDA—Con.

Escambia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,007 0.1 674 63.4 4.0 65 96 16 23,258 66.2 33.8 314 28.2 8 45Flagler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,695 1.5 100 35.0 22.0 68 684 24 237,890 93.8 6.2 28 87.3 21 6Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 20 85.0 5.0 (D) (D) (Z) 19,250 – (NA) 2 100.0 (Z) 2Gadsden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,602 7.9 343 44.6 6.1 68 199 91 266,405 98.8 1.2 16 52.6 9 4Gilchrist . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,163 4.0 408 48.8 9.3 81 200 45 109,211 13.9 86.1 16 98.0 12 (Z)

Glades. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,967 7.3 231 34.6 23.4 408 1,766 72 311,965 72.8 27.2 75 28.1 69 1Gulf. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 30 46.7 3.3 5 151 (Z) 16,300 (NA) (NA) 4 62.8 (Z) 1Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,876 (X) 239 38.1 9.6 52 218 12 50,916 52.9 47.1 42 99.7 6 1Hardee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,551 8.4 1,142 50.6 11.6 346 303 166 145,537 78.0 22.0 91 99.3 80 2Hendry. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,609 8.5 456 49.1 20.6 552 1,211 376 824,149 95.0 5.0 512 38.5 504 5

Hernando . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,978 0.4 617 70.5 4.5 65 106 22 35,183 37.7 62.3 50 98.0 8 20Highlands. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,940 4.0 1,035 57.5 12.8 577 557 236 228,024 86.8 13.2 174 90.1 161 9Hillsborough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 196,884 0.5 2,969 79.3 3.2 285 96 392 132,176 85.0 15.0 3,479 5.7 95 166Holmes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,622 4.3 672 31.5 3.9 91 135 30 44,975 9.7 90.3 4 92.2 1 1Indian River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,336 0.8 480 64.4 12.3 191 399 117 243,569 94.3 5.7 287 30.4 233 14

Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,180 1.6 920 33.5 11.5 227 247 36 39,641 68.1 31.9 112 18.3 16 2Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,754 7.1 418 54.1 10.0 133 318 21 50,608 44.0 56.0 8 98.0 7 1Lafayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,578 15.7 195 34.4 14.4 92 472 48 246,749 7.0 93.0 7 97.6 4 (Z)Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,209 1.4 1,798 75.0 3.6 180 100 178 99,041 93.4 6.6 100 90.2 45 40Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,449 0.3 643 75.3 7.5 126 197 113 176,370 96.2 3.8 652 18.4 83 52

Leon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,359 (Z) 281 67.6 5.7 74 263 7 23,698 66.5 33.5 46 99.3 3 36Levy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,294 6.6 897 59.2 6.2 180 201 83 92,783 31.2 68.8 31 91.5 22 2Liberty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 67 52.2 4.5 10 148 1 22,343 (NA) (NA) 2 100.0 (Z) (Z)Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,344 2.3 529 29.7 12.1 157 297 25 46,588 40.9 59.1 9 98.1 6 2Manatee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 92,123 1.5 852 52.9 14.0 301 354 268 315,117 92.0 8.0 187 65.4 110 50

Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,743 0.8 2,930 75.4 3.1 271 92 88 29,874 20.9 79.1 69 96.9 23 28Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,524 0.5 418 64.8 17.2 206 493 128 305,395 78.0 22.0 199 21.8 148 18Miami-Dade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149,710 0.2 2,244 89.6 1.5 90 40 578 257,576 99.2 0.8 598 89.7 124 394Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 18 100.0 – (Z) 6 3 140,722 26.5 73.5 2 68.4 2 –Nassau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,465 0.2 315 61.9 4.4 (D) (D) 27 87,292 7.8 92.2 48 96.6 4 7

Okaloosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 813 (Z) 465 49.7 3.4 55 119 7 14,065 54.7 45.3 28 98.4 4 23Okeechobee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,396 7.1 638 46.2 22.4 392 615 144 226,295 25.4 74.6 71 83.2 63 2Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,769 0.2 901 76.6 3.0 147 163 243 269,354 98.7 1.3 275 93.9 52 212Osceola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,210 0.4 519 63.0 14.6 653 1,258 65 125,127 67.7 32.3 143 81.8 108 30Palm Beach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160,183 0.5 1,110 83.3 6.9 536 483 760 684,565 99.1 0.9 1,712 16.0 1,020 230

Pasco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,740 0.5 1,222 75.1 4.3 169 138 84 68,903 41.1 58.9 2,098 6.6 28 103Pinellas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,949 (Z) 111 93.7 – 2 14 8 71,712 95.8 4.2 466 9.3 6 40Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66,794 0.7 3,114 65.1 6.0 627 201 285 91,454 87.5 12.5 363 90.7 175 75Putnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,062 1.6 466 66.5 7.9 93 199 47 100,150 87.8 12.2 89 45.1 16 3St. Johns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,715 0.6 204 62.3 14.2 38 185 60 292,554 95.4 4.6 56 94.3 37 16

St. Lucie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,642 0.6 477 53.7 13.6 222 464 128 268,149 87.8 12.2 1,758 4.6 245 18Santa Rosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,100 0.3 505 60.2 8.7 84 166 21 41,578 91.2 8.8 31 98.9 11 13Sarasota . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,285 0.1 371 68.7 10.2 121 327 18 47,981 75.0 25.0 46 86.8 16 29Seminole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,649 0.1 376 85.4 1.1 28 74 19 51,093 93.4 6.6 90 98.0 21 67Sumter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,678 1.9 902 61.3 4.9 187 208 31 33,973 45.8 54.2 44 60.1 16 4

Suwannee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,228 4.8 1,054 45.2 5.7 170 161 136 128,994 23.9 76.1 128 20.6 19 1Taylor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 472 0.2 101 37.6 16.8 54 532 13 132,218 5.4 94.6 50 93.9 2 2Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 425 0.2 275 54.2 5.8 60 217 11 38,949 39.9 60.1 3 99.2 1 (Z)Volusia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58,893 0.8 1,114 80.8 3.2 94 84 106 95,419 92.6 7.4 235 41.3 45 55Wakulla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463 0.2 126 66.7 3.2 11 87 2 12,571 40.5 59.5 33 14.4 (Z) 2Walton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,051 0.4 540 41.3 5.2 80 148 20 37,139 22.6 77.4 12 85.2 4 7Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,475 0.6 391 37.9 4.9 53 136 6 14,082 41.6 58.4 4 100.0 1 1

GEORGIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,839,814 0.8 49,311 39.2 9.9 10,744 218 4,912 99,608 32.2 67.8 6,500 22.3 1,140 1,250

Appling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,936 4.3 557 37.0 10.8 119 213 56 100,047 36.3 63.7 64 7.3 4 1Atkinson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,244 30.3 194 21.6 22.2 71 365 42 214,588 22.2 77.8 7 48.5 6 (Z)Bacon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,155 7.3 331 34.4 11.8 67 202 40 119,462 32.5 67.5 6 77.9 5 (Z)Baker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,901 24.6 147 27.9 33.3 126 860 28 189,762 61.4 38.6 42 92.7 41 (Z)Baldwin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 717 0.1 194 32.5 7.2 36 184 7 35,948 5.0 95.0 9 7.4 (Z) 7

Banks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,672 24.9 614 47.2 2.3 58 94 103 168,526 0.8 99.2 2 41.4 (Z) 1Barrow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,523 3.0 452 56.9 1.3 36 80 52 114,091 1.2 98.8 8 26.7 1 5Bartow. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,983 0.6 586 50.3 5.1 82 139 49 83,635 15.1 84.9 66 9.7 2 17Ben Hill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,756 4.2 174 30.5 14.4 57 330 14 77,810 65.4 34.6 11 75.1 6 4Berrien. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,144 4.4 481 29.1 15.6 126 262 27 55,518 76.6 23.4 15 55.8 14 1

Bibb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,427 (Z) 168 41.1 8.9 30 181 6 35,077 20.7 79.3 155 3.7 2 33Bleckley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,006 1.8 265 25.3 10.6 55 209 6 22,053 83.7 16.3 16 51.6 15 1Brantley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,912 6.3 270 43.0 5.2 32 120 12 46,096 21.1 78.9 2 86.9 (Z) (Z)Brooks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,468 18.9 446 24.9 20.0 203 455 55 124,011 73.3 26.7 6 78.2 4 2Bryan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –887 (X) 65 58.5 10.8 17 264 1 18,985 80.3 19.7 3 99.6 1 2

Bulloch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,029 2.8 641 33.4 17.6 206 322 43 66,629 77.9 22.1 15 81.3 10 3Burke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,405 3.9 494 24.5 23.9 219 443 26 53,130 59.1 40.9 98 27.8 29 4Butts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,582 0.6 173 36.4 9.2 37 212 2 14,312 32.4 67.6 4 12.6 (Z) 3Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,388 15.1 119 20.2 44.5 118 992 26 217,193 75.7 24.3 35 66.0 33 1Camden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 747 0.1 47 36.2 17.0 12 264 1 21,170 83.2 16.8 49 84.8 1 4




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

GEORGIA—Con.

Candler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,452 5.1 272 26.1 12.9 63 231 12 43,423 65.4 34.6 6 54.0 5 1Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,700 2.1 975 45.4 1.9 94 97 106 109,085 4.6 95.4 12 26.4 (Z) 9Catoosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,240 1.6 296 50.3 2.4 27 92 24 81,807 3.0 97.0 11 84.6 1 8Charlton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 816 0.9 101 41.6 6.9 15 147 4 41,238 14.5 85.5 1 93.2 (Z) 1Chatham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,170 (Z) 58 46.6 10.3 9 157 2 36,138 90.5 9.5 214 33.2 9 33

Chattahoochee . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 16 37.5 12.5 4 272 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 10 5.2 (Z) 10Chattooga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,365 0.5 329 28.9 5.8 55 167 6 17,073 13.7 86.3 12 55.6 (Z) 4Cherokee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,321 0.9 606 71.1 1.8 36 60 51 84,134 10.7 89.3 20 12.0 1 15Clarke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,949 0.1 104 42.3 5.8 14 136 35 338,106 13.9 86.1 19 2.1 1 19Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,709 12.6 49 10.2 36.7 42 866 7 135,102 91.5 8.5 6 25.5 5 (Z)

Clayton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 62 71.0 – 3 52 (Z) 7,726 68.1 31.9 27 0.1 1 26Clinch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,883 3.1 118 46.6 19.5 31 260 6 49,508 61.8 38.2 2 80.6 1 1Cobb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,036 (Z) 191 74.9 2.1 11 57 5 28,152 94.4 5.6 467 0.3 2 97Coffee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,271 4.7 692 28.8 13.2 189 273 124 179,171 31.5 68.5 21 60.0 14 5Colquitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,995 9.5 588 31.3 20.4 228 388 129 220,179 80.5 19.5 46 39.5 39 4

Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,683 0.3 196 54.6 4.1 23 119 5 24,806 27.5 72.5 17 14.4 4 13Cook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,273 9.6 254 37.0 13.4 68 266 39 152,969 96.6 3.4 12 66.4 9 2Coweta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,984 0.2 480 51.0 5.2 61 127 7 14,790 57.5 42.5 560 1.0 2 10Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,236 11.1 179 31.8 6.7 38 213 19 107,866 63.4 36.6 6 75.1 3 (Z)Crisp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,698 5.6 223 32.3 25.1 104 466 28 127,112 89.7 10.3 17 87.0 16 1

Dade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,902 2.0 253 49.0 3.2 28 110 11 42,874 3.1 96.9 3 18.2 1 2Dawson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,500 4.4 222 56.8 6.3 20 91 40 177,968 2.5 97.5 2 27.0 (Z) 1Decatur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,988 8.9 396 25.0 18.4 160 405 101 253,811 86.3 13.7 63 88.0 58 3DeKalb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 (Z) 37 81.1 – 1 29 1 23,162 99.4 0.6 92 3.4 2 87Dodge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,905 2.2 491 24.6 12.8 139 282 13 25,998 83.1 16.9 16 25.9 14 1

Dooly. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,323 16.3 326 22.4 25.8 171 524 55 167,457 62.5 37.5 26 94.1 24 2Dougherty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,443 0.3 162 46.3 20.4 98 603 22 138,778 94.2 5.8 222 24.9 23 19Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –753 (X) 153 64.1 0.7 8 52 2 12,908 41.6 58.4 12 6.6 2 10Early . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,713 8.0 347 25.6 23.3 160 462 26 75,648 90.8 9.2 157 24.7 47 (Z)Echols . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,675 18.2 78 23.1 17.9 29 376 24 305,397 98.2 1.8 7 92.0 6 (Z)

Effingham. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,509 0.4 206 35.0 13.1 53 258 4 18,131 72.1 27.9 149 3.5 1 33Elbert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,186 1.4 438 29.9 4.6 63 145 23 52,822 12.9 87.1 3 27.1 1 2Emanuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,578 2.3 554 20.6 14.6 160 288 12 21,439 67.5 32.5 6 83.1 3 2Evans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,049 2.8 242 30.2 11.6 48 199 23 92,983 40.0 60.0 4 73.9 2 1Fannin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,772 2.1 208 54.8 1.0 15 74 11 51,115 9.1 90.9 2 34.9 (Z) 1

Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,193 0.2 235 55.3 0.9 18 77 4 17,855 78.5 21.5 17 16.4 2 14Floyd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,416 0.4 663 41.2 4.7 91 138 29 43,163 7.9 92.1 586 0.6 7 14Forsyth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,261 1.2 528 65.5 1.5 34 64 56 105,773 10.2 89.8 19 12.7 (Z) 16Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55,197 14.9 825 41.1 2.1 86 104 181 219,072 0.8 99.2 4 34.2 (Z) 2Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,890 (Z) 328 69.5 4.9 28 85 6 18,220 61.7 38.3 171 0.7 4 165

Gilmer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,436 7.8 303 50.5 1.3 25 82 99 326,264 1.4 98.6 7 27.1 (Z) 5Glascock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –902 (X) 100 13.0 11.0 21 210 2 18,710 16.4 83.6 (Z) 75.0 (Z) (Z)Glynn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 155 (Z) 59 45.8 5.1 8 129 (Z) 3,068 43.1 56.9 146 42.3 2 12Gordon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,400 2.5 804 51.6 2.2 76 95 100 124,724 3.5 96.5 16 14.6 1 13Grady . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,699 11.0 501 35.9 11.2 127 254 74 146,794 78.3 21.7 20 46.9 17 2

Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,976 5.1 255 29.0 11.8 52 205 25 97,882 (NA) (NA) 13 5.2 10 2Gwinnett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,527 (Z) 312 75.0 1.3 18 56 21 68,907 87.4 12.6 94 0.4 3 90Habersham. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,489 6.9 517 60.3 1.2 39 75 120 231,333 0.8 99.2 8 23.5 (Z) 6Hall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,326 1.3 834 61.0 1.4 62 74 170 204,137 0.8 99.2 25 22.7 1 19Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,961 5.1 144 12.5 16.0 42 293 2 10,764 16.6 83.4 1 33.0 (Z) 1

Haralson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,391 1.7 332 36.7 3.0 40 120 19 57,108 3.4 96.6 4 12.3 1 2Harris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,854 0.9 298 33.6 10.4 67 225 3 8,993 53.5 46.5 7 16.9 1 2Hart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,482 5.6 567 40.7 3.4 65 115 82 145,451 2.4 97.6 4 29.7 1 2Heard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,980 6.9 209 34.9 8.1 42 201 22 105,344 1.3 98.7 74 0.9 (Z) 2Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,215 0.1 439 63.8 4.1 58 132 6 13,431 58.2 41.8 14 5.4 (Z) 13

Houston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,129 0.2 360 48.6 10.3 75 210 24 65,567 34.0 66.0 28 96.1 6 21Irwin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,943 12.6 349 21.5 20.9 138 396 29 84,158 80.8 19.2 13 59.8 11 1Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103,358 12.0 915 50.8 3.8 100 109 154 168,691 1.7 98.3 7 36.2 1 3Jasper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,441 4.6 210 27.1 9.0 51 243 26 122,543 8.4 91.6 3 46.6 1 1Jeff Davis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,198 1.7 254 34.3 11.4 56 221 11 41,563 61.6 38.4 7 68.7 5 1

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,293 2.4 388 15.5 18.3 137 354 38 98,778 76.4 23.6 27 49.0 18 2Jenkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,649 5.5 240 20.4 24.6 95 394 14 58,567 52.5 47.5 7 70.7 6 1Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,417 6.3 286 21.7 12.2 76 266 4 15,524 57.7 42.3 3 76.4 2 (Z)Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,258 1.6 194 31.4 8.8 35 181 8 41,392 6.5 93.5 3 88.4 (Z) 1Lamar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,660 3.9 243 37.0 7.0 42 172 23 94,728 17.4 82.6 7 22.5 1 4

Lanier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 900 2.1 134 35.1 14.9 52 386 10 75,022 94.8 5.2 3 83.9 2 1Laurens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,385 1.0 709 30.3 9.7 194 273 13 18,216 71.0 29.0 32 33.3 10 4Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,621 5.9 171 30.4 35.7 147 858 24 137,550 68.3 31.7 35 95.3 33 1Liberty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –238 (X) 68 33.8 13.2 16 234 (Z) 4,603 63.6 36.4 15 99.3 (Z) 6Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,697 2.7 207 36.2 5.3 31 149 3 12,135 8.6 91.4 1 52.1 (Z) 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

GEORGIA—Con.

Long . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,328 6.7 76 21.1 21.1 24 311 8 104,605 19.2 80.8 1 86.6 (Z) (Z)Lowndes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,406 0.4 462 48.1 7.1 74 160 24 51,794 93.5 6.5 33 90.7 11 9Lumpkin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,696 5.3 250 59.2 1.6 21 85 44 176,496 7.6 92.4 4 37.7 (Z) 1McDuffie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,383 3.6 296 48.3 9.5 47 158 30 102,963 (NA) (NA) 5 22.5 2 3McIntosh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 157 0.2 39 25.6 12.8 11 290 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1 87.3 (Z) 1

Macon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,416 17.2 360 28.6 15.3 114 318 123 342,700 15.5 84.5 32 51.5 19 1Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,832 18.9 763 48.6 1.4 76 100 123 161,275 1.2 98.8 3 68.2 1 (Z)Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,200 9.6 181 24.3 14.4 52 286 13 71,122 20.8 79.2 4 70.5 1 2Meriwether . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,666 1.5 339 27.4 10.0 84 248 7 20,646 46.0 54.0 6 44.2 1 2Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,591 15.2 207 16.9 29.0 95 460 29 138,425 81.1 18.9 34 91.1 33 (Z)

Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,274 6.9 496 31.5 21.0 185 373 128 257,486 37.9 62.1 78 79.2 74 3Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,520 2.7 236 31.4 14.0 62 261 45 190,695 3.3 96.7 126 2.7 (Z) 2Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,791 3.9 252 23.4 15.1 74 294 9 35,587 61.5 38.5 3 68.3 2 (Z)Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,955 5.0 525 36.8 7.2 89 170 48 91,179 7.2 92.8 3 33.2 (Z) 2Murray. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,922 1.9 306 44.8 4.6 42 137 27 88,516 5.8 94.2 5 43.6 1 2

Muscogee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –651 (X) 96 47.9 9.4 15 161 1 11,823 83.9 16.1 46 0.2 3 41Newton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 405 (Z) 355 54.4 5.4 45 126 8 22,110 6.9 93.1 13 11.2 (Z) 12Oconee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,864 4.4 411 45.3 5.6 54 132 51 123,611 15.7 84.3 3 83.1 (Z) 2Oglethorpe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,683 29.4 362 36.2 5.0 56 155 80 219,713 2.1 97.9 2 50.8 (Z) (Z)Paulding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 265 58.1 – 17 63 14 53,664 20.5 79.5 4 34.0 (Z) 3

Peach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,209 3.8 217 41.9 6.9 39 179 20 90,286 81.9 18.1 13 93.1 10 2Pickens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,971 5.9 243 57.6 0.8 17 71 48 196,687 1.2 98.8 3 39.1 (Z) 2Pierce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,617 4.5 434 40.6 11.8 99 227 29 67,166 65.1 34.9 8 90.9 7 1Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,794 6.6 327 38.8 4.6 44 134 10 30,618 28.8 71.2 2 57.9 (Z) 1Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,296 1.3 428 48.6 3.5 52 122 19 45,145 5.6 94.4 9 47.9 1 6

Pulaski. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,360 5.8 187 33.7 19.8 67 360 13 70,128 75.9 24.1 17 82.0 15 1Putnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,513 1.2 225 35.1 9.8 41 181 27 118,218 2.7 97.3 988 0.1 2 1Quitman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –95 (X) 23 13.0 34.8 14 623 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) 62.9 (Z) (Z)Rabun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,412 1.4 146 63.7 2.1 10 68 11 72,164 22.2 77.8 4 16.5 1 1Randolph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,290 6.8 136 12.5 30.9 79 583 13 98,257 86.7 13.3 9 55.2 8 1

Richmond. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,219 (Z) 140 58.6 1.4 12 89 3 22,314 54.0 46.0 126 19.3 8 44Rockdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –626 (X) 140 70.7 1.4 9 63 1 6,086 45.2 54.8 2 16.4 (Z) 2Schley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,047 6.8 115 13.0 20.9 35 308 10 83,983 15.3 84.7 1 60.5 (Z) (Z)Screven . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,667 6.4 347 15.6 23.9 184 531 19 54,161 85.7 14.3 25 76.3 22 1Seminole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,578 11.0 206 22.8 21.8 93 451 24 116,684 82.0 18.0 71 90.4 69 1

Spalding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –857 (X) 249 47.0 3.2 26 103 4 17,779 15.0 85.0 11 8.2 1 9Stephens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,265 3.7 238 52.1 1.3 20 82 44 186,647 0.5 99.5 4 10.6 (Z) 3Stewart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,477 4.2 85 12.9 31.8 34 398 4 47,294 51.5 48.5 3 27.8 2 1Sumter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,318 8.8 381 27.0 21.3 167 437 49 128,331 64.8 35.2 42 57.6 38 4Talbot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292 0.7 160 23.1 16.9 45 283 2 10,150 20.0 80.0 3 55.3 – (Z)

Taliaferro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 542 6.2 73 11.0 19.2 19 254 3 42,014 2.7 97.3 (Z) 78.3 – (Z)Tattnall. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81,378 28.9 644 35.2 7.5 143 223 139 216,203 29.9 70.1 8 66.5 6 1Taylor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,702 16.0 227 13.2 18.1 75 328 24 107,683 42.2 57.8 9 62.8 8 1Telfair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,446 3.4 304 18.1 12.5 73 240 8 24,888 83.9 16.1 6 79.3 4 2Terrell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,329 10.1 239 18.4 29.7 123 516 19 81,008 97.0 3.0 22 50.6 20 1

Thomas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,327 1.2 510 33.7 16.7 198 389 26 51,733 71.4 28.6 21 84.4 12 7Tift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,667 3.8 398 41.7 11.3 98 246 45 113,405 94.4 5.6 28 62.1 20 7Toombs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,797 4.7 382 20.4 12.3 93 243 33 86,751 82.3 17.7 14 50.6 11 3Towns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –149 (X) 148 56.1 0.7 11 74 2 13,527 33.3 66.7 1 16.0 (Z) 1Treutlen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,377 5.6 182 31.9 12.6 35 191 4 19,802 84.8 15.2 2 78.1 1 (Z)

Troup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –914 (X) 294 29.9 10.5 61 208 3 10,381 22.8 77.2 13 5.1 2 11Turner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,692 12.5 282 22.3 18.1 98 348 35 124,830 68.5 31.5 17 42.1 16 1Twiggs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,637 7.9 119 40.3 16.8 40 338 2 19,319 76.9 23.1 20 98.4 1 (Z)Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,376 4.2 330 57.3 1.5 25 75 16 48,194 26.4 73.6 2 56.0 (Z) 1Upson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,583 0.8 291 40.2 7.2 47 160 14 46,447 10.3 89.7 10 25.3 1 3

Walker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,021 1.3 642 38.6 4.2 82 127 34 53,653 3.4 96.6 15 62.0 1 11Walton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,006 1.7 679 51.3 2.2 66 97 32 47,330 24.5 75.5 9 31.6 2 5Ware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,150 0.8 323 42.4 10.8 65 202 23 69,820 41.2 58.8 10 83.4 5 4Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,179 3.8 165 26.1 16.4 48 291 4 27,261 8.3 91.7 3 39.2 (Z) 1Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –501 (X) 411 29.4 16.5 124 302 16 37,871 76.7 23.3 26 94.2 7 4

Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,075 1.0 341 39.3 7.0 64 189 16 47,974 55.2 44.8 65 99.3 2 2Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,424 21.4 98 4.1 30.6 66 676 9 89,276 79.8 20.2 4 13.1 4 (Z)Wheeler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,273 12.6 156 12.8 26.9 60 383 10 63,827 95.2 4.8 5 25.5 4 (Z)White. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,124 9.4 376 58.0 2.1 30 81 73 195,319 1.6 98.4 4 37.6 (Z) 2Whitfield. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,001 0.5 418 45.2 2.4 43 104 74 177,383 1.3 98.7 66 0.3 1 64

Wilcox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,090 32.5 311 28.9 16.1 102 329 48 154,309 41.9 58.1 23 79.3 22 1Wilkes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,019 5.9 349 22.1 12.9 99 284 21 60,716 8.2 91.8 3 13.3 (Z) 2Wilkinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208 0.1 127 32.3 10.2 31 241 1 9,118 68.1 31.9 28 96.9 (Z) 2Worth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,704 13.0 487 35.1 20.5 179 368 38 79,035 80.8 19.2 42 65.6 38 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

HAWAII. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217,252 0.6 5,398 88.0 3.1 1,300 241 533 98,819 83.5 16.5 641 67.7 364 250

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,702 2.2 3,216 87.9 2.9 821 255 188 58,376 76.7 23.3 (6) (NA) 20 34Honolulu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63,802 0.2 794 91.4 2.4 71 89 179 225,845 83.1 16.9 (6) (NA) 39 165Kalawao. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – (6) (NA) – (Z)Kauai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,519 0.9 565 84.8 4.8 152 269 42 74,080 85.4 14.6 (6) (NA) 30 15Maui . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70,229 2.0 823 87.1 3.6 257 312 125 151,289 93.7 6.3 (6) (NA) 275 37

IDAHO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 969,612 3.2 25,017 49.2 18.0 11,767 470 3,908 156,224 45.7 54.3 19,500 21.2 17,100 244

Ada. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,373 0.3 1,420 76.4 4.9 223 157 127 89,246 33.9 66.1 1,193 10.2 1,116 58Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,404 (X) 316 42.4 25.0 196 622 8 25,190 10.1 89.9 85 3.8 84 1Bannock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,775 0.3 1,030 58.9 15.3 357 347 32 31,259 74.5 25.5 403 12.8 353 21Bear Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,561 10.5 424 30.7 22.9 212 499 13 30,545 25.4 74.6 108 4.1 105 2Benewah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,454 1.5 241 32.4 24.5 138 572 14 59,805 95.6 4.4 3 51.7 1 1

Bingham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47,881 8.0 1,273 56.2 19.6 821 645 269 211,224 73.6 26.4 1,378 33.8 1,335 6Blaine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,371 0.5 224 48.2 24.6 226 1,009 19 85,817 43.6 56.4 304 22.9 288 3Boise. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –238 (X) 89 47.2 15.7 50 563 3 28,708 72.7 27.3 10 14.3 8 (Z)Bonner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,328 0.2 743 59.6 3.6 91 122 7 9,623 61.7 38.3 22 47.6 8 4Bonneville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,199 0.8 963 55.9 17.7 478 496 119 123,717 75.1 24.9 836 16.3 808 22

Boundary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,051 5.3 432 54.9 9.0 77 177 23 52,829 87.5 12.5 4 40.5 2 1Butte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,963 0.6 197 28.4 29.4 121 616 49 246,584 21.7 78.3 213 49.3 194 4Camas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,449 10.0 106 17.0 41.5 134 1,266 6 60,038 84.8 15.2 28 60.4 28 (Z)Canyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79,493 3.7 2,233 70.1 6.2 272 122 269 120,443 49.7 50.3 710 40.6 648 25Caribou . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,588 6.1 490 23.9 36.7 427 871 42 85,192 (NA) (NA) 282 16.6 249 2

Cassia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95,008 24.0 692 37.6 34.2 744 1,076 383 552,789 37.5 62.5 792 63.2 779 4Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 756 4.0 85 21.2 54.1 178 2,092 28 330,129 88.2 11.8 161 36.2 160 (Z)Clearwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –156 (X) 193 32.6 21.2 71 366 6 29,249 67.5 32.5 2 42.2 1 1Custer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,586 (X) 285 38.6 20.4 132 462 13 44,667 23.6 76.4 232 9.0 205 (Z)Elmore. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,593 5.8 364 49.7 23.6 346 951 293 804,544 (NA) (NA) 299 26.8 291 4

Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,731 23.7 792 43.2 17.6 244 308 49 62,385 15.5 84.5 225 9.8 220 3Fremont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,118 9.1 518 36.3 24.1 287 555 72 139,054 88.8 11.2 391 13.1 382 2Gem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,959 1.7 802 66.1 8.5 221 276 27 34,248 32.2 67.8 727 1.8 723 1Gooding. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,688 46.4 663 50.8 12.8 195 294 353 531,928 9.9 90.1 1,414 8.1 417 2Idaho. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,582 (X) 663 19.6 35.7 639 963 35 53,163 66.6 33.4 19 15.6 8 1

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,782 9.4 784 51.0 16.7 305 389 159 202,423 62.7 37.3 1,959 22.8 1,953 2Jerome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 141,392 34.4 635 52.1 15.4 186 293 289 454,753 26.1 73.9 1,681 4.8 1,530 2Kootenai . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –964 (X) 828 58.0 7.7 154 186 14 17,077 85.2 14.8 57 68.5 27 24Latah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,642 0.6 890 32.2 19.7 340 382 40 44,789 93.2 6.8 8 94.4 1 5Lemhi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,769 (X) 303 45.9 28.1 174 573 17 55,914 7.6 92.4 285 2.6 273 1

Lewis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,834 7.4 177 12.4 50.3 217 1,224 28 156,791 94.1 5.9 2 44.4 1 1Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,806 21.0 280 28.6 24.6 128 457 54 192,514 28.4 71.6 389 27.9 385 1Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,393 2.6 479 48.4 19.4 190 397 93 193,470 93.6 6.4 802 13.2 792 5Minidoka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,184 12.1 694 51.2 14.1 228 329 191 274,994 76.1 23.9 752 49.5 744 3Nez Perce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,879 0.2 441 41.0 32.9 343 779 40 91,615 87.4 12.6 188 1.8 3 6

Oneida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,425 4.3 428 23.1 34.6 363 848 16 38,164 56.3 43.7 141 44.4 140 (Z)Owyhee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,311 35.6 571 34.9 23.6 571 1,000 127 222,019 29.3 70.7 425 22.3 414 1Payette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,796 10.8 639 61.2 5.8 155 242 107 167,003 23.7 76.3 246 11.9 241 2Power . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,805 15.2 334 18.6 49.4 425 1,273 112 333,967 71.3 28.7 341 62.4 326 2Shoshone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –262 (X) 46 58.7 – 4 94 (Z) 1,935 14.6 85.4 5 34.3 (Z) 2

Teton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,509 2.8 302 36.4 22.5 125 413 24 79,887 82.9 17.1 168 24.9 166 1Twin Falls. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106,327 8.0 1,297 47.3 14.7 441 340 292 225,022 36.8 63.2 1,877 15.7 1,380 17Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,043 (X) 156 56.4 19.2 66 420 3 22,397 27.6 72.4 127 2.1 115 1Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,192 8.0 495 36.4 26.5 472 954 45 91,000 44.1 55.9 165 20.9 163 1

ILLINOIS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 826,217 0.2 73,027 26.9 24.0 27,311 374 7,676 105,115 76.5 23.5 13,700 5.9 154 1,760

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,344 1.7 1,347 23.8 21.8 444 330 124 92,258 60.8 39.2 22 66.8 1 9Alexander. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,382 1.7 149 14.1 24.2 78 526 10 68,678 96.3 3.7 3 67.3 2 1Bond . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,480 7.1 668 33.8 19.8 193 288 41 61,847 71.2 28.8 1 93.1 – (Z)Boone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,475 1.2 476 40.8 17.0 147 309 48 100,504 78.5 21.5 6 100.0 (Z) 4Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,730 8.4 417 23.3 19.4 144 346 24 57,357 74.5 25.5 (Z) 100.0 (Z) (Z)

Bureau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,331 3.4 1,091 18.2 31.8 491 450 204 186,914 84.9 15.1 8 99.1 3 3Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,045 8.5 480 24.2 7.3 90 188 13 26,398 78.8 21.2 1 100.0 – (Z)Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,003 6.6 656 25.3 22.1 248 377 111 169,162 56.2 43.8 7 100.0 2 1Cass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,391 6.6 427 24.4 28.6 199 465 64 149,717 66.8 33.2 9 96.5 5 2Champaign. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,476 (X) 1,285 21.4 32.1 577 449 168 130,928 95.0 5.0 29 100.0 5 23

Christian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,918 1.3 796 25.8 34.4 411 516 111 138,961 93.3 6.7 754 0.4 (Z) 3Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,630 4.8 581 28.6 28.1 275 474 60 102,620 84.8 15.2 3 100.0 1 1Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,789 4.1 703 31.3 23.5 243 346 37 53,060 74.8 25.2 2 57.0 (Z) 1Clinton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,381 7.8 915 29.2 16.4 255 278 141 153,809 29.8 70.2 5 62.1 – 2Coles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 684 29.5 26.6 261 382 61 89,165 92.4 7.6 5 23.3 (Z) 5

Cook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,062 (Z) 211 60.7 4.7 24 113 21 100,867 98.6 1.4 1,738 1.0 2 1,043Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,515 1.5 567 33.9 23.3 214 377 46 80,489 82.3 17.7 86 7.0 1 2Cumberland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,132 15.7 583 30.4 18.5 173 297 51 87,098 61.8 38.2 1 88.5 (Z) (Z)DeKalb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,767 0.6 816 23.8 32.6 359 440 175 213,897 53.3 46.7 11 97.6 (Z) 8De Witt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,330 (X) 459 27.7 32.0 203 442 56 122,582 88.9 11.1 631 0.4 1 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

ILLINOIS—Con.

Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 782 0.2 576 28.0 28.3 233 404 63 108,701 90.7 9.3 1 100.0 (Z) (Z)DuPage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,483 (Z) 79 64.6 5.1 8 97 9 115,468 98.1 1.9 13 100.0 (Z) 10Edgar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,336 1.3 667 20.5 37.0 355 532 140 209,367 (NA) (NA) 3 52.4 (Z) 2Edwards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,374 3.1 379 32.5 23.5 123 325 22 58,063 68.6 31.4 1 76.0 – (Z)Effingham. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,318 2.2 1,134 29.4 13.5 278 245 72 63,751 52.6 47.4 5 47.9 – 3

Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,287 4.0 1,248 32.1 18.2 366 293 66 53,278 84.2 15.8 3 62.2 (Z) 1Ford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,743 (X) 530 16.2 40.0 286 540 82 155,426 87.7 12.3 3 100.0 (Z) 2Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,173 1.8 727 40.0 12.7 180 247 27 36,993 61.1 38.9 15 2.3 (Z) 14Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,937 3.5 1,055 21.4 24.0 413 392 90 85,392 74.8 25.2 237 0.7 (Z) 2Gallatin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,712 (X) 187 23.0 35.3 154 826 29 155,642 93.4 6.6 13 94.3 9 3

Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,482 10.8 678 22.1 27.7 315 464 88 129,162 61.9 38.1 2 100.0 1 1Grundy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,241 (X) 407 19.2 34.6 213 524 53 129,644 94.1 5.9 979 1.2 (Z) 3Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,090 10.1 694 31.4 15.4 234 338 30 42,537 89.1 10.9 1 100.0 (Z) –Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,676 9.1 1,095 18.4 25.6 432 394 117 106,723 69.6 30.4 4 68.9 1 1Hardin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,816 9.1 179 12.8 9.5 40 222 3 16,246 (NA) (NA) (Z) 100.0 (Z) (Z)

Henderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,749 7.3 392 17.1 36.2 201 513 59 151,048 72.6 27.4 13 99.6 6 6Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,133 2.4 1,284 22.7 26.7 481 375 180 140,566 63.6 36.4 9 100.0 3 4Iroquois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,791 2.0 1,386 18.8 34.3 679 490 229 164,907 81.4 18.6 5 100.0 2 2Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,574 0.9 740 28.9 13.2 200 270 29 38,972 73.6 26.4 117 0.5 – 6Jasper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,738 14.1 791 26.2 25.2 271 343 69 87,102 63.9 36.1 529 0.4 (Z) 1

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,898 1.6 1,168 33.4 11.9 259 222 32 27,451 73.9 26.1 2 100.0 (Z) –Jersey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,217 2.2 520 26.7 21.0 173 333 41 78,963 79.5 20.5 2 100.0 (Z) 1Jo Daviess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,145 8.5 989 24.4 13.7 264 267 70 70,943 42.5 57.5 7 100.0 (Z) 2Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,061 10.4 636 26.6 7.4 121 190 11 17,046 52.3 47.7 2 50.5 (Z) 1Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,861 0.1 619 42.6 20.5 198 320 116 187,488 87.2 12.8 55 61.8 1 53

Kankakee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,085 0.8 722 22.6 32.3 347 481 120 166,150 92.0 8.0 23 44.2 6 14Kendall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 412 24.5 29.6 168 408 58 141,095 89.0 11.0 6 100.0 (Z) 2Knox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,856 1.9 921 23.9 26.0 394 428 130 140,776 67.0 33.0 2 100.0 (Z) (Z)Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,011 (Z) 337 69.7 6.2 39 115 28 83,855 86.2 13.8 752 2.2 1 66LaSalle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,436 (X) 1,478 19.1 27.8 579 392 162 109,407 90.5 9.5 78 22.2 1 11

Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,767 6.3 355 25.6 32.1 192 541 56 158,992 59.7 40.3 2 100.0 2 –Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,682 0.3 842 21.4 30.8 389 462 129 153,754 83.5 16.5 10 86.2 4 4Livingston. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,873 2.7 1,330 17.1 35.3 636 479 183 137,794 82.4 17.6 7 47.9 (Z) 5Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,139 (X) 692 21.5 37.7 359 518 110 159,285 85.6 14.4 5 100.0 1 3McDonough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,400 1.4 752 19.8 28.9 325 432 82 109,677 86.8 13.2 4 38.7 (Z) 3

McHenry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,834 (Z) 870 49.0 14.5 233 268 92 105,306 75.3 24.7 35 99.9 2 21McLean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,423 (X) 1,442 21.3 35.0 688 477 207 143,669 86.8 13.2 13 67.5 1 10Macon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,761 (X) 646 28.3 36.1 321 496 91 140,646 93.5 6.5 42 9.6 (Z) 39Macoupin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,507 3.0 1,214 26.6 21.7 427 352 129 106,409 71.8 28.2 6 46.7 (Z) 3Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,909 0.1 1,152 37.2 14.6 296 257 78 67,878 83.4 16.6 647 7.2 – 54

Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,610 2.0 1,095 34.6 14.0 262 239 39 35,526 73.5 26.5 6 7.4 (Z) 5Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,908 (X) 454 17.4 27.5 191 421 53 115,643 88.8 11.2 6 97.9 3 2Mason . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –9,530 (X) 443 19.2 42.9 285 644 72 163,594 93.2 6.8 123 32.3 37 (Z)Massac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,724 2.5 434 29.3 14.5 125 287 17 38,947 67.8 32.2 565 1.8 2 1Menard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,421 7.9 329 25.2 31.3 155 471 42 126,985 82.7 17.3 1 100.0 1 (Z)

Mercer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,105 9.0 746 26.3 25.6 293 392 90 120,823 75.5 24.5 4 100.0 2 1Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,649 4.7 531 32.8 20.7 177 334 39 72,589 66.3 33.7 3 100.0 (Z) (Z)Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,911 3.0 1,001 26.7 24.0 362 362 93 92,755 82.3 17.7 442 0.3 – 1Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,488 0.4 682 22.6 30.1 293 429 84 123,177 79.9 20.1 202 4.2 1 (Z)Moultrie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,612 3.4 441 29.9 30.2 186 423 49 110,789 89.0 11.0 2 100.0 (Z) 1

Ogle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,079 0.2 1,129 30.9 21.1 372 330 131 116,434 65.0 35.0 59 15.3 (Z) 5Peoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,858 0.1 892 29.1 18.0 266 299 78 87,015 81.2 18.8 379 9.1 3 26Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,143 3.9 549 25.7 20.8 194 353 24 43,843 79.4 20.6 2 53.6 (Z) 1Piatt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,705 (X) 442 20.1 42.1 258 583 72 162,002 96.1 3.9 4 100.0 (Z) 2Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,916 12.5 1,041 21.0 23.8 426 409 100 95,924 68.8 31.2 4 83.7 (Z) 2

Pope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,647 8.0 341 21.1 10.9 77 226 4 12,630 67.5 32.5 (Z) 100.0 (Z) –Pulaski. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,745 2.3 253 26.5 19.4 86 341 15 58,040 86.9 13.1 1 100.0 (Z) (Z)Putnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,725 9.6 175 20.0 25.1 71 407 43 242,874 93.7 6.3 180 0.4 (Z) (Z)Randolph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,497 3.7 823 24.5 17.9 254 308 39 47,644 71.3 28.7 37 6.1 (Z) 3Richland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,110 4.6 506 29.6 26.1 209 414 53 104,783 56.7 43.3 2 32.2 – 1

Rock Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,036 0.1 659 34.1 16.8 170 257 46 69,178 76.7 23.3 1,130 0.5 2 16St. Clair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,373 0.1 811 28.9 21.5 270 333 70 86,773 86.1 13.9 73 26.6 (Z) 54Saline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,032 1.2 446 38.3 17.3 130 291 20 45,471 65.6 34.4 (Z) 100.0 (Z) –Sangamon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,915 (Z) 970 33.5 27.8 468 483 146 150,422 90.0 10.0 355 1.7 (Z) 36Schuyler. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,707 14.7 538 20.8 21.0 207 386 42 77,796 68.0 32.0 2 100.0 (Z) 1

Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,373 3.4 291 26.5 26.1 116 398 27 93,667 81.3 18.7 6 100.0 1 5Shelby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,868 6.5 1,228 27.0 22.9 420 342 95 77,328 77.1 22.9 4 74.0 (Z) 2Stark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 349 0.6 335 21.2 37.0 174 520 57 169,328 85.1 14.9 1 100.0 1 (Z)Stephenson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,075 3.1 1,075 29.0 16.7 324 302 125 116,223 47.8 52.2 9 100.0 (Z) 4Tazewell. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,780 0.1 918 28.8 24.9 327 356 107 116,228 83.8 16.2 855 5.9 19 15




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

ILLINOIS—Con.

Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,180 0.6 666 28.5 11.6 152 229 23 33,788 80.5 19.5 2 97.2 (Z) (Z)Vermilion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,784 (X) 909 26.7 35.4 450 495 125 137,201 93.6 6.4 16 33.0 (Z) 10Wabash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –247 (X) 199 24.6 36.2 111 556 23 113,191 87.7 12.3 2 100.0 (Z) 2Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,329 1.5 633 14.1 38.1 327 516 106 167,773 77.9 22.1 4 100.0 (Z) 3Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,386 7.3 756 18.8 28.7 332 440 80 105,380 58.5 41.5 3 75.4 (Z) 1

Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,138 10.5 1,092 29.4 17.1 356 326 57 51,886 69.3 30.7 3 47.0 (Z) 2White. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,425 3.9 482 26.8 27.0 281 583 44 91,052 88.3 11.7 4 96.5 2 1Whiteside . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,752 1.2 1,001 24.5 23.7 379 379 144 143,962 66.7 33.3 25 99.0 11 5Will . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,363 (X) 830 38.2 20.8 265 320 82 99,061 93.0 7.0 2,095 2.8 1 42Williamson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,881 0.9 631 35.8 7.3 105 167 10 15,491 59.9 40.1 109 2.0 (Z) 2Winnebago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,312 (Z) 695 39.9 16.5 191 275 62 89,468 73.0 27.0 40 100.0 (Z) 33Woodford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,400 (X) 919 25.0 22.4 310 337 104 112,976 75.2 24.8 13 35.1 (Z) 10

INDIANA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 700,191 0.5 60,296 39.9 13.8 15,059 250 4,783 79,328 62.6 37.4 10,100 6.5 101 670

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,920 1.5 1,296 48.4 9.4 229 177 99 76,090 39.3 60.7 7 72.8 – 3Allen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,309 0.1 1,550 46.5 9.1 284 183 75 48,166 75.0 25.0 54 17.7 (Z) 41Bartholomew. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,990 0.3 608 42.3 15.1 161 264 42 69,689 83.0 17.0 19 86.2 1 12Benton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,169 3.0 394 16.8 42.9 248 629 70 176,604 96.5 3.5 1 88.6 (Z) (Z)Blackford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,484 0.9 279 34.8 21.1 97 348 26 92,839 78.1 21.9 3 88.3 (Z) 1

Boone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,881 0.8 672 48.7 20.2 226 336 75 111,259 85.6 14.4 5 84.4 (Z) 2Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125 0.1 222 53.2 2.3 20 92 2 8,775 65.2 34.8 (Z) 90.3 – –Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,582 5.3 529 31.0 23.6 202 381 95 179,992 54.0 46.0 7 60.5 (Z) 1Cass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,266 1.9 717 36.8 18.7 208 291 72 100,876 68.5 31.5 33 16.9 (Z) 6Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,573 0.1 638 41.2 7.8 101 158 22 34,481 73.8 26.2 25 86.3 – 21

Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,525 2.3 555 40.5 16.2 152 273 32 58,422 82.3 17.7 1 90.8 – (Z)Clinton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,840 1.7 604 36.9 27.8 245 405 105 174,402 64.6 35.4 6 99.4 (Z) 5Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,739 1.7 427 26.7 2.8 55 129 4 8,422 36.8 63.2 6 36.5 – 2Daviess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,617 3.8 1,138 45.8 7.7 207 182 104 91,185 31.2 68.8 7 93.8 (Z) 2Dearborn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 603 0.1 676 32.4 2.7 74 110 7 10,194 64.0 36.0 860 1.1 – 4

Decatur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,951 1.6 676 29.3 18.3 207 306 87 128,632 54.7 45.3 4 60.5 – 2DeKalb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,719 0.9 1,000 41.0 8.8 179 179 42 42,338 58.2 41.8 12 90.8 (Z) 4Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,864 0.4 687 48.5 13.5 190 276 50 73,048 86.9 13.1 18 31.6 (Z) 12Dubois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,195 1.3 758 24.9 12.9 189 249 105 138,863 19.2 80.8 7 19.7 – 5Elkhart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,276 0.3 1,516 52.8 5.9 201 133 136 89,718 30.6 69.4 35 91.1 7 14

Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 827 0.2 424 36.1 14.9 107 252 20 46,573 76.1 23.9 4 96.3 – 3Floyd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 867 0.1 299 56.5 2.7 24 80 4 11,716 69.2 30.8 337 0.6 – 2Fountain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,383 2.2 487 27.7 24.4 205 422 52 107,464 89.8 10.2 4 96.7 (Z) 1Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,236 2.5 817 31.6 7.1 139 171 25 30,464 56.9 43.1 4 90.9 (Z) 2Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,505 4.2 616 36.0 18.7 193 313 53 85,396 73.6 26.4 7 91.6 4 1

Gibson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,500 1.1 557 32.1 22.6 211 379 54 97,826 81.3 18.7 47 8.3 (Z) 2Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,709 0.5 598 36.3 22.6 198 332 54 90,005 81.5 18.5 14 63.9 – 7Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,961 4.0 822 34.5 8.4 171 207 41 50,027 41.6 58.4 5 78.8 (Z) 3Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,626 0.2 726 57.4 10.2 140 193 56 76,616 91.8 8.2 129 18.6 (Z) 33Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,680 0.4 616 51.6 14.6 162 262 44 71,690 82.1 17.9 6 95.3 (Z) 3

Harrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,409 0.9 1,176 37.8 4.6 160 136 42 36,080 31.1 68.9 3 89.2 – 2Hendricks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –188 (X) 703 54.9 12.9 182 259 52 74,329 86.4 13.6 10 91.7 – 4Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,873 1.1 745 46.6 13.7 173 232 47 63,601 74.1 25.9 8 71.0 (Z) 4Howard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,725 0.3 536 39.2 18.7 156 291 57 105,959 68.7 31.3 21 36.4 – 12Huntington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,320 1.8 675 38.8 19.0 200 296 63 93,604 66.7 33.3 6 80.4 – 3

Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,226 1.9 806 36.7 16.6 207 257 80 99,783 39.4 60.6 9 46.9 1 5Jasper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,774 3.3 641 35.4 30.9 280 437 133 207,340 54.2 45.8 45 11.7 15 1Jay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,895 4.5 857 39.8 11.8 195 228 94 109,740 29.1 70.9 4 82.5 (Z) 2Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184 (Z) 778 42.4 5.0 109 140 16 20,226 75.8 24.2 1,310 0.2 – 6Jennings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,727 2.2 669 45.3 10.0 143 213 41 61,019 50.3 49.7 3 19.3 – 1

Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,475 0.3 598 53.3 14.0 135 226 49 82,672 69.3 30.7 13 98.7 (Z) 11Knox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,980 1.8 508 25.0 31.3 300 591 86 169,764 84.1 15.9 93 10.8 3 5Kosciusko . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,018 1.1 1,203 42.3 11.6 262 218 122 101,633 39.8 60.2 20 83.5 6 4LaGrange. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,795 3.7 1,551 41.6 4.4 189 122 107 69,090 38.3 61.7 13 76.9 8 1Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,524 (Z) 482 51.7 15.8 128 265 39 80,797 92.6 7.4 2,317 0.4 14 81

LaPorte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,612 0.6 817 41.2 17.6 243 298 79 97,140 70.2 29.8 40 34.2 11 10Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,231 0.5 825 35.2 7.4 147 179 15 17,613 43.3 56.7 9 18.0 – 6Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,372 0.3 807 45.2 19.1 244 302 75 93,311 90.1 9.9 21 86.1 (Z) 14Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,521 (Z) 303 74.6 3.3 24 78 33 110,347 (NA) (NA) 296 17.6 (Z) 125Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,434 1.5 842 35.7 13.4 204 243 63 74,791 63.3 36.7 7 86.9 1 3

Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,576 0.9 350 32.0 6.6 64 181 28 79,017 16.5 83.5 2 78.9 – 1Miami . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,406 1.5 685 36.4 16.9 191 279 59 85,699 60.9 39.1 9 39.6 (Z) 2Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,047 0.1 547 41.7 3.5 61 111 7 12,590 49.9 50.1 15 3.3 – 14Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,184 0.6 644 37.6 24.8 273 425 94 146,592 74.0 26.0 5 87.0 (Z) 2Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,152 0.3 690 57.1 7.5 112 162 25 36,680 77.9 22.1 277 2.9 – 6

Newton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,592 4.0 344 28.2 36.3 182 528 119 346,619 39.9 60.1 5 71.8 2 1Noble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,427 0.9 1,029 39.7 8.6 173 168 51 49,214 48.6 51.4 9 87.5 2 3Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –859 (X) 213 41.8 2.3 24 112 2 11,042 82.2 17.8 1 95.0 (Z) 1Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,918 1.6 535 26.4 7.9 106 198 18 34,402 44.2 55.8 2 50.0 – 1Owen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,303 0.6 588 34.0 6.1 99 168 13 22,131 72.7 27.3 2 93.3 – 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

INDIANA—Con.

Parke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,594 3.3 470 33.2 17.7 165 351 33 70,468 80.3 19.7 2 94.0 (Z) 1Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,875 1.3 470 24.3 6.0 76 162 9 18,581 30.4 69.6 1 80.6 – (Z)Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,030 3.8 288 30.2 14.2 76 263 15 53,302 70.5 29.5 501 0.3 – 1Porter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,283 0.2 606 49.5 16.0 146 241 37 61,579 83.7 16.3 722 1.7 2 15Posey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,627 1.0 396 29.3 29.3 192 485 50 127,374 84.5 15.5 20 11.0 (Z) 2

Pulaski. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,889 5.3 524 33.4 24.2 223 425 81 155,351 61.9 38.1 10 43.1 3 (Z)Putnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,743 0.7 853 44.3 10.8 181 212 45 52,183 74.9 25.1 8 86.0 (Z) 4Randolph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,269 3.4 786 34.9 21.2 258 328 70 89,452 68.3 31.7 4 71.9 – 2Ripley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,231 1.0 904 36.4 9.2 173 191 44 48,770 71.0 29.0 3 27.1 – 2Rush . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,496 4.1 606 26.7 25.9 224 369 67 111,101 66.5 33.5 3 76.0 (Z) 1

St. Joseph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,116 0.1 855 52.2 9.8 165 193 50 58,936 74.7 25.3 55 92.7 5 31Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,842 0.6 387 44.2 7.5 69 179 13 32,344 83.4 16.6 4 3.8 – 2Shelby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,245 1.3 651 41.3 20.1 200 307 59 90,702 86.1 13.9 7 91.7 (Z) 4Spencer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,376 2.8 593 30.7 14.5 155 261 35 58,610 59.6 40.4 32 9.2 (Z) 2Starke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 862 0.5 518 47.7 13.7 134 259 28 54,792 93.2 6.8 6 63.9 4 1

Steuben . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,452 1.3 674 38.1 6.5 113 167 21 30,533 61.1 38.9 5 81.4 1 1Sullivan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,163 3.9 437 29.1 21.5 179 409 38 87,915 87.7 12.3 464 0.7 1 2Switzerland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,740 (X) 464 35.8 2.6 60 130 6 13,940 72.8 27.2 2 95.0 – 1Tippecanoe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,526 0.3 705 49.6 17.2 221 313 78 110,790 78.2 21.8 35 96.5 (Z) 14Tipton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,114 4.1 360 28.3 26.9 152 421 56 154,769 78.6 21.4 2 98.6 – 1

Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,183 4.2 262 22.1 25.2 85 325 22 82,603 68.1 31.9 1 92.2 – (Z)Vanderburgh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,784 (Z) 306 44.4 16.7 82 268 20 66,552 90.3 9.7 22 4.3 (Z) 21Vermillion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,141 (X) 221 29.4 26.2 110 497 28 128,412 78.5 21.5 608 1.8 (Z) 1Vigo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,366 0.2 476 46.8 16.6 123 258 28 59,658 91.2 8.8 535 3.4 1 10Wabash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,031 1.9 799 35.2 14.8 215 269 103 129,191 37.0 63.0 8 92.9 (Z) 4

Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,412 9.0 346 33.5 26.0 167 482 52 151,592 (NA) (NA) 2 96.5 (Z) 1Warrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,125 0.8 401 45.9 13.7 94 236 17 42,499 83.6 16.4 786 0.7 – 2Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,245 3.6 977 34.8 7.1 181 185 40 41,121 36.6 63.4 4 33.0 – 2Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,740 0.5 850 38.5 11.8 171 201 45 52,660 72.8 27.2 11 48.1 (Z) 7Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,594 2.0 631 29.5 24.7 226 359 62 98,960 71.4 28.6 5 71.9 – 2White. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,963 3.3 589 33.6 29.5 284 482 116 197,774 60.8 39.2 5 75.1 1 1Whitley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,321 1.9 840 41.0 10.5 172 205 46 54,907 59.6 40.4 4 94.8 (Z) 2

IOWA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,237,042 3.2 90,655 23.3 22.7 31,729 350 12,274 135,388 49.5 50.5 3,360 20.2 22 383

Adair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,154 12.2 843 16.7 27.2 373 443 93 110,654 57.6 42.4 1 79.7 – (Z)Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,568 22.1 567 16.4 28.4 238 419 51 89,832 55.6 44.4 2 34.1 – (Z)Allamakee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,898 11.1 1,083 19.5 17.4 326 301 91 84,049 31.3 68.7 239 1.3 – 1Appanoose . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,464 3.3 816 20.0 17.3 236 289 25 30,984 51.3 48.7 6 21.9 – 5Audubon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,409 23.6 638 22.4 26.2 261 409 113 176,658 41.5 58.5 2 81.1 – (Z)

Benton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,311 4.8 1,186 24.1 23.1 401 338 148 124,750 64.4 35.6 3 91.9 (Z) 1Black Hawk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,620 0.7 939 30.6 18.8 275 293 114 121,814 60.9 39.1 35 85.4 (Z) 19Boone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,003 2.8 827 29.9 25.8 313 378 106 128,093 71.4 28.6 3 91.8 – 2Bremer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,984 7.7 956 27.5 15.3 255 267 108 113,041 58.0 42.0 3 91.5 (Z) 2Buchanan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,701 9.3 1,067 24.7 20.5 340 319 142 132,720 59.3 40.7 4 90.2 (Z) 1

Buena Vista . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,114 9.4 825 20.8 32.2 342 414 213 257,862 37.3 62.7 6 93.5 (Z) 4Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,724 20.8 1,076 30.4 19.6 328 305 135 125,040 55.4 44.6 2 89.0 (Z) 1Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,124 19.3 762 24.5 33.3 341 447 141 184,459 58.7 41.3 3 72.4 – 1Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,306 7.2 1,045 22.3 22.4 364 348 264 252,648 28.6 71.4 5 88.2 (Z) 3Cass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,912 5.8 764 19.8 30.6 337 441 117 153,288 44.7 55.3 3 79.1 (Z) 2

Cedar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,740 6.1 971 24.5 23.3 338 349 123 126,674 66.9 33.1 3 90.8 (Z) 1Cerro Gordo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,122 2.8 795 31.2 28.4 323 407 112 141,204 74.6 25.4 10 68.9 (Z) 6Cherokee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,284 12.9 837 19.6 27.7 335 401 155 184,780 42.9 57.1 4 90.3 (Z) 3Chickasaw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,703 17.3 951 26.5 18.1 271 285 120 126,074 46.9 53.1 2 84.3 (Z) 1Clarke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,202 9.3 726 16.9 15.8 216 298 44 60,132 26.3 73.7 2 90.8 – 1

Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,911 4.8 691 20.4 33.1 312 451 157 227,305 40.6 59.4 4 94.2 (Z) 2Clayton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,597 13.3 1,601 17.3 15.2 433 270 160 99,905 33.6 66.4 4 86.0 (Z) 1Clinton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,524 1.8 1,219 25.5 20.9 388 318 138 113,456 63.9 36.1 277 47.3 (Z) 5Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,402 6.8 927 24.2 29.4 446 481 157 169,540 57.2 42.8 5 92.7 – 2Dallas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,675 2.7 938 37.4 20.9 309 330 92 98,611 69.9 30.1 6 90.4 (Z) 3

Davis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,547 9.4 1,007 17.5 14.4 291 289 50 49,293 41.4 58.6 2 62.0 – (Z)Decatur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,179 15.9 788 17.8 18.3 278 353 42 53,274 34.3 65.7 2 68.8 – 1Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,737 15.6 1,253 18.8 14.9 345 276 190 151,863 33.1 66.9 5 82.6 – 1Des Moines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,267 0.4 674 28.8 16.3 181 269 47 70,473 78.4 21.6 114 7.4 (Z) 7Dickinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,429 0.9 492 21.5 30.9 203 413 76 155,303 56.2 43.8 3 31.7 (Z) 2

Dubuque . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,654 1.5 1,481 19.9 8.5 316 213 152 102,612 22.7 77.3 95 28.5 (Z) 8Emmet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,631 11.5 510 20.0 36.9 235 462 107 209,445 49.4 50.6 3 72.7 (Z) 1Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,303 16.0 1,344 26.4 19.6 415 309 181 134,548 44.2 55.8 4 87.9 (Z) 1Floyd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,872 7.6 895 26.6 22.2 291 325 116 129,964 61.1 38.9 3 90.6 (Z) 2Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,276 13.9 825 22.9 29.5 337 409 160 193,896 51.7 48.3 3 56.6 (Z) 1

Fremont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,623 9.5 547 15.2 36.0 318 582 62 114,207 79.6 20.4 2 92.1 (Z) 1Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,934 10.2 727 22.4 34.1 347 477 120 165,154 65.4 34.6 2 85.1 (Z) 1Grundy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,757 14.2 724 25.8 28.9 324 448 140 193,844 65.9 34.1 2 82.8 (Z) 1Guthrie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,488 14.9 885 22.5 21.0 324 366 111 125,631 46.6 53.4 2 78.0 (Z) 1Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,161 11.8 797 28.1 30.4 348 437 235 294,730 37.3 62.7 4 85.3 (Z) 2




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

IOWA—Con.

Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,859 8.8 827 23.9 27.8 322 390 142 171,209 56.6 43.4 4 57.5 (Z) 1Hardin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,932 13.0 829 27.3 28.7 328 395 252 303,945 32.2 67.8 6 62.6 (Z) 2Harrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,705 6.6 828 20.7 32.0 428 517 111 134,289 76.3 23.7 5 85.6 2 1Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,741 1.8 857 27.0 16.6 251 293 79 91,718 50.5 49.5 3 90.5 – 2Howard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,822 12.1 891 25.5 17.7 269 302 105 118,110 52.0 48.0 2 80.1 (Z) 1

Humboldt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,583 11.8 606 19.3 30.2 271 447 97 159,467 68.1 31.9 3 57.8 – 1Ida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,499 7.8 618 26.5 27.3 266 430 111 180,228 52.9 47.1 2 87.4 – 1Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,659 3.3 1,024 21.3 18.0 340 332 133 129,877 67.0 33.0 2 88.8 (Z) 1Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,265 4.3 1,336 20.6 14.4 349 261 107 80,011 31.1 68.9 3 88.3 – 1Jasper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,674 4.5 1,212 27.7 24.1 410 339 149 122,889 59.5 40.5 7 94.0 (Z) 5

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,845 3.7 808 20.8 18.1 233 289 49 60,097 54.6 45.4 3 94.5 – 2Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,134 0.2 1,261 27.0 13.3 301 239 105 82,971 54.2 45.8 42 12.5 (Z) 9Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,456 4.5 1,024 21.3 20.1 312 304 119 116,670 48.3 51.7 3 88.6 – 1Keokuk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,505 12.6 1,093 23.0 21.0 344 315 99 90,431 51.1 48.9 2 67.4 – (Z)Kossuth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,552 12.5 1,340 18.8 32.8 592 442 261 194,789 55.7 44.3 4 88.5 (Z) 1

Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,886 1.1 945 24.1 18.1 270 286 66 69,398 58.1 41.9 30 68.9 (Z) 11Linn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,751 0.2 1,445 32.5 13.3 349 241 105 72,910 69.6 30.4 265 20.3 (Z) 39Louisa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,784 8.5 601 21.5 21.8 201 334 70 117,008 60.9 39.1 11 98.7 2 1Lucas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,208 4.4 747 19.3 16.1 222 298 27 35,930 41.4 58.6 1 40.7 – 1Lyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,153 20.8 1,045 20.8 21.9 342 327 248 237,221 27.1 72.9 5 87.4 (Z) 2

Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,041 5.2 990 23.3 17.5 304 307 71 71,214 47.3 52.7 2 85.2 – 1Mahaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,161 6.9 1,043 19.8 20.5 329 315 133 127,275 42.0 58.0 4 89.9 – 2Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,965 1.2 1,051 27.8 15.4 277 263 68 65,140 67.4 32.6 5 91.2 (Z) 4Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,726 2.3 848 30.0 27.1 335 395 132 155,772 64.8 35.2 12 77.3 – 6Mills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,501 5.6 462 19.3 39.2 247 535 48 104,152 88.6 11.4 2 96.2 – 1

Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,102 20.5 828 22.8 25.6 289 349 155 186,700 40.4 59.6 3 83.2 (Z) 1Monona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,715 7.1 625 13.1 39.2 392 628 105 168,136 67.4 32.6 8 97.8 6 1Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,807 7.6 714 16.2 20.3 253 354 41 57,329 36.7 63.3 2 84.3 – (Z)Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,785 6.7 583 19.9 29.3 243 416 83 141,559 59.7 40.3 2 93.9 – 1Muscatine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,833 0.5 816 27.9 19.0 230 282 72 88,417 70.8 29.2 326 17.4 2 27

O’Brien . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,977 15.2 993 18.6 26.4 362 365 204 205,752 40.4 59.6 4 89.7 (Z) 2Osceola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,562 22.0 636 20.3 30.7 257 404 163 255,830 35.1 64.9 4 87.7 (Z) 2Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,302 7.7 873 17.6 29.0 339 388 69 79,211 61.8 38.2 3 51.7 – 2Palo Alto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,590 22.4 783 23.9 30.5 327 417 191 244,070 39.3 60.7 3 90.2 1 1Plymouth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,862 9.3 1,339 17.2 27.4 531 397 278 207,911 38.2 61.8 7 89.7 1 3

Pocahontas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,722 24.5 730 17.7 37.9 354 485 142 194,684 61.2 38.8 2 92.0 (Z) 1Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,328 0.1 764 41.4 17.8 227 297 69 89,682 86.3 13.7 53 47.4 1 51Pottawattamie . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,029 1.3 1,255 25.7 31.4 540 431 163 130,093 65.5 34.5 455 3.6 (Z) 14Poweshiek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,362 5.8 925 21.6 26.2 345 373 111 120,066 60.1 39.9 3 81.9 – 1Ringgold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,739 24.3 758 14.5 22.2 299 395 52 67,967 35.2 64.8 2 60.4 (Z) (Z)

Sac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,796 24.6 791 21.4 31.4 339 429 183 231,794 44.3 55.7 4 84.4 (Z) 1Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,083 0.1 750 27.5 19.5 229 305 96 127,620 66.5 33.5 122 4.3 (Z) 20Shelby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,040 11.8 868 15.9 30.3 348 401 124 142,762 59.9 40.1 2 88.2 (Z) 1Sioux. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124,576 15.8 1,673 25.5 18.5 505 302 617 368,711 17.6 82.4 15 89.1 2 7Story . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,939 0.8 977 30.9 24.5 360 368 119 121,525 77.9 22.1 13 88.1 (Z) 9

Tama. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,316 12.1 1,159 19.4 23.3 418 361 128 110,464 75.5 24.5 5 95.4 (Z) 2Taylor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,641 26.7 794 14.9 22.5 308 388 60 75,831 51.2 48.8 1 54.0 – (Z)Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,581 4.5 698 20.3 19.9 238 341 63 90,100 36.8 63.2 4 14.1 – 3Van Buren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,418 8.8 870 18.0 16.0 253 291 48 55,025 42.5 57.5 1 58.3 – (Z)Wapello . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,485 0.9 845 25.9 14.1 206 244 38 44,764 66.2 33.8 22 2.2 – 7

Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,595 2.5 1,338 34.6 11.7 299 224 53 39,941 65.1 34.9 2 91.3 (Z) 1Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,747 8.4 1,200 26.4 18.4 335 279 175 145,683 34.7 65.3 4 80.8 – 2Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,394 17.5 788 12.6 23.0 305 387 41 52,348 58.5 41.5 1 61.2 – (Z)Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,513 2.1 932 22.4 30.3 417 447 154 165,206 69.4 30.6 10 87.0 – 5Winnebago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,572 6.6 631 30.3 25.4 240 381 98 155,036 56.1 43.9 2 96.7 (Z) 2

Winneshiek. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,579 7.3 1,501 23.3 13.9 380 253 148 98,886 33.2 66.8 5 79.9 (Z) 2Woodbury. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,792 0.8 1,148 24.0 24.2 442 385 142 123,994 57.8 42.2 959 3.2 1 17Worth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,297 13.6 588 28.2 30.3 224 381 68 115,371 78.0 22.0 3 29.9 (Z) (Z)Wright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41,246 15.2 752 24.9 33.5 345 459 226 300,195 38.9 61.1 4 86.3 (Z) 1

KANSAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,066,237 1.5 64,414 17.4 34.6 47,228 733 8,746 135,782 27.7 72.3 6,610 57.3 3,710 416

Allen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,659 (X) 619 17.1 27.5 280 453 25 40,068 49.6 50.4 4 2.4 (Z) 2Anderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,406 5.1 654 16.8 30.6 379 579 44 67,844 46.7 53.3 3 3.0 1 1Atchison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,972 2.1 619 19.1 20.7 227 366 32 51,929 49.4 50.6 5 7.9 (Z) 4Barber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,770 (X) 471 8.3 52.7 697 1,480 50 105,815 29.6 70.4 6 100.0 4 1Barton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,490 2.4 772 13.3 41.8 650 842 171 221,707 26.3 73.7 41 100.0 34 3

Bourbon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,050 0.4 838 14.7 22.6 339 405 29 35,044 23.9 76.1 3 0.3 (Z) 2Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,725 3.3 591 16.4 31.0 324 548 53 89,091 59.3 40.7 2 57.6 (Z) 1Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,875 1.2 1,309 27.7 21.5 701 536 116 88,939 20.9 79.1 15 11.7 1 10Chase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,024 23.4 260 14.2 45.0 362 1,391 44 167,592 11.2 88.8 4 28.0 2 (Z)Chautauqua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,860 (X) 371 7.0 39.4 390 1,052 30 81,951 23.8 76.2 2 31.3 (Z) (Z)




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

KANSAS—Con.

Cherokee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,145 2.4 746 26.9 20.5 291 389 50 66,469 58.1 41.9 95 3.3 (Z) 3Cheyenne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,329 12.5 441 7.7 54.0 576 1,307 54 123,401 36.3 63.7 60 100.0 58 1Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,760 17.7 302 7.0 46.7 492 1,628 98 324,079 5.1 94.9 6 100.0 4 (Z)Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,325 5.9 571 14.4 42.6 393 689 49 85,278 53.9 46.1 18 99.4 15 1Cloud . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,570 4.0 520 10.2 47.7 431 829 38 72,723 64.1 35.9 22 97.3 19 1

Coffey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,225 1.7 607 15.2 29.7 336 553 38 63,194 44.3 55.7 677 (Z) (Z) 1Comanche . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –866 (X) 274 7.7 57.3 447 1,631 26 93,996 (NA) (NA) 8 100.0 7 (Z)Cowley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,128 1.0 1,004 18.3 28.6 690 687 62 62,156 36.6 63.4 8 49.4 1 5Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,540 1.0 825 22.1 21.6 341 413 42 50,888 51.7 48.3 7 71.8 1 5Decatur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,106 15.9 350 14.3 55.7 469 1,340 108 308,263 14.2 85.8 17 100.0 15 1

Dickinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,590 3.7 976 17.3 34.4 551 564 97 98,950 30.9 69.1 8 85.1 3 2Doniphan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,991 4.5 469 18.1 26.0 206 439 32 68,446 78.2 21.8 1 96.1 (Z) (Z)Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,294 0.1 874 35.8 11.3 201 230 24 27,446 53.3 46.7 25 21.7 1 16Edwards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,721 32.7 353 4.8 47.3 420 1,190 131 372,249 28.6 71.4 114 100.0 112 (Z)Elk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –852 (X) 407 11.1 38.1 370 910 26 63,307 15.6 84.4 1 2.0 – (Z)

Ellis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,704 1.9 758 12.5 39.4 578 762 52 68,960 26.9 73.1 5 95.8 2 2Ellsworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,218 3.2 478 17.2 40.2 413 864 25 51,659 54.2 45.8 3 72.9 (Z) 1Finney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,216 5.0 485 8.5 59.2 802 1,653 488 1,005,610 16.0 84.0 310 100.0 288 7Ford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,496 6.7 701 14.4 46.6 649 926 215 306,217 17.4 82.6 109 99.8 94 5Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 830 0.2 977 26.0 17.6 339 347 41 41,512 37.1 62.9 4 9.0 (Z) 2

Geary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,877 (X) 245 18.8 40.8 180 733 17 68,188 38.1 61.9 10 93.2 3 6Gove . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,133 21.8 395 10.4 58.7 592 1,498 110 278,339 17.5 82.5 22 99.8 20 (Z)Graham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,118 14.8 431 10.0 42.5 517 1,200 32 75,299 40.4 59.6 14 99.9 13 1Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,956 15.2 304 10.2 48.0 302 993 317 1,041,151 9.8 90.2 155 100.0 149 2Gray . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,418 37.5 470 8.1 51.9 501 1,066 354 752,206 16.1 83.9 238 99.4 234 1

Greeley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,054 35.5 303 5.0 51.8 456 1,506 52 171,706 17.6 82.4 30 100.0 29 (Z)Greenwood. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,813 7.1 575 11.5 38.6 594 1,034 51 88,670 12.5 87.5 3 0.4 (Z) 1Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,960 48.3 393 7.4 51.4 536 1,363 176 447,654 7.2 92.8 46 86.7 43 1Harper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,021 4.8 523 9.9 45.1 470 898 63 120,436 44.3 55.7 4 93.3 2 1Harvey. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,739 1.7 832 26.0 26.7 352 423 60 72,475 57.6 42.4 45 98.8 27 16

Haskell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58,591 49.5 227 5.3 70.0 406 1,788 482 2,124,119 12.5 87.5 251 99.9 246 1Hodgeman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,425 52.6 381 5.5 59.3 471 1,235 98 257,619 13.7 86.3 32 99.2 31 (Z)Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,112 (X) 1,099 22.7 17.1 337 307 28 25,279 35.6 64.4 2 73.1 (Z) 1Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,568 1.8 1,041 23.4 11.8 280 269 35 33,463 37.3 62.7 4 90.9 2 2Jewell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,429 21.4 572 11.0 45.8 496 867 50 87,448 53.1 46.9 92 3.5 91 1

Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,676 (Z) 659 45.5 11.1 149 226 27 40,616 65.1 34.9 25 55.2 2 14Kearny. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,557 26.2 347 9.5 45.2 558 1,607 181 520,735 20.6 79.4 249 58.8 246 1Kingman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,395 (X) 837 14.6 36.0 556 664 52 61,879 52.8 47.2 20 96.3 15 1Kiowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,520 7.0 379 8.4 47.2 435 1,147 36 96,282 56.1 43.9 59 100.0 58 (Z)Labette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,430 0.9 889 18.9 22.8 361 406 62 70,228 27.9 72.1 5 1.7 (Z) 3

Lane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,704 34.2 312 6.1 59.9 460 1,476 124 397,628 11.7 88.3 19 100.0 17 (Z)Leavenworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,477 0.4 1,094 34.8 7.0 197 180 22 20,181 48.0 52.0 9 53.7 (Z) 7Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,578 7.8 458 10.9 48.9 446 974 35 76,832 49.0 51.0 2 60.1 1 (Z)Linn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,705 1.7 903 16.9 17.9 311 344 23 25,540 45.0 55.0 1,153 (Z) (Z) 1Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,917 15.5 318 7.5 62.6 610 1,918 40 126,409 32.3 67.7 10 100.0 8 1

Lyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,574 1.0 898 19.3 29.4 494 550 76 84,523 24.3 75.7 7 3.1 (Z) 5McPherson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,068 2.8 1,161 17.5 31.0 575 495 99 85,640 49.7 50.3 35 93.9 26 5Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,002 5.6 996 19.4 34.6 588 591 81 81,617 38.8 61.2 4 47.6 1 1Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,416 12.4 954 12.5 42.6 581 609 64 67,453 49.3 50.7 3 69.0 1 1Meade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,302 33.8 454 6.4 52.6 611 1,345 106 233,672 40.4 59.6 163 100.0 161 1

Miami . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,200 (X) 1,424 37.6 10.1 320 225 44 30,963 36.2 63.8 5 – (Z) 4Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,163 8.2 473 11.6 49.7 449 949 74 156,218 37.0 63.0 16 12.9 14 2Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,522 0.7 983 23.3 16.5 346 352 40 40,192 41.8 58.2 11 0.5 (Z) 5Morris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,645 5.5 466 16.5 41.0 386 828 54 114,818 20.8 79.2 5 10.8 (Z) 4Morton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,960 5.1 309 7.1 46.0 353 1,141 41 133,731 31.3 68.7 52 100.0 49 1

Nemaha. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,275 15.9 1,020 12.0 27.5 417 408 79 77,841 23.3 76.7 3 99.3 (Z) 1Neosho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,364 (X) 769 18.1 25.1 341 444 39 50,553 42.8 57.2 4 0.3 (Z) 2Ness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,502 5.5 547 9.7 55.8 655 1,198 31 57,026 50.3 49.7 5 92.9 4 (Z)Norton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,972 5.9 482 16.6 43.6 517 1,074 54 112,324 27.5 72.5 15 67.5 13 1Osage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,883 (X) 925 20.5 21.4 367 397 33 35,489 47.6 52.4 2 1.6 (Z) 2

Osborne. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,785 8.1 449 8.7 52.1 499 1,111 34 76,800 51.8 48.2 6 56.1 4 1Ottawa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,867 5.4 512 11.1 41.4 416 812 49 95,961 41.5 58.5 5 91.6 3 1Pawnee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,052 10.0 430 13.5 45.1 520 1,210 139 324,381 22.4 77.6 79 99.6 76 1Phillips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,521 9.6 531 16.2 47.8 587 1,106 48 90,348 27.9 72.1 29 25.0 27 1Pottawatomie . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,804 1.9 842 18.8 29.3 465 553 54 63,899 24.0 76.0 40 39.9 6 7

Pratt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,082 6.3 591 10.3 39.6 501 848 131 221,095 30.0 70.0 85 100.0 81 2Rawlins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,277 13.6 405 8.6 65.4 651 1,607 35 85,247 51.4 48.6 23 99.9 21 1Reno . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,883 1.8 1,570 21.7 26.4 735 468 112 71,127 49.5 50.5 70 100.0 44 8Republic. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,742 10.6 642 9.7 42.8 424 660 83 129,276 46.7 53.3 35 84.9 32 1Rice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,679 7.4 500 18.4 41.2 416 832 106 211,574 31.7 68.3 25 100.0 21 2




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

KANSAS—Con.

Riley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,503 0.3 493 23.5 29.0 222 451 24 47,992 39.0 61.0 8 90.6 3 3Rooks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,160 5.9 485 12.8 46.2 560 1,155 40 82,790 34.3 65.7 18 20.6 17 1Rush . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,031 6.1 504 11.1 41.5 418 829 29 57,724 58.5 41.5 10 99.4 9 1Russell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,751 2.9 617 13.6 37.1 484 784 28 45,629 47.4 52.6 1 12.7 – 1Saline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 585 (Z) 758 19.7 29.8 437 576 41 54,429 53.7 46.3 12 75.2 3 7

Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,696 27.8 327 14.1 56.0 495 1,515 335 1,025,688 8.0 92.0 64 99.7 58 1Sedgwick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,488 (Z) 1,355 32.3 21.1 534 394 75 55,663 63.8 36.2 103 62.8 34 54Seward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,950 5.4 350 10.0 39.4 363 1,036 276 788,894 11.2 88.8 155 100.0 144 5Shawnee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,617 0.1 903 35.8 13.1 217 240 22 24,336 69.7 30.3 46 28.3 8 30Sheridan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,103 31.9 404 5.9 63.1 511 1,266 142 352,634 22.3 77.7 89 99.9 87 1

Sherman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,446 11.0 443 5.6 57.6 607 1,369 68 153,736 52.3 47.7 130 100.0 127 2Smith. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,266 12.8 546 11.9 53.7 518 949 46 83,650 48.8 51.2 5 85.0 4 1Stafford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,023 19.8 534 9.9 44.2 473 885 111 207,401 37.7 62.3 86 100.0 84 (Z)Stanton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,732 45.1 313 4.5 52.7 438 1,399 105 337,019 34.4 65.6 151 100.0 149 1Stevens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,810 29.5 401 9.7 46.4 491 1,223 152 378,731 37.6 62.4 216 100.0 212 1

Sumner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,335 4.0 1,072 15.8 39.1 732 683 78 72,633 74.3 25.7 9 88.8 6 3Thomas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,681 16.3 476 7.8 59.7 690 1,450 93 195,252 48.0 52.0 123 100.0 120 2Trego . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,300 3.1 423 11.6 54.4 455 1,075 40 93,563 29.5 70.5 6 96.1 5 (Z)Wabaunsee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,915 3.1 631 16.0 30.7 464 736 35 55,189 21.0 79.0 5 68.5 3 (Z)Wallace . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,981 22.5 290 7.6 61.0 415 1,431 24 82,410 52.2 47.8 73 100.0 73 (Z)

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,359 21.0 796 16.5 35.9 497 624 82 102,698 30.9 69.1 8 72.6 5 1Wichita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,814 44.8 326 9.2 58.9 471 1,444 314 964,598 (NA) (NA) 81 100.0 77 (Z)Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,440 (X) 556 13.1 35.3 337 607 32 57,002 64.8 35.2 3 1.1 1 1Woodson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,305 13.7 308 13.0 41.9 255 828 28 91,104 30.5 69.5 2 – – (Z)Wyandotte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 (Z) 161 68.3 3.1 14 86 3 18,062 79.2 20.8 398 0.8 (Z) 96

KENTUCKY. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,456,122 1.6 86,541 34.8 5.6 13,844 160 3,080 35,591 36.0 64.0 4,160 4.5 29 525

Adair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,836 5.0 1,395 31.5 2.9 170 122 31 22,429 19.3 80.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Allen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,072 1.4 1,191 30.4 2.9 168 141 41 34,665 15.1 84.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Anderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,249 (X) 748 37.3 1.7 84 112 9 11,964 31.6 68.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Ballard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,614 17.1 486 33.7 11.3 113 233 34 70,646 44.7 55.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Barren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,255 2.9 2,021 37.4 3.8 240 119 63 31,071 25.5 74.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 6

Bath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,171 (X) 692 28.3 6.1 108 155 13 18,428 48.4 51.6 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Bell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –170 (X) 63 33.3 3.2 7 110 (Z) 3,429 27.9 72.1 (6) (NA) – 3Boone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,430 0.1 743 50.1 2.4 75 101 18 24,425 62.3 37.7 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Bourbon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,965 15.1 913 38.2 11.0 185 202 98 107,129 18.0 82.0 (6) (NA) 1 1Boyd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –444 (X) 274 36.5 2.6 34 122 1 4,591 35.0 65.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 8

Boyle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,865 (X) 715 41.1 5.0 99 138 22 31,466 19.7 80.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Bracken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,502 (X) 639 27.4 3.8 94 148 10 16,208 58.0 42.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Breathitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,669 (X) 209 29.7 13.9 51 245 1 6,426 72.0 28.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Breckinridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,755 8.2 1,443 25.6 7.6 276 192 29 19,899 44.0 56.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Bullitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,717 (X) 616 50.3 2.9 61 100 7 11,735 48.4 51.6 (6) (NA) (Z) –

Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,776 9.2 729 19.1 9.2 162 222 19 26,196 37.0 63.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Caldwell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,148 12.0 673 25.0 9.2 147 219 18 26,664 68.1 31.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Calloway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,653 8.7 819 42.5 9.8 169 207 54 65,902 51.7 48.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Campbell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,725 (X) 581 43.4 0.9 50 87 6 10,074 51.2 48.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 33Carlisle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,858 44.6 380 33.4 10.3 107 283 31 82,824 49.1 50.9 (6) (NA) 1 (Z)

Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,052 (X) 339 27.4 5.6 61 180 8 23,619 76.8 23.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Carter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,554 (X) 925 28.6 3.0 120 130 7 7,603 50.5 49.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Casey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,594 3.2 1,353 29.7 3.9 191 141 22 16,052 38.0 62.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Christian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,640 1.3 1,267 27.8 12.0 342 270 77 60,798 69.7 30.3 (6) (NA) 1 8Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,708 (X) 861 41.0 7.4 143 166 25 29,367 28.3 71.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 6

Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,121 (X) 386 28.2 4.1 55 143 4 9,619 80.8 19.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Clinton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,682 9.3 629 39.1 3.2 72 114 21 32,769 14.0 86.0 (6) (NA) – 2Crittenden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,489 20.3 698 20.1 8.5 157 224 12 17,576 36.8 63.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Cumberland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 951 1.7 473 24.9 6.8 89 189 7 15,698 33.0 67.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Daviess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,575 2.0 1,062 43.6 11.1 254 239 63 59,070 73.4 26.6 (6) (NA) 1 14

Edmonson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 711 1.1 670 30.3 3.9 94 140 10 14,858 33.5 66.5 (6) (NA) – 1Elliott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –999 (X) 427 26.5 3.5 56 131 3 6,602 64.7 35.3 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Estill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,725 (X) 457 25.6 3.7 64 140 4 8,444 41.8 58.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113,701 1.2 738 47.0 8.0 119 161 179 242,401 8.1 91.9 (6) (NA) 1 44Fleming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –907 (X) 1,071 24.7 6.8 184 171 34 31,698 26.2 73.8 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)

Floyd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140 (Z) 68 45.6 1.5 7 99 1 7,500 87.1 12.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,252 (X) 689 35.8 2.9 82 119 12 17,624 60.6 39.4 (6) (NA) 1 8Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,930 24.6 193 31.1 28.5 112 581 30 156,342 65.7 34.3 (6) (NA) 1 1Gallatin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,069 (X) 247 28.7 5.3 38 152 4 15,348 64.6 35.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Garrard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,492 (X) 873 31.0 3.9 120 137 21 24,281 29.4 70.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,992 (X) 1,020 32.4 1.7 116 114 13 12,940 41.8 58.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Graves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,329 10.4 1,712 39.7 7.0 300 175 150 87,741 26.9 73.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Grayson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,986 5.2 1,650 30.1 4.3 233 141 32 19,177 23.9 76.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Green . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,713 2.4 1,134 35.3 3.2 135 119 21 18,635 35.6 64.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Greenup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,502 0.8 728 29.4 3.6 103 142 5 7,471 56.5 43.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 3




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

KENTUCKY—Con.

Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,162 1.6 418 25.8 5.3 69 165 9 22,679 54.3 45.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Hardin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,468 0.6 1,732 44.5 5.7 240 138 36 20,726 51.2 48.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 9Harlan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –167 (X) 23 47.8 – 2 81 (Z) 5,391 75.0 25.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Harrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,103 (X) 1,085 30.7 5.2 159 147 21 19,393 51.1 48.9 (6) (NA) 1 2Hart. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,230 2.0 1,392 27.1 3.4 195 140 30 21,392 35.3 64.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 3

Henderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,912 3.9 525 44.0 18.9 192 366 52 98,850 55.8 44.2 (6) (NA) 1 8Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,095 (X) 883 27.5 4.8 142 160 26 29,034 56.8 43.2 (6) (NA) 1 2Hickman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111,605 73.4 347 32.6 14.1 125 361 66 189,061 31.2 68.8 (6) (NA) 1 (Z)Hopkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,224 3.5 678 29.9 9.7 164 242 38 56,618 34.9 65.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 9Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,001 (X) 727 35.2 1.8 82 113 8 10,865 56.1 43.9 (6) (NA) – 1

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,359 (Z) 526 63.9 2.5 41 78 13 25,338 74.6 25.4 (6) (NA) 1 140Jessamine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,423 1.4 770 50.5 3.8 82 107 50 64,594 15.9 84.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,101 (X) 195 35.4 2.6 24 122 1 6,313 81.2 18.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Kenton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,743 (X) 495 38.4 1.8 46 94 5 10,729 53.2 46.8 (6) (NA) – 5Knott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –238 (X) 22 22.7 9.1 4 204 (Z) 2,864 6.3 93.7 (6) (NA) – (Z)

Knox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –370 (X) 347 37.8 4.3 41 119 2 7,199 65.9 34.1 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Larue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,336 6.5 888 36.1 4.3 134 151 21 23,713 50.5 49.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Laurel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,819 (X) 1,137 48.7 1.7 108 95 16 13,822 43.7 56.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 11Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,576 (X) 318 20.8 6.3 57 179 2 5,635 58.0 42.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 160 0.2 173 32.9 4.0 23 136 1 6,647 54.1 45.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Leslie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 20 50.0 5.0 3 174 (Z) 1,700 82.4 17.6 (6) (NA) – 1Letcher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 46 54.3 – 3 62 (Z) 3,935 66.9 33.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Lewis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 304 0.4 733 22.5 7.9 144 196 9 12,951 59.4 40.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,785 2.7 1,275 38.5 4.9 171 134 35 27,511 32.7 67.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Livingston. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,649 14.5 518 18.7 13.3 146 282 11 21,834 33.7 66.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,752 8.8 1,212 29.8 9.2 276 228 56 45,901 68.9 31.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Lyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,478 4.5 304 23.4 6.3 56 186 5 15,474 63.1 36.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 2McCracken . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,106 1.0 531 50.3 6.0 85 161 16 29,778 73.7 26.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 8McCreary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –907 (X) 154 42.9 0.6 15 97 1 3,675 22.3 77.7 (6) (NA) – 1McLean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63,980 48.8 413 33.2 17.2 129 312 65 156,816 32.0 68.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,259 (X) 1,396 38.8 6.2 218 156 36 25,530 34.1 65.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 12Magoffin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –958 (X) 345 38.3 3.8 46 132 2 4,806 71.2 28.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,095 6.8 1,054 33.2 5.6 171 162 29 27,281 30.1 69.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,383 4.3 902 40.7 4.4 121 134 27 29,947 32.3 67.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 13 – 23.1 5 365 (Z) 9,154 7.6 92.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 3

Mason . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,023 (X) 726 31.3 8.0 128 176 22 30,791 42.7 57.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Meade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,954 3.3 955 43.1 4.5 135 141 16 16,933 42.5 57.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Menifee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –517 (X) 334 33.2 2.1 37 111 3 7,760 66.6 33.4 (6) (NA) (Z) –Mercer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,308 (X) 1,086 41.0 3.0 134 123 29 26,611 31.0 69.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Metcalfe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,495 15.7 950 33.2 3.9 132 139 30 31,349 19.8 80.2 (6) (NA) (Z) –

Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,277 12.4 980 31.5 7.0 162 166 33 33,615 15.4 84.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,243 (X) 676 37.9 4.7 91 135 16 23,146 32.8 67.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,876 (X) 804 25.5 4.4 116 144 8 9,505 54.9 45.1 (6) (NA) – 1Muhlenberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,995 9.3 667 28.3 8.1 138 207 42 62,678 22.0 78.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Nelson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,677 0.4 1,407 39.2 4.1 189 134 33 23,626 33.2 66.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 4

Nicholas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,484 (X) 582 27.8 6.5 106 181 12 20,404 51.4 48.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,415 8.6 1,006 29.7 5.1 167 166 61 61,087 18.5 81.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Oldham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,383 1.2 481 53.2 5.4 63 130 21 44,214 42.1 57.9 (6) (NA) 2 4Owen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,140 (X) 788 18.5 7.7 155 196 17 21,381 47.4 52.6 (6) (NA) 1 2Owsley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,267 (X) 227 24.7 4.4 33 145 2 7,533 83.1 16.9 (6) (NA) – (Z)

Pendleton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,428 (X) 964 25.1 2.5 132 137 9 9,130 61.8 38.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145 (Z) 44 38.6 15.9 7 161 1 13,045 40.8 59.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 45 35.6 4.4 7 160 (Z) 3,311 53.0 47.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Powell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,573 2.2 239 28.9 4.6 38 157 2 10,393 59.2 40.8 (6) (NA) – 1Pulaski. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,577 1.2 1,977 36.3 2.5 232 117 35 17,713 35.4 64.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 7

Robertson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,994 (X) 247 20.2 5.7 43 174 2 10,065 63.3 36.7 (6) (NA) (Z) –Rockcastle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,589 (X) 803 36.5 2.9 94 117 9 11,481 41.2 58.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Rowan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 800 0.2 436 40.1 4.1 51 117 6 12,933 43.4 56.6 (6) (NA) – 5Russell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 701 0.3 930 44.3 2.7 97 105 23 24,263 21.2 78.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,717 1.0 848 37.6 6.5 137 162 49 57,236 27.1 72.9 (6) (NA) 1 2

Shelby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 (Z) 1,557 44.4 4.1 202 130 46 29,311 57.3 42.7 (6) (NA) 1 3Simpson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,060 4.6 550 38.4 10.4 128 233 42 75,687 51.3 48.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Spencer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,078 (X) 623 41.3 2.4 78 124 11 18,268 61.2 38.8 (6) (NA) (Z) –Taylor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,987 0.5 957 39.1 3.7 112 117 20 20,972 39.9 60.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Todd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,888 27.1 676 25.0 12.9 184 272 62 92,414 51.7 48.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Trigg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,845 6.4 425 28.0 11.5 123 289 20 47,047 71.6 28.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Trimble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,030 (X) 562 40.0 3.0 65 115 6 11,512 70.2 29.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,448 14.6 328 30.2 25.0 209 637 43 132,155 87.7 12.3 (6) (NA) 1 2Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,502 1.1 1,881 44.3 4.1 255 136 61 32,684 38.7 61.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 17Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,502 4.6 1,119 27.8 2.7 150 134 27 24,182 44.9 55.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

KENTUCKY—Con.

Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,895 10.4 860 35.3 7.0 139 162 44 50,917 13.0 87.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 106,071 37.9 595 26.4 10.9 159 268 77 129,993 22.1 77.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 6Whitley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –110 (X) 530 34.5 2.8 64 121 5 9,138 24.8 75.2 (6) (NA) – 1Wolfe. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –402 (X) 371 26.7 6.5 60 161 3 6,749 78.6 21.4 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Woodford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 145,652 22.5 708 43.1 9.7 123 174 172 242,821 5.6 94.4 (6) (NA) 1 3

LOUISIANA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 461,215 0.5 27,413 41.2 13.9 7,831 286 1,816 66,239 58.7 41.3 10,400 15.7 1,020 753

Acadia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,369 (X) 751 42.9 20.0 257 342 33 44,150 89.8 10.2 186 78.5 162 5Allen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,051 (X) 360 40.3 15.6 103 286 8 23,456 61.0 39.0 39 95.1 34 3Ascension . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,548 0.1 329 61.4 6.7 50 151 19 57,325 88.1 11.9 217 6.1 (Z) 5Assumption . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,384 2.9 105 38.1 43.8 66 628 36 343,229 93.9 6.1 30 46.7 – 5Avoyelles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,726 4.4 890 39.3 16.2 272 305 52 58,940 90.9 9.1 23 80.8 17 4

Beauregard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,043 0.3 793 36.7 7.3 143 180 11 14,352 21.5 78.5 30 99.8 4 4Bienville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,006 2.7 222 37.8 5.4 44 198 24 108,225 1.5 98.5 13 99.3 – 2Bossier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,495 (X) 456 46.7 12.1 107 235 9 19,939 35.6 64.4 14 30.9 (Z) 12Caddo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,579 0.1 555 39.1 16.6 172 309 24 44,036 64.2 35.8 146 3.9 3 48Calcasieu . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,704 (X) 870 49.3 11.5 303 349 16 18,121 50.5 49.5 367 35.4 32 25

Caldwell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,031 2.1 285 38.6 11.6 61 213 5 17,418 79.1 20.9 2 73.5 1 2Cameron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –303 (X) 409 30.3 27.1 249 608 6 15,352 (NA) (NA) 30 28.5 24 2Catahoula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,839 15.8 435 21.4 26.9 232 534 29 65,706 83.7 16.3 31 99.4 26 1Claiborne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,764 9.2 275 26.2 10.2 56 202 52 189,051 1.5 98.5 3 99.2 – 2Concordia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,759 7.3 336 19.0 34.5 212 630 29 87,143 89.8 10.2 48 53.2 30 4

De Soto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,467 1.2 628 35.7 9.7 137 218 18 28,317 8.0 92.0 22 11.0 (Z) 3East Baton Rouge . . . . . . . . . . –1,651 (X) 489 56.9 5.1 61 126 11 23,100 51.1 48.9 154 88.0 (Z) 64East Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,745 16.2 234 11.5 41.0 217 925 45 192,137 97.1 2.9 42 85.1 40 1East Feliciana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,241 1.4 460 41.3 13.5 123 268 7 16,220 16.0 84.0 4 94.8 (Z) 3Evangeline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,502 2.3 648 38.9 15.3 184 284 22 34,573 81.6 18.4 182 30.7 50 6

Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,616 12.1 856 28.6 16.7 258 302 60 69,565 74.4 25.6 50 93.3 23 2Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 614 0.4 196 41.8 9.7 36 182 3 16,964 56.1 43.9 6 32.9 – 4Iberia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,401 0.3 340 60.9 17.6 111 327 53 155,065 98.0 2.0 30 65.2 2 9Iberville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,298 0.6 183 36.1 28.4 97 528 44 243,153 95.6 4.4 1,159 2.4 – 3Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,432 7.7 235 47.7 1.7 21 89 32 136,464 2.7 97.3 2 100.0 – 2

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,436 (Z) 52 40.4 7.7 8 147 2 32,346 90.3 9.7 1,147 0.3 (Z) 85Jefferson Davis . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,077 (X) 641 37.4 30.9 323 504 32 50,415 86.6 13.4 170 84.7 157 4Lafayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 568 (Z) 715 71.2 5.0 75 105 20 28,354 88.3 11.7 42 92.6 11 21Lafourche. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,797 0.3 405 38.5 11.9 151 373 27 66,067 83.5 16.5 47 3.5 – 23La Salle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –143 (X) 161 41.0 1.9 17 105 1 6,348 18.3 81.7 3 88.7 (Z) 3

Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,418 2.4 392 35.7 6.4 66 168 70 179,240 3.3 96.7 9 99.7 (Z) 8Livingston. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,415 0.4 451 65.6 2.4 34 76 7 15,683 18.3 81.7 12 99.6 (Z) 10Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,692 8.5 274 18.2 43.8 237 865 45 164,825 98.7 1.3 18 93.7 15 2Morehouse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,961 7.7 412 21.6 34.2 245 595 51 123,910 97.3 2.7 75 52.2 46 4Natchitoches. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,687 3.6 565 28.7 14.7 193 341 57 101,315 16.2 83.8 33 11.8 10 6

Orleans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 8 100.0 – (D) (D) (Z) 5,125 (NA) (NA) 743 0.7 (Z) 155Ouachita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,534 0.2 493 44.0 10.3 95 192 20 40,164 50.3 49.7 236 10.7 13 23Plaquemines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 0.1 192 75.0 6.3 35 181 7 34,391 67.9 32.1 104 0.1 (Z) 8Pointe Coupee . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,410 2.8 465 35.3 21.7 199 429 52 111,133 89.9 10.1 294 6.5 3 4Rapides . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,918 0.5 996 47.3 9.7 201 202 67 66,976 82.4 17.6 452 8.1 10 29

Red River. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,762 2.8 236 30.5 20.8 138 587 11 44,822 53.6 46.4 2 81.7 1 1Richland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,875 4.6 536 22.8 24.1 216 403 28 51,396 86.9 13.1 41 83.4 36 3Sabine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,413 11.3 403 34.7 6.5 63 155 67 165,501 0.7 99.3 5 45.8 (Z) 2St. Bernard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 24 58.3 8.3 (D) (D) (Z) 15,667 67.8 32.2 281 (Z) – 10St. Charles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,093 0.1 62 38.7 4.8 9 141 5 85,548 (NA) (NA) 2,701 0.1 – 10

St. Helena . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,517 21.6 326 31.3 6.1 51 156 20 62,822 2.7 97.3 1 99.1 – (Z)St. James. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,926 1.4 69 26.1 42.0 53 765 27 386,217 99.5 0.5 245 2.1 – 3St. John the Baptist . . . . . . . . . 982 0.1 34 29.4 32.4 22 647 6 170,353 99.5 0.5 94 11.0 – 7St. Landry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,937 0.9 1,228 52.4 12.0 290 236 52 42,331 83.8 16.2 63 82.9 28 9St. Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,189 1.7 328 52.7 16.2 81 246 28 86,329 92.5 7.5 59 21.7 7 6

St. Mary. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,902 0.2 99 23.2 47.5 73 742 36 358,869 98.2 1.8 200 1.5 – 11St. Tammany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,289 0.1 603 71.5 3.2 51 85 13 20,748 52.5 47.5 26 97.5 1 18Tangipahoa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,625 1.2 1,065 49.8 3.3 118 111 57 53,275 15.1 84.9 18 96.7 1 13Tensas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,258 18.8 228 11.4 45.2 226 992 49 213,974 99.7 0.3 17 90.6 16 1Terrebonne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,131 0.1 156 45.5 19.2 53 340 15 98,231 62.1 37.9 7 1.8 – 6

Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47,711 19.1 504 38.7 4.4 73 144 121 239,567 0.7 99.3 6 96.9 – 5Vermilion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,571 (X) 1,116 43.0 16.9 359 322 53 47,047 86.4 13.6 226 78.4 190 5Vernon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,047 0.3 460 45.4 3.0 50 108 9 18,809 4.7 95.3 8 98.0 – 6Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,974 0.7 836 42.0 2.2 102 122 35 42,197 21.2 78.8 36 66.5 – 10Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,987 0.4 426 39.2 4.7 57 133 8 17,688 7.9 92.1 7 97.0 – 6

West Baton Rouge. . . . . . . . . . 11,267 2.4 108 57.4 10.2 22 199 29 265,361 (NA) (NA) 20 79.7 – 6West Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,318 7.9 709 24.1 15.1 184 259 31 44,017 91.7 8.3 32 90.9 30 1West Feliciana . . . . . . . . . . . . –310 (X) 165 30.3 23.0 68 413 5 30,945 64.5 35.5 50 12.2 – 5Winn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,022 0.5 130 26.9 4.6 21 159 5 38,623 10.4 89.6 4 97.1 – 2




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

MAINE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 117,376 0.4 7,196 38.6 8.0 1,370 190 464 64,425 48.0 52.0 799 10.1 6 102

Androscoggin . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,535 0.6 334 40.7 7.5 56 167 97 289,368 7.4 92.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 10Aroostook. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,810 2.6 1,084 15.9 17.8 392 361 121 111,769 96.8 3.2 (6) (NA) 2 6Cumberland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,728 0.1 596 60.7 3.2 54 91 18 29,520 66.9 33.1 (6) (NA) 1 28Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 761 0.1 317 32.2 6.3 50 157 6 18,874 24.2 75.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,640 0.5 317 46.1 7.6 50 156 29 90,467 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) (Z) 4

Kennebec. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,492 0.3 575 36.5 6.6 86 150 30 52,572 22.8 77.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 8Knox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 877 0.1 275 50.9 2.2 29 104 5 18,349 69.7 30.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,059 0.4 292 45.9 2.7 31 105 8 25,829 47.0 53.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Oxford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,295 0.6 469 48.0 6.8 67 144 15 31,239 76.6 23.4 (6) (NA) 1 3Penobscot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,997 0.2 575 35.8 9.4 107 186 29 50,357 34.9 65.1 (6) (NA) 1 10

Piscataquis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,855 0.7 201 32.3 10.0 39 196 4 19,075 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) (Z) 1Sagadahoc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,203 0.1 158 37.3 4.4 20 128 4 27,032 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) (Z) 2Somerset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,186 0.7 504 25.6 10.9 110 219 24 48,200 26.3 73.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Waldo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,603 0.7 415 35.7 6.7 69 167 15 35,318 20.0 80.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,696 3.3 399 40.9 8.0 152 382 41 103,544 43.8 56.2 (6) (NA) 1 1York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,639 0.2 685 55.8 2.3 57 84 19 27,372 76.8 23.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 16

MARYLAND. . . . . . . . . . . . . 352,785 0.2 12,198 47.8 7.8 2,078 170 1,293 106,026 34.8 65.2 7,910 2.8 42 824

Allegany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –325 (X) 278 30.2 5.8 39 142 2 7,680 45.2 54.8 49 2.8 (Z) 1Anne Arundel . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,638 (Z) 432 65.0 3.0 35 82 11 25,412 90.3 9.7 824 5.2 1 31Baltimore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,095 0.2 7784 762.8 73.1 771 791 762 779,286 774.3 725.7 901 1.0 1 271Calvert. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –659 (X) 321 51.7 1.9 30 94 3 10,106 87.5 12.5 3,277 0.2 (Z) 2Caroline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,676 3.2 506 39.9 14.2 115 227 104 206,241 27.6 72.4 21 72.9 15 1

Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,325 0.7 1,058 52.6 5.0 147 139 69 65,176 45.2 54.8 15 66.2 (Z) 7Cecil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,146 1.5 468 51.5 7.9 77 165 69 146,607 44.1 55.9 9 72.3 1 4Charles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,207 (X) 418 49.5 4.1 52 125 6 15,273 74.4 25.6 1,205 1.0 (Z) 7Dorchester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,921 2.3 351 38.5 22.5 125 357 84 238,934 30.6 69.4 14 89.5 9 2Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,624 0.6 1,273 44.1 5.8 196 154 97 76,004 21.4 78.6 39 35.2 1 15

Garrett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,971 2.1 634 24.6 4.9 101 160 21 32,897 18.0 82.0 9 35.2 (Z) 3Harford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,385 0.5 683 58.9 4.8 81 119 26 38,205 49.6 50.4 18 71.0 (Z) 9Howard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,457 0.2 346 64.2 5.5 38 109 22 62,604 75.8 24.2 3 87.9 1 –Kent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,812 5.9 318 25.8 19.5 117 369 67 210,176 56.8 43.2 4 91.3 2 1Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,709 (Z) 577 60.3 5.7 75 130 42 72,156 87.0 13.0 708 0.6 1 380

Prince George’s. . . . . . . . . . . . 15,475 0.1 452 58.8 3.8 45 101 12 27,009 86.2 13.8 625 0.9 1 52Queen Anne’s . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,373 1.9 443 35.9 21.7 156 351 66 149,038 68.9 31.1 8 83.1 4 2St. Mary’s. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,404 0.1 577 46.3 3.6 68 118 12 21,137 73.7 26.3 9 96.6 (Z) 4Somerset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,480 2.8 301 43.9 10.0 57 188 127 422,847 7.0 93.0 4 99.5 (Z) 2

Talbot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,142 0.9 288 36.1 20.5 106 367 33 116,149 42.8 57.2 6 92.2 1 2Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,901 0.3 775 40.1 5.4 125 161 60 76,874 18.6 81.4 81 12.6 (Z) 14Wicomico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,426 2.0 512 54.9 9.8 88 173 175 341,004 15.0 85.0 16 96.3 4 6Worcester. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,016 2.6 403 43.7 16.1 131 326 123 306,328 13.1 86.9 13 97.0 1 8

Independent City

Baltimore city . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – (7) (NA) (NA) (7) (7) (7) (NA) (NA) (NA) 55 0.2 – –

MASSACHUSETTS. . . . . . . . 118,981 0.1 6,075 60.0 2.7 519 85 384 63,262 72.1 27.9 4,660 5.8 126 739

Barnstable . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,546 0.1 285 89.1 – 6 21 14 48,516 62.2 37.8 400 6.7 12 26Berkshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,884 0.1 401 43.9 10.2 69 171 22 54,177 44.7 55.3 33 24.2 1 19Bristol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,965 0.2 624 66.8 1.1 36 58 29 47,053 76.0 24.0 1,215 1.5 8 58Dukes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,281 0.3 83 86.7 2.4 8 94 1 17,518 61.6 38.4 3 89.5 (Z) 2Essex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,197 0.1 400 71.5 3.0 28 70 24 61,173 82.0 18.0 685 1.0 2 74

Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,487 0.9 586 36.5 4.3 74 127 43 73,200 63.4 36.6 9 61.3 1 5Hampden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,751 0.1 458 54.4 1.7 38 82 24 51,716 85.3 14.7 176 11.2 1 54Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,755 0.3 542 50.6 2.4 51 94 35 64,721 68.7 31.3 17 61.3 1 12Middlesex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,121 (Z) 579 68.0 0.9 33 57 66 113,843 83.7 16.3 834 6.7 4 67Nantucket. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 13 84.6 – (D) (D) 3 205,923 100.0 – 4 47.6 3 1

Norfolk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,545 (Z) 208 81.3 2.4 13 61 11 54,356 93.1 6.9 48 71.5 2 45Plymouth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,506 (Z) 794 70.7 2.3 59 75 43 54,142 94.1 5.9 576 7.1 87 40Suffolk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 8 87.5 – (D) (D) (Z) 44,250 80.2 19.8 303 0.6 (Z) –Worcester. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,943 0.1 1,094 51.4 2.4 104 95 69 62,682 50.8 49.2 359 10.2 3 337

MICHIGAN . . . . . . . . . . . . . 820,687 0.3 53,315 41.1 9.0 10,143 190 3,772 70,757 62.6 37.4 10,000 7.3 201 1,140

Alcona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,500 1.8 244 27.9 9.4 41 168 6 22,816 49.6 50.4 1 96.0 (Z) (Z)Alger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 429 0.3 67 23.9 11.9 15 223 2 22,552 33.2 66.8 7 20.9 (Z) 1Allegan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58,783 3.1 1,489 49.4 7.0 243 163 230 154,646 48.9 51.1 26 76.7 7 5Alpena. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,020 (X) 460 28.7 6.3 74 160 13 27,289 33.4 66.6 129 1.5 (Z) 3Antrim . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,104 1.5 382 33.8 6.0 63 166 16 41,503 69.8 30.2 4 97.6 2 1

Arenac. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,933 2.8 381 32.5 12.1 84 220 23 59,136 72.6 27.4 38 3.5 (Z) 36Baraga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79 0.1 63 27.0 12.7 15 241 1 17,778 57.8 42.2 2 19.8 (Z) 1Barry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,465 1.1 1,063 40.9 7.4 182 171 48 45,007 39.9 60.1 7 92.3 1 2Bay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,319 0.4 787 38.8 13.6 186 236 59 75,442 91.9 8.1 678 0.3 2 10Benzie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,985 1.6 181 35.4 3.3 23 127 4 23,326 79.2 20.8 3 99.6 1 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

MICHIGAN—Con.

Berrien. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,049 0.9 1,093 53.4 7.6 174 159 97 88,487 87.4 12.6 1,141 1.4 7 17Branch. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,030 2.3 1,123 36.7 11.1 254 226 65 57,795 60.5 39.5 18 71.1 11 3Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,004 0.4 1,147 32.8 10.1 240 209 64 56,184 56.1 43.9 34 85.5 5 15Cass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,572 3.0 808 41.6 11.9 189 234 64 79,545 59.4 40.6 15 88.5 9 2Charlevoix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 885 0.2 299 42.1 4.3 39 130 4 13,348 46.1 53.9 45 28.4 1 2

Cheboygan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,118 0.3 268 35.1 7.5 50 187 7 24,612 43.2 56.8 4 92.1 (Z) 2Chippewa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,306 0.2 372 16.7 12.4 94 252 6 15,565 45.1 54.9 5 45.0 (Z) 3Clare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,210 0.9 414 30.9 6.0 64 155 12 27,923 18.0 82.0 4 84.1 1 1Clinton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,715 2.3 1,179 39.5 10.1 256 217 99 83,681 42.0 58.0 9 96.0 1 3Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 47 46.8 10.6 6 134 (Z) 3,170 (NA) (NA) 2 96.7 (Z) 1

Delta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,237 0.3 273 19.0 15.4 74 272 10 37,432 47.2 52.8 65 3.7 1 2Dickinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 165 (Z) 146 32.2 7.5 29 196 4 25,801 43.8 56.2 22 18.1 (Z) 3Eaton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,434 0.3 1,221 41.0 9.0 238 195 53 43,435 76.2 23.8 10 85.2 1 3Emmet. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 647 0.1 274 33.9 6.2 44 159 6 21,412 48.6 51.4 6 100.0 1 3Genesee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,460 (Z) 1,051 59.1 6.6 143 136 29 28,004 73.6 26.4 22 94.8 2 7

Gladwin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,949 1.5 534 29.4 4.9 72 135 8 15,571 58.6 41.4 2 98.8 (Z) 1Gogebic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –270 (X) 49 32.7 – 4 82 (Z) 4,102 78.5 21.5 3 100.0 – 2Grand Traverse . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,811 0.2 489 49.9 5.1 62 127 11 23,243 66.5 33.5 12 56.4 1 6Gratiot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,344 2.7 1,018 35.6 15.3 289 284 115 112,697 56.2 43.8 6 80.5 1 3Hillsdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,591 2.8 1,509 40.1 8.1 275 182 79 52,296 51.8 48.2 8 85.1 2 2

Houghton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 158 29.1 5.1 26 164 3 17,854 48.4 51.6 5 99.4 (Z) 4Huron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,958 3.9 1,189 29.4 21.6 432 363 211 177,056 51.6 48.4 82 5.2 1 3Ingham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,922 0.1 1,018 54.9 8.4 185 182 51 50,438 67.3 32.7 249 15.8 2 34Ionia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,378 2.4 1,146 41.4 10.6 230 201 113 98,668 32.0 68.0 10 95.3 1 5Iosco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,156 1.0 285 37.2 7.4 45 156 13 45,568 20.2 79.8 3 53.3 1 1

Iron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –289 (X) 106 25.5 10.4 31 296 3 30,321 84.6 15.4 3 92.7 (Z) 2Isabella . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,403 1.1 953 31.1 9.0 195 205 50 52,598 48.4 51.6 7 95.3 1 4Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,252 0.2 1,265 46.2 6.0 193 153 43 34,068 49.2 50.8 21 95.4 2 13Kalamazoo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,248 0.5 808 53.7 9.5 148 183 155 191,312 70.5 29.5 84 79.1 6 26Kalkaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –197 (X) 175 38.3 4.0 24 138 6 32,206 87.2 12.8 4 93.4 2 1

Kent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,459 0.2 1,212 51.5 5.5 173 143 150 123,490 75.5 24.5 76 38.3 4 51Keweenaw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 11 54.5 – 1 65 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) 90.9 (Z) (Z)Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327 0.4 173 31.2 5.2 23 135 2 12,237 46.6 53.4 1 97.4 (Z) (Z)Lapeer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,505 0.7 1,187 47.7 8.6 189 159 51 42,641 65.8 34.2 8 85.2 1 (Z)Leelanau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,995 2.8 429 35.2 4.9 62 145 16 37,268 78.4 21.6 3 96.8 1 (Z)

Lenawee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,909 0.8 1,446 37.6 13.7 353 244 103 71,478 62.2 37.8 12 68.9 1 6Livingston. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,559 0.1 877 60.2 4.6 96 110 25 29,032 64.6 35.4 18 97.9 2 6Luce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 894 1.1 30 33.3 23.3 10 342 3 87,833 85.1 14.9 1 100.0 (Z) 1Mackinac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 146 0.1 76 17.1 13.2 20 269 3 37,066 17.4 82.6 10 8.3 (Z) 2Macomb. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,479 0.1 512 58.2 5.9 68 133 44 85,531 91.2 8.8 13 53.3 2 5

Manistee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,653 0.7 315 31.4 5.1 46 147 8 25,495 85.9 14.1 43 10.9 1 2Marquette. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –198 (X) 160 39.4 8.1 30 188 4 23,106 48.9 51.1 294 1.6 (Z) 6Mason . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,190 2.0 478 32.8 7.3 80 167 25 52,207 66.3 33.7 23 11.7 1 2Mecosta. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,388 1.4 794 27.3 5.4 120 151 31 38,544 43.8 56.2 7 74.2 3 1Menominee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,404 2.4 372 17.2 13.7 99 265 21 56,962 14.4 85.6 5 30.4 (Z) 1

Midland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,155 0.1 510 43.5 8.2 85 166 22 42,627 66.3 33.7 9 33.0 (Z) (Z)Missaukee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,631 9.1 412 23.5 12.4 98 237 40 95,983 27.1 72.9 2 95.2 1 (Z)Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,698 0.8 1,183 51.2 10.1 217 184 92 77,974 93.4 6.6 1,734 1.2 3 13Montcalm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,415 2.0 1,139 35.2 9.3 255 224 106 93,338 68.3 31.7 27 87.7 19 4Montmorency . . . . . . . . . . . . . 792 0.8 139 23.0 4.3 21 152 3 23,986 34.6 65.4 1 84.7 (Z) (Z)

Muskegon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,713 0.3 545 55.2 5.1 74 136 46 84,956 63.8 36.2 323 4.1 4 18Newaygo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,451 2.6 902 37.7 6.3 135 150 61 67,481 34.1 65.9 8 91.7 2 3Oakland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,591 (Z) 643 71.4 1.9 41 64 45 70,698 91.3 8.7 50 96.6 4 23Oceana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,693 7.1 648 33.0 9.0 127 197 58 90,096 68.1 31.9 6 87.7 1 1Ogemaw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,273 2.1 256 23.8 14.8 68 265 23 88,828 18.2 81.8 3 94.8 (Z) (Z)

Ontonagon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476 0.5 108 9.3 18.5 34 312 2 22,343 20.3 79.7 20 2.2 (Z) (Z)Osceola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,269 1.1 591 25.7 8.3 116 196 19 32,462 24.0 76.0 5 96.6 1 3Oscoda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 591 0.7 123 33.3 3.3 17 138 3 27,976 9.8 90.2 1 81.8 (Z) (Z)Otsego . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –788 (X) 170 32.9 12.9 35 203 5 27,859 72.6 27.4 4 98.7 1 1Ottawa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87,851 1.5 1,291 54.3 5.0 165 128 278 214,952 59.4 40.6 734 2.0 8 41

Presque Isle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,699 2.0 303 19.8 9.2 68 225 11 37,307 65.2 34.8 8 35.3 2 1Roscommon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 46 39.1 8.7 7 161 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 3 99.6 (Z) (Z)Saginaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,037 0.2 1,359 38.8 12.1 325 239 91 67,132 88.2 11.8 18 19.6 2 12St. Clair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,237 0.2 1,260 48.7 5.2 182 145 40 31,910 78.0 22.0 1,717 0.3 (Z) 172St. Joseph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,915 1.0 907 40.2 12.7 231 254 94 103,264 81.2 18.8 58 73.5 44 4

Sanilac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,700 5.6 1,595 29.8 15.4 435 273 137 85,826 56.2 43.8 8 91.9 3 2Schoolcraft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –240 (X) 51 33.3 15.7 14 266 2 29,804 54.9 45.1 12 4.8 (Z) 1Shiawassee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,246 1.1 1,037 38.2 12.2 235 226 44 42,906 72.5 27.5 8 93.3 1 3Tuscola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,657 2.2 1,292 35.9 13.5 336 260 94 72,598 77.6 22.4 9 80.2 3 2




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

MICHIGAN—Con.

Van Buren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,892 3.2 1,160 45.3 4.6 176 152 97 83,383 87.7 12.3 152 10.3 8 4Washtenaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,303 0.1 1,325 51.4 6.5 175 132 55 41,221 68.6 31.4 34 47.4 3 21Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,273 (Z) 319 74.0 2.5 21 67 28 86,392 97.8 2.2 1,727 (Z) 2 493Wexford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,776 0.4 395 40.5 3.0 46 116 10 24,101 66.9 33.1 8 98.6 (Z) 3

MINNESOTA . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,818,993 1.2 80,839 24.9 19.0 27,512 340 8,576 106,083 53.2 46.8 3,870 18.6 227 500

Aitkin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,338 (X) 674 16.9 11.9 174 259 12 18,082 56.3 43.7 4 37.5 2 (Z)Anoka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,407 0.1 552 55.8 4.9 60 109 50 90,112 86.5 13.5 132 19.8 3 124Becker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,547 4.8 1,254 15.3 14.2 417 332 98 78,441 47.2 52.8 9 99.4 5 2Beltrami . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,935 0.4 746 14.3 17.0 233 312 17 23,209 26.5 73.5 7 55.6 3 2Benton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,671 1.7 965 27.4 8.3 196 203 88 91,518 21.9 78.1 22 54.5 8 3

Big Stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,435 12.9 446 14.1 40.8 274 614 58 129,305 77.9 22.1 1 97.1 1 1Blue Earth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67,540 4.1 1,125 27.3 25.0 406 361 210 186,960 46.4 53.6 33 36.1 (Z) 5Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49,346 7.9 1,047 19.0 22.4 348 333 165 157,983 44.0 56.0 5 96.3 1 2Carlton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,416 (X) 607 15.7 5.6 114 188 8 13,338 34.8 65.2 11 27.1 (Z) 2Carver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,704 0.6 820 35.6 8.9 172 210 62 76,067 48.3 51.7 10 97.9 1 7

Cass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,922 0.5 646 11.8 13.8 197 305 14 22,176 27.6 72.4 4 98.5 1 (Z)Chippewa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,721 5.9 694 21.6 32.0 340 489 103 148,244 85.3 14.7 2 81.9 (Z) 1Chisago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,683 0.7 943 46.1 3.5 117 124 29 30,487 70.1 29.9 5 86.0 1 2Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,818 1.9 877 20.2 33.1 601 685 135 153,847 83.5 16.5 7 41.4 1 5Clearwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,608 2.5 627 10.2 17.9 226 361 20 31,941 45.0 55.0 12 8.7 11 (Z)

Cook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 20 25.0 5.0 3 163 (Z) 17,400 81.0 19.0 296 0.1 (Z) (Z)Cottonwood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,318 20.8 832 21.8 33.5 375 450 147 176,512 51.9 48.1 4 86.2 1 1Crow Wing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –418 (X) 755 24.2 7.4 145 192 14 18,181 36.5 63.5 11 68.1 2 3Dakota. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,864 0.2 997 44.1 11.7 236 236 112 112,337 66.5 33.5 243 25.2 15 32Dodge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,402 8.7 697 34.4 20.1 233 335 109 156,151 52.4 47.6 2 93.0 (Z) 1

Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,068 1.1 1,177 22.8 10.9 273 232 53 45,200 47.2 52.8 6 98.6 2 2Faribault. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,573 9.9 909 22.9 33.3 432 475 167 183,323 68.3 31.7 3 100.0 (Z) 1Fillmore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,988 13.6 1,600 25.8 16.5 441 276 143 89,221 45.2 54.8 4 99.5 (Z) 2Freeborn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,816 7.8 1,172 31.7 23.8 394 337 167 142,314 60.3 39.7 6 99.1 (Z) 4Goodhue . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,316 3.3 1,679 35.4 12.0 384 229 157 93,515 41.1 58.9 631 1.4 1 4

Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,233 9.9 606 24.6 27.4 317 524 69 114,444 89.8 10.2 2 100.0 1 (Z)Hennepin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,894 (Z) 626 60.7 4.3 65 105 58 92,086 88.8 11.2 298 31.9 3 83Houston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,575 4.3 1,031 19.0 11.1 254 246 67 64,558 28.8 71.2 3 99.2 (Z) 1Hubbard. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,956 1.6 535 17.2 10.5 140 262 23 42,912 75.4 24.6 14 99.4 10 1Isanti . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,711 (X) 952 46.7 6.5 139 146 26 26,888 63.5 36.5 4 99.7 1 1

Itasca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,711 (X) 494 23.7 10.9 120 243 6 13,036 52.7 47.3 201 2.4 (Z) 2Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,509 21.5 989 21.9 28.4 398 402 159 161,140 51.9 48.1 2 97.8 (Z) 1Kanabec . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,147 (X) 796 26.4 7.9 159 199 19 23,862 33.1 66.9 2 98.2 (Z) (Z)Kandiyohi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41,807 4.4 1,286 28.3 17.5 408 317 231 179,546 36.0 64.0 10 97.7 4 4Kittson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,271 10.9 659 6.4 42.2 556 843 70 106,168 86.5 13.5 1 80.9 1 (Z)

Koochiching . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –184 (X) 258 8.1 16.7 74 288 4 14,795 36.1 63.9 53 1.0 (Z) 1Lac qui Parle . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,099 29.9 910 15.9 34.8 435 478 113 124,343 69.1 30.9 4 97.1 1 1Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –160 (X) 46 32.6 2.2 5 105 (Z) 7,630 80.6 19.4 136 0.3 (Z) 1Lake of the Woods. . . . . . . . . . –2,391 (X) 266 12.4 27.4 152 573 6 21,056 79.1 20.9 1 33.6 1 (Z)Le Sueur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,521 4.0 974 29.8 12.6 238 244 88 90,561 51.5 48.5 19 50.1 5 2

Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,590 30.1 761 22.9 23.0 271 357 73 96,372 50.6 49.4 2 98.4 (Z) 1Lyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,863 6.5 949 22.2 32.2 404 426 157 165,526 47.9 52.1 7 94.5 (Z) 3McLeod . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,515 1.7 987 29.7 15.4 263 266 81 82,160 63.8 36.2 7 97.7 (Z) 3Mahnomen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,540 4.3 363 16.0 31.1 195 537 24 66,047 72.3 27.7 1 100.0 (Z) (Z)Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,244 8.3 1,409 8.3 36.1 935 664 107 76,267 91.4 8.6 1 76.3 (Z) (Z)

Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67,071 14.8 954 22.2 31.2 423 443 249 260,785 41.3 58.7 21 14.1 (Z) 2Meeker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,828 6.2 1,141 28.7 16.2 341 298 129 113,120 45.9 54.1 6 99.3 3 1Mille Lacs. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,742 0.8 847 29.5 5.8 132 156 23 26,581 36.6 63.4 3 97.6 1 1Morrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,598 6.2 1,924 16.6 9.5 452 235 166 86,119 18.2 81.8 14 98.9 9 2Mower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52,075 6.8 1,088 33.6 23.2 412 379 179 164,229 59.0 41.0 9 92.1 (Z) 4

Murray. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,001 26.3 911 21.1 32.6 407 447 139 152,366 54.4 45.6 2 94.6 (Z) 1Nicollet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,565 6.6 730 21.0 22.6 257 352 148 203,199 38.9 61.1 6 98.1 (Z) 4Nobles. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,684 11.0 1,043 22.0 24.9 404 388 188 179,825 40.0 60.0 5 97.5 (Z) 3Norman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,501 14.7 660 13.2 42.6 527 799 91 137,458 82.9 17.1 1 100.0 (Z) (Z)Olmsted . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,485 0.6 1,395 36.3 11.9 313 224 104 74,668 55.2 44.8 42 47.2 (Z) 14

Otter Tail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,937 3.8 3,013 16.2 15.3 881 292 220 73,118 40.8 59.2 105 30.4 25 4Pennington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,500 1.7 610 11.3 29.3 332 544 24 40,048 89.2 10.8 3 20.0 1 1Pine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,096 1.6 1,199 19.7 8.3 255 213 34 28,683 36.9 63.1 3 98.0 (Z) 1Pipestone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,939 21.3 703 23.9 24.6 249 355 106 150,532 35.0 65.0 4 95.8 1 2Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,812 5.5 1,518 11.9 39.4 1,111 732 197 129,900 93.0 7.0 15 14.8 6 8

Pope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,668 9.0 924 19.6 20.6 350 379 91 98,037 57.5 42.5 18 98.6 16 1Ramsey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,093 (Z) 36 77.8 – 1 29 4 122,361 79.6 20.4 161 14.7 1 23Red Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,696 11.9 378 9.8 34.7 227 600 23 61,156 76.4 23.6 4 36.5 2 1Redwood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,886 14.1 1,198 19.2 34.4 545 455 220 184,048 55.3 44.7 3 94.2 (Z) 1Renville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,238 14.3 1,164 19.5 35.8 664 570 317 272,348 64.3 35.7 3 91.4 (Z) 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

MINNESOTA—Con.

Rice . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,854 1.6 1,296 37.9 9.6 249 192 99 76,640 45.7 54.3 9 91.2 (Z) 5Rock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,662 27.8 721 26.4 25.0 299 415 152 211,395 35.9 64.1 2 93.4 (Z) 1Roseau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,648 1.7 1,238 10.3 29.1 703 568 45 35,981 59.4 40.6 2 100.0 – 1St. Louis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,335 0.1 978 25.9 6.6 175 179 11 11,409 52.6 47.4 324 2.0 (Z) 39Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,172 0.2 1,004 56.4 5.0 131 130 54 53,297 52.1 47.9 14 93.7 1 8

Sherburne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,970 0.9 677 50.2 9.0 126 186 49 71,696 77.9 22.1 91 33.5 23 3Sibley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,335 14.5 963 22.2 18.7 339 352 169 175,079 49.4 50.6 3 100.0 (Z) 2Stearns . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71,167 2.0 3,152 23.7 8.1 681 216 344 109,029 20.2 79.8 38 78.3 17 13Steele . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,999 2.8 899 36.3 15.5 282 314 128 142,327 62.7 37.3 9 66.8 (Z) 5Stevens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,259 8.8 556 26.4 37.2 313 563 120 216,203 54.2 45.8 5 96.7 3 1

Swift . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,907 10.5 807 18.8 32.6 416 515 158 195,437 55.4 44.6 10 99.2 8 1Todd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,555 6.4 1,825 18.1 7.8 370 203 96 52,644 26.8 73.2 10 94.5 6 2Traverse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,148 8.5 452 22.1 45.8 344 761 80 177,511 90.9 9.1 1 96.7 (Z) (Z)Wabasha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,184 6.1 999 22.3 14.0 267 267 96 95,795 39.5 60.5 5 100.0 (Z) 2Wadena . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,499 3.7 734 17.3 8.0 166 226 39 53,556 33.5 66.5 11 86.3 9 1

Waseca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,205 9.6 759 28.5 20.2 231 305 111 145,943 51.0 49.0 3 97.4 (Z) 2Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,450 0.6 810 56.2 5.9 96 119 62 76,227 89.8 10.2 321 8.3 2 16Watonwan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,338 22.0 601 22.8 28.8 272 452 127 211,436 51.6 48.4 4 98.9 1 2Wilkin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,755 11.5 414 14.0 51.9 425 1,025 106 256,604 92.3 7.7 1 86.6 (Z) (Z)Winona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,227 3.3 1,125 20.1 14.4 311 276 125 111,132 25.3 74.7 8 100.0 (Z) 3Wright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,485 0.6 1,646 40.7 7.5 266 161 94 57,214 53.0 47.0 334 3.4 2 5Yellow Medicine. . . . . . . . . . . . 32,601 16.3 989 23.9 32.8 448 453 139 140,393 62.4 37.6 3 93.0 (Z) 2

MISSISSIPPI . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,231,711 2.4 42,186 30.0 9.9 11,098 263 3,116 73,870 32.9 67.1 2,960 73.6 1,410 359

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 717 0.1 269 32.0 11.5 91 340 6 21,673 70.0 30.0 49 100.0 (Z) 5Alcorn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,184 0.4 564 35.3 5.5 93 166 8 14,191 80.3 19.7 6 93.4 (Z) 5Amite. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,163 14.0 626 27.8 7.5 157 250 30 48,522 2.3 97.7 2 91.9 (Z) 1Attala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,494 1.2 526 21.7 8.4 126 240 9 16,975 48.6 51.4 3 93.3 (Z) 2Benton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,463 2.7 302 24.2 10.3 100 333 9 28,570 89.5 10.5 1 89.2 (Z) (Z)

Bolivar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,773 4.5 435 20.0 40.9 440 1,011 107 246,124 98.3 1.7 286 95.0 269 3Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,252 15.3 634 20.8 10.4 170 268 32 50,823 79.7 20.3 5 83.3 1 3Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,509 4.7 556 18.3 14.7 168 302 14 25,583 62.4 37.6 5 97.3 2 1Chickasaw . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,346 6.2 655 25.0 10.7 172 263 24 35,963 28.3 71.7 4 46.7 1 1Choctaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,958 2.9 284 22.9 8.8 64 225 10 36,606 8.1 91.9 2 72.8 (Z) 1

Claiborne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,912 0.9 298 20.1 16.1 101 339 6 19,973 57.4 42.6 34 98.8 1 1Clarke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,394 4.0 362 33.1 5.8 56 155 8 21,936 8.3 91.7 3 91.5 (Z) 2Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,285 0.4 497 23.1 10.3 129 260 12 23,304 23.5 76.5 9 92.9 – 6Coahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,256 7.8 255 20.0 43.1 272 1,068 80 312,553 93.0 7.0 161 95.5 145 12Copiah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,471 6.2 690 28.7 8.8 158 228 41 58,812 6.7 93.3 5 99.4 (Z) 3

Covington. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,478 10.4 565 26.5 6.5 103 183 62 110,572 3.6 96.4 6 79.9 (Z) 2DeSoto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,011 0.2 639 53.2 7.7 143 224 21 33,484 86.5 13.5 32 97.1 19 11Forrest. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,622 0.5 440 45.0 2.5 45 103 14 31,018 14.4 85.6 53 25.2 1 10Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279 0.4 208 23.1 9.6 44 214 4 17,832 11.8 88.2 1 96.0 (Z) 1George . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,405 1.9 537 56.1 2.8 63 117 13 24,302 76.3 23.7 2 80.3 1 1

Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,821 10.0 393 29.5 3.8 59 151 18 45,122 6.9 93.1 7 31.2 (Z) 1Grenada . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,653 2.4 339 20.9 10.6 91 268 6 17,106 75.5 24.5 16 69.5 6 3Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,695 (X) 298 41.6 3.0 38 127 3 8,487 27.0 73.0 5 99.2 (Z) 2Harrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –983 (X) 418 66.7 1.0 25 60 3 7,981 54.6 45.4 341 11.2 (Z) 24Hinds. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,108 0.2 1,247 37.3 8.4 279 223 51 40,987 19.3 80.7 47 32.1 (Z) 40

Holmes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,383 5.1 516 18.2 18.0 219 425 32 62,647 87.3 12.7 48 95.9 39 2Humphreys. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,085 18.5 289 18.7 30.8 182 628 75 258,983 51.9 48.1 136 98.0 53 1Issaquena . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,361 33.4 91 14.3 44.0 117 1,281 22 242,099 (NA) (NA) 14 97.0 8 (Z)Itawamba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,930 3.7 514 25.3 5.8 96 187 22 42,457 15.5 84.5 3 95.8 (Z) 2Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –775 (X) 568 63.2 1.6 43 76 6 11,252 48.9 51.1 71 30.1 (Z) 11

Jasper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,612 11.0 475 27.4 6.5 80 168 40 83,800 2.0 98.0 2 88.9 (Z) 1Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,685 7.8 315 14.9 12.4 91 289 13 40,832 26.8 73.2 1 100.0 – (Z)Jefferson Davis . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,322 12.3 442 26.9 4.1 64 145 22 50,762 5.8 94.2 2 92.0 (Z) 2Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68,046 5.1 1,080 40.7 2.3 132 122 130 120,242 1.7 98.3 19 98.9 (Z) 12Kemper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,776 11.4 503 20.7 9.3 123 245 10 19,511 8.1 91.9 1 75.9 (Z) (Z)

Lafayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –480 (X) 572 22.6 8.6 135 236 6 9,645 58.4 41.6 6 99.0 (Z) 4Lamar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,395 2.2 565 40.5 4.2 75 133 28 49,430 7.1 92.9 17 99.5 (Z) 5Lauderdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,309 0.1 505 37.2 6.5 93 183 7 14,095 33.8 66.2 12 99.4 (Z) 9Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,693 11.5 424 28.1 5.2 66 156 33 77,483 5.4 94.6 36 6.9 (Z) 1Leake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71,182 25.5 742 25.6 5.1 110 148 121 162,481 0.8 99.2 3 82.6 – 1

Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,211 0.1 613 40.3 9.8 144 235 18 29,352 53.8 46.2 17 44.8 (Z) 12Leflore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,365 3.5 287 10.8 42.9 283 986 104 361,362 61.0 39.0 207 96.4 150 4Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,710 3.0 643 27.8 4.4 112 174 28 43,395 4.2 95.8 5 99.1 (Z) 3Lowndes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,409 1.3 492 30.5 17.1 150 304 39 79,313 20.0 80.0 42 34.2 (Z) 9Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,007 0.2 719 30.2 11.4 192 268 16 22,740 74.9 25.1 13 93.2 1 11

Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,228 6.4 581 29.1 4.6 99 170 37 63,775 2.2 97.8 4 86.9 (Z) 3Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,039 0.4 670 28.8 12.7 193 287 14 20,648 57.6 42.4 4 95.6 (Z) 2Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,056 0.6 713 27.3 7.9 183 257 32 44,252 38.8 61.2 20 93.4 (Z) 4Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,388 1.1 352 16.8 11.9 86 244 7 18,918 45.2 54.8 4 99.8 (Z) 4Neshoba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,502 3.0 692 23.6 5.3 146 211 125 181,312 0.6 99.4 4 96.1 (Z) 3




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

MISSISSIPPI—Con.

Newton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62,235 20.5 745 34.9 4.7 119 160 95 127,274 1.1 98.9 2 89.5 (Z) 1Noxubee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,012 8.6 571 22.1 18.0 210 368 50 87,739 29.0 71.0 31 5.9 2 1Oktibbeha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 486 0.1 502 34.9 9.6 94 186 10 18,940 22.5 77.5 6 94.1 (Z) 4Panola. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,135 1.1 725 16.3 15.4 272 375 30 41,557 86.3 13.7 17 96.3 13 3Pearl River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –696 (X) 881 49.0 4.4 120 136 12 13,304 28.4 71.6 8 98.3 (Z) 5

Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,109 6.6 331 40.8 2.1 35 106 12 36,586 3.3 96.7 18 9.5 (Z) 1Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,613 3.8 563 33.2 3.6 80 142 50 87,943 3.2 96.8 12 97.8 (Z) 9Pontotoc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,233 0.6 864 30.1 6.4 140 162 11 12,681 41.8 58.2 2 88.9 (Z) 2Prentiss . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –454 (X) 572 29.2 5.9 102 179 7 11,404 67.5 32.5 4 99.7 (Z) 4Quitman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,765 16.3 243 15.6 32.1 182 751 32 133,576 97.3 2.7 81 95.3 77 (Z)

Rankin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,920 1.4 804 41.4 4.7 131 163 62 77,153 8.8 91.2 13 95.3 (Z) 11Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100,685 19.9 771 35.9 4.4 114 148 205 265,711 1.0 99.0 9 99.2 (Z) 9Sharkey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,205 15.2 101 6.9 64.4 165 1,632 48 477,020 84.2 15.8 37 94.9 28 1Simpson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77,271 23.7 684 26.9 4.1 104 152 127 185,896 1.7 98.3 2 96.4 (Z) 2Smith. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96,161 39.8 727 29.0 4.3 104 143 154 212,281 2.2 97.8 4 97.7 (Z) 4

Stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –461 (X) 330 36.7 5.8 57 174 7 21,088 45.6 54.4 2 73.2 (Z) (Z)Sunflower . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,806 6.4 343 9.6 41.7 336 981 119 347,230 58.2 41.8 264 96.6 180 2Tallahatchie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,133 10.8 417 15.8 26.9 293 703 45 108,254 95.0 5.0 114 95.5 102 1Tate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,757 1.5 662 32.9 10.1 155 234 24 36,918 46.2 53.8 18 95.8 15 2Tippah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,410 0.5 733 28.2 4.1 121 165 13 17,147 49.7 50.3 3 97.3 (Z) 3

Tishomingo. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369 0.2 358 28.5 3.9 53 147 3 9,128 32.1 67.9 3 100.0 – 2Tunica . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,085 2.9 98 5.1 62.2 201 2,053 53 545,347 87.3 12.7 94 95.7 81 2Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,370 1.0 819 30.3 4.4 139 170 10 12,195 47.8 52.2 3 96.4 (Z) 2Walthall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,167 18.5 662 24.8 4.7 107 162 51 77,640 1.5 98.5 2 92.3 – 1Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,393 0.1 281 33.5 20.6 115 408 10 37,014 87.3 12.7 72 20.8 (Z) 13

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,122 3.1 333 19.8 39.9 321 963 94 283,568 86.0 14.0 292 73.9 184 12Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,628 16.3 547 33.3 5.3 84 154 101 183,969 2.0 98.0 2 93.2 (Z) 2Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,220 2.5 351 19.1 10.8 77 220 14 39,382 45.3 54.7 1 95.7 (Z) 1Wilkinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 712 1.0 298 21.1 18.8 105 353 3 9,628 (NA) (NA) 4 47.1 3 1Winston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,401 1.8 530 26.2 8.1 101 190 13 24,930 9.3 90.7 3 96.2 (Z) 2Yalobusha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –190 (X) 374 21.1 12.6 100 268 8 20,364 78.4 21.6 3 65.9 – 2Yazoo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,794 7.7 566 17.1 25.6 360 636 67 118,606 79.8 20.2 60 69.2 25 4

MISSOURI . . . . . . . . . . . . . 640,223 0.5 106,797 23.1 14.0 29,946 280 4,983 46,661 40.0 60.0 8,230 21.6 1,430 872

Adair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,825 (X) 915 17.9 17.0 269 294 20 22,150 51.7 48.3 4 10.6 (Z) 3Andrew . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,889 2.5 847 23.8 15.5 223 264 31 36,406 69.9 30.1 1 52.9 (Z) 1Atchison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,642 9.9 465 12.3 43.4 318 683 48 104,030 88.5 11.5 7 97.4 6 1Audrain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,925 1.0 1,089 20.6 21.7 415 381 90 82,299 58.4 41.6 14 33.5 10 2Barry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,211 5.9 1,669 28.6 7.4 321 193 201 120,670 1.9 98.1 21 36.1 (Z) 5

Barton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,760 3.4 960 20.1 21.8 337 351 66 69,142 41.0 59.0 11 75.7 8 2Bates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,737 5.8 1,293 19.0 17.8 468 362 57 44,336 46.1 53.9 3 10.3 (Z) 2Benton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,364 1.6 839 16.3 15.4 259 309 31 37,197 19.0 81.0 3 85.7 (Z) 1Bollinger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,315 1.6 913 14.9 11.7 228 250 20 21,451 (NA) (NA) 14 97.4 12 (Z)Boone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,427 (X) 1,388 34.1 8.5 270 194 36 25,793 55.0 45.0 23 95.4 1 19

Buchanan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,056 0.1 848 29.8 12.6 200 236 28 32,996 76.0 24.0 68 2.1 (Z) 16Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,985 1.7 673 23.5 20.5 248 368 43 64,248 92.1 7.9 350 98.1 344 4Caldwell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,317 3.0 959 23.4 11.5 230 240 25 25,688 36.7 63.3 2 66.5 1 (Z)Callaway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,613 0.4 1,494 24.6 11.6 358 239 51 34,159 42.7 57.3 33 22.5 5 4Camden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,686 0.4 623 12.4 14.8 178 287 16 26,276 5.4 94.6 5 85.6 (Z) 3

Cape Girardeau. . . . . . . . . . . . –1,602 (X) 1,204 22.8 9.6 261 217 44 36,809 53.7 46.3 28 69.6 10 9Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,983 4.0 1,081 16.3 20.0 417 386 62 57,191 76.2 23.8 3 88.4 1 1Carter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 550 1.0 228 18.0 16.2 93 406 3 12,114 8.3 91.7 1 92.5 – 1Cass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,670 0.7 1,635 37.7 7.7 314 192 48 29,612 59.7 40.3 4 4.9 2 2Cedar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,010 2.3 952 19.4 10.3 228 240 24 24,765 13.6 86.4 2 74.4 (Z) 1

Chariton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –253 (X) 1,095 14.0 20.6 379 346 66 60,223 58.6 41.4 1 50.7 (Z) (Z)Christian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,818 0.4 1,294 35.3 6.1 213 165 27 20,841 11.1 88.9 9 93.4 2 4Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,868 (X) 685 13.4 23.6 254 370 29 41,945 68.7 31.3 2 85.9 1 1Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,366 0.1 683 43.3 9.4 128 188 25 35,873 36.5 63.5 173 20.0 (Z) 166Clinton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,245 1.2 889 30.1 10.7 226 255 31 35,322 50.7 49.3 3 4.7 – 2

Cole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,567 0.1 1,098 25.1 4.4 186 169 25 22,457 24.5 75.5 12 57.7 (Z) 11Cooper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,318 1.0 923 16.7 17.9 294 318 47 51,243 43.3 56.7 3 29.7 – 2Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,112 0.8 751 17.7 16.0 218 290 9 12,483 20.3 79.7 2 89.6 – 1Dade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,378 6.0 893 20.3 16.2 296 332 41 46,022 32.3 67.7 4 76.7 3 1Dallas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,766 3.4 1,243 26.0 7.8 235 189 37 29,501 6.2 93.8 2 71.2 – 1

Daviess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,902 14.8 1,029 16.8 15.8 330 321 45 43,404 40.1 59.9 2 59.8 (Z) 1DeKalb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,294 4.1 833 19.8 15.0 225 271 28 33,062 39.1 60.9 1 52.6 (Z) (Z)Dent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,003 0.6 693 15.0 17.3 210 303 10 14,742 9.9 90.1 28 5.5 (Z) 1Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,218 3.9 1,160 17.1 12.1 312 269 26 22,718 3.9 96.1 2 67.1 (Z) 1Dunklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,150 3.5 429 18.4 42.4 297 692 82 191,821 98.4 1.6 79 98.0 74 4




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

MISSOURI—Con.

Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 940 0.1 1,833 30.7 5.9 300 164 40 21,588 38.8 61.2 1,016 1.0 (Z) 7Gasconade. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 683 0.3 877 14.1 10.9 222 253 19 21,233 30.5 69.5 2 78.5 (Z) 1Gentry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,700 12.5 821 18.3 19.9 292 355 54 66,308 26.1 73.9 2 37.5 (Z) 1Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –129 (X) 2,122 44.3 4.8 275 130 39 18,434 16.5 83.5 255 5.9 (Z) 47Grundy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,308 1.7 735 18.6 14.3 212 288 27 37,201 58.2 41.8 3 26.1 1 2

Harrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,494 5.8 1,101 18.6 17.6 388 353 48 43,156 40.9 59.1 1 22.7 (Z) (Z)Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,213 1.0 1,010 21.7 18.1 338 335 45 44,484 31.2 68.8 399 0.2 1 3Hickory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,071 2.5 534 13.9 15.5 156 292 16 30,105 10.0 90.0 1 75.4 (Z) (Z)Holt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,190 6.4 486 14.0 27.2 252 519 48 98,348 84.6 15.4 19 99.3 19 1Howard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 806 17.1 16.6 270 335 29 36,325 67.2 32.8 3 70.8 2 1

Howell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,389 0.9 1,743 25.0 9.5 414 237 44 25,111 8.2 91.8 7 84.2 (Z) 4Iron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,723 1.4 299 10.7 13.4 71 236 4 12,174 12.4 87.6 1 76.2 – (Z)Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,137 (Z) 807 53.3 6.6 145 180 21 26,447 74.3 25.7 388 9.3 (Z) 34Jasper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,773 0.9 1,390 32.9 9.2 289 208 66 47,717 33.5 66.5 32 45.9 8 18Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,285 (X) 764 33.1 5.2 125 163 11 13,857 41.6 58.4 813 1.7 – 10

Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,594 0.6 1,811 28.3 10.8 413 228 56 30,864 34.5 65.5 6 79.7 (Z) 5Knox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 903 2.3 643 8.9 23.5 249 387 27 42,012 56.8 43.2 1 46.7 (Z) (Z)Laclede . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,196 0.6 1,394 22.7 11.8 319 229 31 22,518 8.2 91.8 26 19.1 (Z) 4Lafayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,774 2.8 1,286 27.4 14.9 363 282 76 59,010 64.5 35.5 4 14.3 1 3Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,881 5.9 1,852 34.5 7.3 316 171 110 59,338 10.5 89.5 7 63.0 1 3

Lewis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,695 1.8 838 19.9 16.7 284 339 49 58,647 47.1 52.9 1 61.4 (Z) 1Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –277 (X) 1,102 31.3 12.2 252 228 49 44,582 50.7 49.3 6 93.1 2 2Linn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,556 2.9 969 17.6 20.8 340 351 38 39,160 40.2 59.8 2 15.5 (Z) 1Livingston. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,619 0.7 903 19.2 15.5 300 332 39 43,004 68.6 31.4 4 94.5 1 2McDonald. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,881 11.0 1,113 23.9 8.3 216 194 120 107,717 1.1 98.9 7 83.5 (Z) 3

Macon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –538 (X) 1,351 16.1 14.5 406 301 41 30,454 46.4 53.6 3 5.2 – 2Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,329 1.2 463 18.1 12.3 123 265 9 19,369 7.2 92.8 1 49.6 – 1Maries . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,543 2.3 883 12.6 12.9 234 265 20 22,275 11.9 88.1 2 66.9 – (Z)Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –73 (X) 744 19.8 16.7 230 309 40 53,716 57.9 42.1 8 32.5 2 4Mercer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,268 58.0 569 12.7 20.6 212 373 83 146,538 (NA) (NA) 12 88.9 10 (Z)

Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,275 5.7 1,111 16.7 11.2 268 241 72 64,756 3.9 96.1 4 76.8 1 1Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,161 3.0 247 15.4 56.7 272 1,100 66 267,243 97.3 2.7 78 100.0 76 2Moniteau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,345 9.0 1,139 19.8 10.3 258 227 84 74,010 13.4 86.6 3 81.2 – 2Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –401 (X) 960 19.0 16.5 316 329 49 51,415 51.0 49.0 5 3.9 (Z) 3Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,278 (X) 761 19.1 19.2 259 340 36 47,466 68.8 31.2 1 59.9 (Z) 1

Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,888 15.5 930 18.7 9.4 222 239 81 87,627 7.5 92.5 2 72.6 – 1New Madrid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,579 6.1 364 9.1 62.4 395 1,085 99 270,766 98.9 1.1 1,092 23.8 257 2Newton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,344 4.1 1,752 35.1 5.1 269 153 138 78,566 4.9 95.1 8 64.8 – 4Nodaway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,746 2.1 1,396 15.1 22.3 506 362 69 49,688 60.7 39.3 4 31.3 (Z) 2Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,093 2.2 843 16.1 15.4 266 316 23 27,856 8.0 92.0 3 80.4 – 2

Osage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,775 5.4 1,219 12.6 12.5 315 258 53 43,308 9.1 90.9 64 2.1 (Z) 1Ozark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,822 6.8 820 12.1 17.1 282 343 26 31,978 4.0 96.0 2 58.5 (Z) (Z)Pemiscot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,064 6.2 258 15.5 55.4 296 1,149 70 269,814 99.6 0.4 50 100.0 47 3Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –204 (X) 914 19.1 10.6 222 243 31 33,573 47.4 52.6 2 45.7 – 1Pettis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,318 1.8 1,278 20.3 16.2 402 315 102 79,714 23.9 76.1 7 66.9 (Z) 3

Phelps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –76 (X) 824 24.2 11.0 201 244 10 12,535 13.3 86.7 12 40.3 (Z) 4Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –545 (X) 1,061 19.1 17.2 344 325 55 51,759 51.2 48.8 10 12.1 1 2Platte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,568 0.2 736 34.6 11.5 185 251 28 37,416 77.5 22.5 337 0.9 1 3Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,713 2.5 1,768 28.2 9.2 369 209 60 33,917 7.4 92.6 5 67.5 1 2Pulaski. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 290 (Z) 573 18.5 14.3 142 247 11 19,276 12.3 87.7 8 35.1 (Z) 7

Putnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,015 4.7 723 15.9 20.9 293 406 57 78,530 12.0 88.0 2 25.3 (Z) (Z)Ralls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 731 0.6 674 18.7 17.8 253 376 36 52,786 65.8 34.2 1 7.5 (Z) –Randolph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,016 0.2 971 23.5 11.2 246 253 33 33,775 34.0 66.0 812 0.1 1 2Ray. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,331 1.1 1,231 26.3 10.6 292 237 35 28,500 60.6 39.4 5 91.4 2 2Reynolds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 818 1.0 379 15.6 14.0 118 311 4 10,739 12.1 87.9 4 97.2 – (Z)

Ripley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,816 1.8 478 17.6 16.1 140 293 10 20,186 47.7 52.3 36 81.6 35 1St. Charles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –515 (X) 739 34.2 13.8 185 250 34 45,518 80.0 20.0 502 4.4 (Z) 20St. Clair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,768 2.4 766 15.4 20.5 268 350 23 29,790 40.5 59.5 2 70.5 (Z) (Z)Ste. Genevieve . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,462 0.6 677 19.4 11.7 184 272 18 26,312 44.5 55.5 3 90.2 – 1St. Francois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,958 0.4 735 28.8 5.6 129 175 15 20,792 46.4 53.6 8 77.8 – 4

St. Louis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,412 (Z) 8328 857.6 86.1 839 8120 821 864,896 892.5 87.5 499 1.2 (Z) 179Saline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,206 2.0 945 19.0 26.2 413 437 92 97,019 63.9 36.1 7 90.9 2 4Schuyler. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 380 1.5 480 14.8 16.7 146 305 12 25,917 29.6 70.4 1 17.0 – (Z)Scotland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,513 4.9 654 14.4 21.4 234 358 32 48,222 52.4 47.6 1 36.9 (Z) (Z)Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,849 1.1 514 28.8 23.0 224 435 71 138,321 62.3 37.7 100 99.9 90 5

Shannon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –144 (X) 516 21.3 15.1 135 262 6 11,607 7.1 92.9 1 79.4 – (Z)Shelby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,571 6.6 676 13.2 27.8 299 442 59 87,281 50.1 49.9 3 72.6 2 (Z)Stoddard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,906 5.2 960 29.7 20.9 415 432 127 132,758 69.6 30.4 372 99.4 368 4Stone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,452 0.4 645 25.1 6.8 114 176 12 19,192 8.6 91.4 3 89.9 (Z) 2Sullivan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,818 25.4 850 12.8 26.5 365 429 74 86,864 (NA) (NA) 9 66.5 6 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

MISSOURI—Con.

Taney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123 (Z) 512 18.9 12.7 154 301 10 19,887 6.0 94.0 27 18.6 (Z) 10Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,398 2.5 1,600 18.6 13.4 472 295 40 24,981 10.2 89.8 4 76.2 (Z) 2Vernon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,341 2.2 1,399 23.8 14.9 426 305 80 57,415 27.9 72.1 10 36.6 5 3Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,662 (X) 670 33.7 10.1 142 211 19 28,490 62.8 37.2 3 92.4 (Z) 2Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,249 2.5 576 19.6 8.5 133 230 8 13,269 14.9 85.1 5 83.5 1 1

Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381 0.5 445 13.3 11.9 114 256 5 10,461 20.0 80.0 2 68.1 – 1Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,293 2.0 1,962 33.6 6.4 320 163 62 31,470 5.4 94.6 4 69.0 (Z) 1Worth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,917 11.2 368 12.8 22.6 140 381 11 29,731 47.5 52.5 (Z) 31.3 – (Z)Wright . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,926 4.5 1,348 18.9 11.9 318 236 44 32,716 6.1 93.9 3 71.1 – 1

Independent City

St. Louis city . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – (8) (NA) (NA) (8) (8) (8) (NA) (NA) (NA) 147 (NA) – 147

MONTANA . . . . . . . . . . . . . 463,802 2.3 27,870 23.3 46.4 59,612 2,139 1,882 67,532 39.0 61.0 8,290 2.3 7,950 149

Beaverhead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,527 9.4 421 24.5 46.3 1,279 3,038 63 150,276 14.9 85.1 506 0.3 504 2Big Horn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,410 5.2 584 16.3 55.3 2,811 4,814 66 113,418 26.9 73.1 152 2.2 151 1Blaine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,339 13.2 588 8.2 66.2 2,261 3,846 53 90,638 45.4 54.6 286 2.1 286 1Broadwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,463 8.0 279 19.7 41.2 470 1,684 19 68,165 60.4 39.6 198 1.1 197 1Carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,866 5.4 703 20.6 35.1 754 1,072 47 66,220 28.8 71.2 422 0.4 420 2

Carter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,342 41.6 289 5.2 85.5 1,667 5,768 30 105,301 3.7 96.3 5 9.0 5 (Z)Cascade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,872 0.9 1,037 26.8 37.0 1,389 1,339 51 49,160 36.8 63.2 169 0.9 153 15Chouteau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,326 37.3 787 4.3 76.5 2,301 2,924 56 70,704 75.3 24.7 43 3.1 41 1Custer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,192 2.2 425 20.0 48.7 1,904 4,480 41 95,734 14.8 85.2 77 1.2 75 2Daniels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,645 19.9 364 3.3 74.5 815 2,240 27 74,734 77.7 22.3 3 46.8 3 (Z)

Dawson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,116 5.3 522 8.4 66.9 1,411 2,703 36 69,247 53.8 46.2 75 0.9 72 2Deer Lodge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 435 0.4 109 24.8 45.9 135 1,239 4 39,404 15.0 85.0 48 8.0 44 4Fallon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,572 13.2 327 8.9 67.0 932 2,851 22 68,621 9.7 90.3 3 29.4 3 (Z)Fergus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,050 8.0 830 14.1 62.4 2,282 2,749 61 73,743 30.8 69.2 63 5.1 61 2Flathead . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,957 0.3 1,075 53.0 9.1 235 218 31 28,384 63.5 36.5 71 26.1 57 6

Gallatin9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,501 0.9 1,074 38.5 23.2 709 660 76 70,852 53.3 46.7 409 2.3 399 9Garfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,745 43.6 268 6.3 86.2 2,182 8,141 32 119,399 20.0 80.0 7 8.4 7 (Z)Glacier. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,137 8.9 472 8.7 65.0 1,645 3,486 39 83,180 52.1 47.9 103 2.0 101 2Golden Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,126 14.1 140 7.1 68.6 661 4,720 8 57,143 12.0 88.0 52 0.1 52 (Z)Granite . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,510 9.0 140 9.3 61.4 283 2,021 11 79,136 10.8 89.2 99 0.6 99 (Z)

Hill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,423 6.8 836 6.1 66.3 1,809 2,164 43 51,981 77.2 22.8 12 16.2 10 2Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,812 1.2 372 29.8 26.1 387 1,041 10 26,086 12.7 87.3 89 3.5 87 2Judith Basin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,913 37.9 316 11.7 71.8 830 2,626 32 102,032 26.2 73.8 69 0.9 69 (Z)Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,860 1.4 1,185 47.8 11.9 602 508 39 33,215 46.2 53.8 342 1.0 339 2Lewis and Clark. . . . . . . . . . . . 4,770 0.3 635 47.9 20.9 842 1,326 23 35,628 30.8 69.2 176 5.5 166 8

Liberty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,033 32.8 297 3.4 82.5 905 3,048 26 87,209 66.8 33.2 20 0.4 20 (Z)Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,890 0.8 310 45.8 8.1 54 175 3 8,116 31.1 68.9 29 5.8 13 1McCone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,926 25.5 496 7.1 73.2 1,346 2,714 30 59,788 58.9 41.1 15 1.3 15 (Z)Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,947 3.3 513 23.4 39.8 1,029 2,005 37 72,279 18.5 81.5 484 0.2 483 (Z)Meagher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,126 24.0 136 16.2 66.2 857 6,303 20 144,956 11.3 88.7 324 0.1 324 (Z)

Mineral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 430 0.9 85 34.1 12.9 16 191 1 8,635 24.4 75.6 8 42.0 4 (Z)Missoula . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,629 (X) 641 55.5 11.4 258 403 8 13,044 33.3 66.7 103 36.3 51 28Musselshell. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,786 12.3 319 12.9 53.0 1,034 3,240 16 49,379 13.8 86.2 80 1.3 79 1Park9. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,118 3.5 527 27.1 38.5 847 1,607 21 39,787 20.1 79.9 263 1.8 260 3Petroleum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,006 35.9 89 2.2 73.0 538 6,045 9 101,876 11.3 88.7 43 0.9 43 (Z)

Phillips. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,297 5.9 525 6.9 66.7 1,897 3,613 38 72,015 32.1 67.9 250 1.5 249 (Z)Pondera. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,743 15.5 520 11.9 63.7 900 1,731 48 92,656 64.4 35.6 231 1.4 230 1Powder River . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,151 19.6 301 9.0 80.4 1,522 5,055 30 98,010 3.8 96.2 15 2.8 15 (Z)Powell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,294 6.0 274 23.0 44.2 619 2,258 19 69,792 14.2 85.8 178 0.9 176 1Prairie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,289 36.1 162 6.2 75.9 620 3,825 19 114,500 29.3 70.7 50 3.1 50 –

Ravalli . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,876 1.6 1,441 64.5 6.6 245 170 29 19,876 36.0 64.0 175 3.1 169 4Richland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,109 4.0 587 13.1 60.6 1,201 2,047 68 115,695 44.3 55.7 373 0.7 339 1Roosevelt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,423 9.3 683 6.3 64.1 1,441 2,111 51 74,366 77.3 22.7 71 2.6 70 1Rosebud . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,022 3.5 412 11.7 58.7 2,541 6,167 42 102,583 18.4 81.6 189 1.2 161 1Sanders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –457 (X) 464 32.5 20.7 346 745 14 30,343 47.3 52.7 109 3.3 107 1

Sheridan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,041 17.8 626 3.7 70.6 1,047 1,672 43 68,832 78.1 21.9 11 85.2 11 (Z)Silver Bow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 766 0.1 155 32.3 22.6 74 476 3 18,439 8.4 91.6 44 4.4 30 12Stillwater . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,197 2.3 552 21.7 47.1 890 1,613 29 52,788 12.8 87.2 133 4.0 132 1Sweet Grass. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,757 3.0 357 16.2 53.8 867 2,429 17 46,717 10.1 89.9 193 0.3 193 (Z)Teton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,666 14.3 700 13.0 53.7 1,231 1,758 73 103,579 47.3 52.7 556 0.3 555 1

Toole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,620 9.8 405 4.4 75.8 1,088 2,686 34 84,978 74.3 25.7 11 3.7 10 (Z)Treasure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,195 26.4 115 12.2 62.6 607 5,277 20 170,104 24.7 75.3 101 1.1 100 (Z)Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,848 17.1 743 6.6 63.9 2,052 2,761 67 90,763 48.0 52.0 157 2.9 156 1Wheatland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,078 17.4 163 8.0 71.8 842 5,163 18 110,000 14.6 85.4 91 1.3 91 (Z)Wibaux . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,842 29.8 215 6.0 65.1 536 2,492 12 57,493 38.6 61.4 2 4.8 2 (Z)Yellowstone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,503 0.8 1,279 37.1 25.6 1,569 1,226 118 92,107 20.6 79.4 502 1.3 414 24Yellowstone National Park9 . . . . (X) (NA) (X) (NA) (NA) (X) (X) (X) (NA) (NA) (NA) (X) (NA) (X) (X)




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

NEBRASKA. . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,500,483 3.3 49,355 14.8 41.6 45,903 930 9,704 196,609 34.9 65.1 12,300 63.9 8,790 330

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,768 2.5 561 11.4 47.6 344 614 157 278,979 46.0 54.0 218 98.3 204 9Antelope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,703 25.6 792 8.8 44.9 527 665 196 247,958 38.9 61.1 224 97.8 219 1Arthur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,670 (X) 76 10.5 81.6 436 5,740 14 183,513 7.7 92.3 16 99.6 16 –Banner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,366 57.6 226 1.8 65.9 411 1,819 56 247,916 14.9 85.1 38 88.1 37 (Z)Blaine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,182 (X) 106 4.7 67.0 441 4,162 22 204,500 2.9 97.1 12 94.1 11 (Z)

Boone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,973 32.6 692 7.5 42.5 431 622 197 284,796 27.3 72.7 133 96.3 130 1Box Butte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,502 8.7 476 6.9 54.4 675 1,418 130 273,233 44.1 55.9 234 96.4 230 3Boyd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 615 3.0 314 6.1 58.3 308 981 30 96,831 14.7 85.3 6 63.8 5 (Z)Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,604 21.9 311 8.0 56.9 686 2,207 93 300,055 14.4 85.6 68 35.1 66 1Buffalo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,923 2.1 989 16.2 41.2 601 608 179 180,995 43.8 56.2 251 94.5 233 9

Burt. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,641 15.0 621 15.6 32.9 310 499 95 153,385 54.6 45.4 56 96.4 53 2Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,836 11.9 840 15.1 32.3 375 446 95 112,513 56.2 43.8 107 96.1 104 1Cass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,831 4.9 679 26.5 30.2 320 472 46 68,159 81.7 18.3 40 73.3 3 26Cedar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64,515 38.0 949 15.0 33.7 460 485 168 176,997 32.3 67.7 70 95.4 65 1Chase . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,221 19.7 326 9.5 63.5 540 1,655 142 436,282 47.6 52.4 268 99.2 265 1

Cherry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,150 14.8 557 6.1 79.2 3,777 6,781 119 214,158 9.3 90.7 47 94.8 42 1Cheyenne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,786 0.7 616 5.4 62.2 803 1,304 88 143,042 34.5 65.5 94 95.2 88 2Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,742 12.9 503 15.7 50.3 374 744 160 317,380 47.0 53.0 228 95.7 222 2Colfax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,721 12.9 589 21.2 31.1 244 415 170 287,946 22.8 77.2 68 93.7 59 3Cuming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73,782 36.0 904 18.1 27.1 366 405 581 642,698 9.6 90.4 54 81.5 39 2

Custer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64,968 31.6 1,149 11.1 57.0 1,502 1,307 282 245,368 21.8 78.2 256 88.4 246 3Dakota. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,514 1.9 296 20.3 28.7 152 512 30 102,084 81.8 18.2 27 98.7 19 3Dawes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –8,021 (X) 406 9.6 60.3 786 1,937 26 64,626 14.3 85.7 35 63.9 28 2Dawson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,157 7.2 718 15.2 44.2 623 867 371 517,175 20.1 79.9 354 70.0 339 9Deuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,974 9.3 252 6.3 61.1 294 1,167 30 117,484 48.5 51.5 39 80.7 36 (Z)

Dixon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,274 32.1 660 16.2 27.6 277 419 102 154,224 33.7 66.3 21 83.4 17 1Dodge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,285 2.7 734 21.3 32.0 339 462 132 179,195 50.1 49.9 100 94.5 87 6Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,224 (X) 361 47.4 18.6 95 262 36 98,440 61.8 38.2 535 6.9 16 68Dundy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,431 31.7 262 3.4 61.8 567 2,164 92 350,527 43.0 57.0 131 96.2 129 (Z)Fillmore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,057 21.2 499 7.6 55.5 364 729 128 256,519 61.9 38.1 213 96.4 210 1

Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,267 19.9 378 9.3 47.4 331 876 54 143,257 62.5 37.5 111 83.0 107 1Frontier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,258 30.0 318 7.2 65.7 487 1,530 65 204,035 36.0 64.0 86 96.0 85 1Furnas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,432 13.0 412 10.4 54.1 441 1,070 84 203,871 36.8 63.2 83 75.9 80 1Gage. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,876 9.4 1,272 19.8 31.4 552 434 102 80,089 51.1 48.9 63 60.4 53 6Garden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 845 3.8 253 7.9 64.4 1,072 4,237 53 210,992 23.6 76.4 64 75.3 62 (Z)

Garfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,290 16.1 190 10.0 56.3 293 1,543 34 177,342 8.3 91.7 17 65.0 16 (Z)Gosper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,978 24.8 242 5.0 59.5 262 1,084 48 197,062 59.6 40.4 101 81.2 100 1Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,031 (X) 73 17.8 67.1 490 6,711 14 197,726 (NA) (NA) 3 97.3 2 (Z)Greeley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,299 39.4 361 7.2 47.1 293 812 61 168,307 25.6 74.4 54 96.3 53 (Z)Hall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,351 1.0 595 19.0 36.8 316 531 132 222,452 48.7 51.3 219 96.6 195 12

Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,659 11.7 603 13.3 45.8 348 577 158 261,745 60.3 39.7 244 99.2 239 2Harlan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,477 14.7 346 12.1 47.1 309 893 59 171,673 46.3 53.7 129 96.1 126 1Hayes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,439 65.0 260 3.5 60.0 408 1,570 71 271,219 24.5 75.5 61 97.0 60 (Z)Hitchcock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,282 10.1 299 5.4 67.2 434 1,450 32 108,645 54.3 45.7 63 64.7 59 1Holt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,127 17.5 1,166 8.8 54.9 1,481 1,270 206 176,888 37.1 62.9 238 95.3 230 2

Hooker. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,897 (X) 81 3.7 79.0 424 5,233 11 141,444 4.8 95.2 6 93.9 6 (Z)Howard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,667 32.6 600 17.2 32.3 294 489 99 164,627 30.3 69.7 122 63.8 119 1Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,092 14.5 631 13.0 40.1 364 576 79 125,342 48.8 51.2 72 81.1 67 2Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,848 3.6 571 13.7 24.9 205 360 23 39,898 42.6 57.4 12 72.4 9 2Kearney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,846 29.2 412 7.0 60.2 331 804 205 497,791 40.6 59.4 189 78.4 185 1

Keith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,524 5.2 363 11.3 49.9 628 1,730 96 263,245 39.3 60.7 136 84.4 132 2Keya Paha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,178 52.1 185 4.3 70.8 463 2,504 29 157,805 11.2 88.8 15 65.3 14 (Z)Kimball . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 0.1 362 5.2 57.7 550 1,518 22 60,423 64.2 35.8 64 93.2 61 1Knox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,692 20.8 1,016 9.3 41.6 599 590 160 157,906 17.6 82.4 47 72.8 39 2Lancaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,145 0.2 1,607 39.2 17.1 449 279 71 44,354 68.6 31.4 19 91.9 14 1

Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,186 2.9 959 15.3 51.0 1,529 1,594 289 301,231 24.6 75.4 1,009 28.2 315 8Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,862 34.8 119 6.7 62.2 359 3,017 17 145,874 34.7 65.3 22 97.7 22 (Z)Loup . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,427 (X) 120 2.5 65.8 338 2,813 18 152,233 5.8 94.2 12 62.4 11 –McPherson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,093 37.7 128 4.7 73.4 529 4,130 19 145,563 6.9 93.1 10 97.9 9 –Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,847 3.8 766 18.8 31.1 342 447 140 182,879 35.8 64.2 103 90.6 86 7

Merrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,410 20.9 513 16.2 39.6 283 552 113 219,468 48.7 51.3 187 98.7 183 1Morrill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,712 20.5 443 9.9 49.2 872 1,969 163 366,989 18.3 81.7 196 27.3 191 1Nance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,507 37.8 392 13.8 40.1 229 584 55 140,957 38.4 61.6 64 64.4 63 (Z)Nemaha. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,492 7.3 483 11.2 34.4 255 529 38 78,207 54.9 45.1 730 0.4 2 2Nuckolls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,187 13.9 476 9.7 49.4 351 736 49 103,851 68.3 31.7 77 76.0 75 1

Otoe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,147 3.3 797 21.7 29.2 343 430 44 54,627 54.0 46.0 424 1.4 3 2Pawnee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,805 34.8 531 11.1 31.8 257 484 22 41,629 48.4 51.6 3 28.5 2 (Z)Perkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,230 25.9 438 4.3 57.5 548 1,252 83 190,148 68.2 31.8 210 99.8 208 1Phelps . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,376 21.2 470 8.5 53.6 366 779 341 726,128 25.6 74.4 325 64.0 318 2Pierce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,729 24.2 697 16.5 32.3 333 477 122 174,549 37.2 62.8 124 97.0 121 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

NEBRASKA—Con.

Platte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49,331 6.5 1,000 19.0 30.7 435 435 199 199,414 36.3 63.7 132 93.7 109 8Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,996 29.7 527 12.0 37.0 264 502 149 281,899 33.3 66.7 136 99.1 133 1Red Willow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,653 7.4 380 17.4 55.0 429 1,129 96 251,374 24.7 75.3 79 65.4 70 4Richardson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,819 21.9 732 10.9 29.5 321 438 53 72,335 54.3 45.7 3 83.2 1 1Rock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,444 23.2 271 8.1 64.2 629 2,320 55 203,483 16.3 83.7 46 96.0 45 (Z)

Saline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,412 8.2 728 13.5 34.6 345 474 66 90,268 71.6 28.4 101 87.2 96 2Sarpy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,487 0.1 355 41.4 20.8 105 296 47 131,777 34.2 65.8 41 87.0 9 22Saunders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,460 19.0 1,157 22.7 26.8 458 396 151 130,786 50.7 49.3 133 90.7 86 36Scotts Bluff . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,143 2.4 780 17.9 26.2 427 548 191 245,060 23.7 76.3 316 19.9 296 10Seward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,458 12.1 862 22.2 30.0 364 422 117 135,455 50.9 49.1 93 83.0 89 2

Sheridan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,029 5.3 613 7.7 57.3 1,486 2,424 70 114,830 25.7 74.3 100 79.8 97 1Sherman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,513 31.1 448 10.5 41.7 316 706 43 97,074 42.3 57.7 76 77.3 74 1Sioux. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –978 (X) 318 3.8 65.4 1,103 3,469 67 211,223 12.5 87.5 72 17.5 70 (Z)Stanton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,867 21.1 655 13.4 26.7 243 371 82 125,869 32.0 68.0 25 89.3 21 1Thayer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,400 17.1 558 9.9 45.7 380 682 101 181,475 59.3 40.7 169 93.1 161 1

Thomas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,850 (X) 79 6.3 77.2 349 4,415 11 133,709 (NA) (NA) 8 64.1 5 (Z)Thurston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,524 12.7 438 18.5 31.5 214 489 93 211,550 38.6 61.4 12 88.9 9 2Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,310 20.0 419 11.7 47.5 315 751 71 168,542 30.2 69.8 78 52.2 76 1Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,143 1.8 760 31.1 22.5 242 319 86 112,808 46.1 53.9 574 2.2 16 7

Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,438 19.2 623 17.3 30.5 281 452 117 187,022 33.8 66.2 35 95.1 32 2Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,494 32.1 449 11.8 43.9 318 709 84 187,641 27.0 73.0 62 77.9 59 1Wheeler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,691 73.2 194 10.8 58.8 338 1,743 146 753,371 7.7 92.3 53 99.2 52 (Z)York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,594 5.4 617 13.9 45.4 354 573 161 260,669 56.3 43.7 253 98.7 246 3

NEVADA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109,563 0.2 2,989 46.7 24.2 6,331 2,118 447 149,545 35.3 64.7 2,810 26.9 2,110 629

Churchill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,261 2.5 498 53.6 9.6 149 300 51 101,637 22.2 77.8 158 8.6 152 3Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,234 (Z) 253 79.8 3.2 69 272 17 67,206 39.0 61.0 529 16.2 25 463Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227 (Z) 178 59.0 16.9 211 1,185 9 51,303 46.3 53.7 150 11.1 138 11Elko . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,400 1.4 397 31.5 41.8 2,472 6,227 45 114,134 3.7 96.3 526 8.0 511 13Esmeralda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 450 3.9 18 27.8 61.1 (D) (D) (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 27 88.8 27 (Z)

Eureka. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,889 0.9 73 5.5 58.9 266 3,650 13 173,411 70.7 29.3 109 64.4 109 (Z)Humboldt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,690 3.8 233 28.8 47.2 761 3,267 55 235,833 68.4 31.6 396 46.7 391 4Lander . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,489 6.1 116 37.9 33.6 620 5,347 21 177,716 49.8 50.2 98 55.1 96 2Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,959 3.1 109 34.9 20.2 (D) (D) 11 105,055 62.0 38.0 58 66.6 56 2Lyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,105 2.9 330 47.6 18.8 226 686 74 225,670 49.3 50.7 224 31.3 210 9

Mineral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,452 (X) 17 41.2 29.4 (D) (D) 3 180,882 (NA) (NA) 14 52.7 12 2Nye. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,093 2.2 172 55.2 22.1 98 567 22 130,349 19.5 80.5 53 73.2 45 6Pershing . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,978 4.3 115 17.4 41.7 131 1,140 26 223,548 33.5 66.5 109 22.2 108 2Storey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 6 100.0 – (Z) 15 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 8 40.9 2 1Washoe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,177 0.1 332 64.2 14.2 802 2,416 18 53,554 55.7 44.3 209 25.3 108 93White Pine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,435 2.4 121 24.8 34.7 203 1,679 76 628,306 5.2 94.8 112 16.9 110 3

Independent City

Carson City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –372 (X) 21 52.4 19.0 4 209 1 44,190 21.8 78.2 25 48.4 7 17

NEW HAMPSHIRE . . . . . . . . 46,175 0.1 3,363 45.9 5.2 445 132 145 43,067 57.4 42.6 1,210 7.0 5 97

Belknap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,360 0.1 231 48.1 3.5 23 101 5 21,139 65.2 34.8 6 52.5 (Z) 3Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,011 0.2 229 43.7 4.8 30 130 4 18,035 68.4 31.6 7 67.6 (Z) 4Cheshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,559 0.5 323 43.0 5.6 41 128 12 38,108 27.3 72.7 8 67.7 (Z) 4Coos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,532 0.6 208 30.3 9.1 44 212 9 43,351 18.8 81.2 44 3.9 (Z) 4Grafton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,450 0.1 421 28.7 10.5 86 204 20 47,033 17.3 82.7 18 38.8 (Z) 8

Hillsborough . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,062 (Z) 481 59.9 1.7 40 83 15 30,701 76.0 24.0 56 39.4 1 37Merrimack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,000 0.3 502 45.0 7.2 79 158 41 81,996 82.7 17.3 253 3.9 1 9Rockingham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,302 0.1 445 60.0 1.1 32 71 17 38,101 78.2 21.8 790 2.7 1 13Strafford. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,751 0.1 281 47.0 3.2 34 120 10 35,135 62.9 37.1 21 37.2 (Z) 12Sullivan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,148 0.4 242 39.3 6.6 36 149 12 49,326 32.8 67.2 5 47.4 (Z) 3

NEW JERSEY . . . . . . . . . . . 264,521 0.1 9,924 70.5 3.5 806 81 750 75,561 87.7 12.3 5,560 10.5 140 1,050

Atlantic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,342 0.3 456 70.8 1.8 30 67 79 172,167 99.0 1.0 44 93.1 8 29Bergen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,879 (Z) 91 93.4 – 1 14 8 83,121 96.4 3.6 132 22.3 (Z) 112Burlington. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,550 0.2 906 69.2 6.8 111 123 83 91,891 87.5 12.5 173 25.4 105 50Camden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,421 (Z) 216 79.2 1.4 10 47 14 63,139 99.0 1.0 51 96.9 1 46Cape May . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,046 0.2 197 77.2 1.0 10 51 11 57,112 95.6 4.4 183 9.7 1 12

Cumberland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,169 1.3 616 62.8 5.4 71 115 123 199,143 97.8 2.2 111 41.1 6 18Essex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,103 (Z) 15 100.0 – (Z) 10 1 49,133 98.8 1.2 33 79.0 (Z) 32Gloucester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,095 0.6 692 69.4 3.2 51 73 66 95,389 93.9 6.1 59 58.4 5 21Hudson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 518 (Z) – –Hunterdon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,443 0.3 1,514 70.2 2.4 109 72 42 27,917 82.1 17.9 100 15.7 1 86

Mercer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,459 (Z) 304 72.4 4.6 25 82 12 40,286 89.0 11.0 693 2.0 (Z) 41Middlesex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,144 (Z) 275 77.5 4.0 22 79 23 82,556 93.8 6.2 213 20.8 2 31Monmouth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,077 0.2 892 80.5 2.7 47 53 82 91,425 89.1 10.9 65 36.3 3 56Morris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,576 0.1 407 77.1 0.7 17 42 42 102,897 97.5 2.5 124 49.9 1 103Ocean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,724 0.1 217 79.7 2.3 12 56 11 49,433 83.6 16.4 667 8.3 1 50




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

NEW JERSEY—Con.

Passaic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,801 (Z) 70 94.3 – 2 22 6 86,771 98.5 1.5 201 4.3 (Z) 184Salem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,488 1.3 753 58.6 6.4 96 128 73 96,311 76.9 23.1 1,970 0.6 4 4Somerset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,554 (Z) 442 73.8 4.1 36 82 15 34,081 54.9 45.1 148 9.3 1 142Sussex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 452 (Z) 1,029 66.2 1.7 75 73 15 14,340 54.7 45.3 22 59.5 (Z) 6Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,785 (Z) 18 100.0 – (Z) 10 7 375,000 99.7 0.3 32 49.9 (Z) 18Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,413 0.1 814 63.8 4.4 78 96 40 48,773 46.4 53.6 24 86.0 (Z) 7

NEW MEXICO . . . . . . . . . . . 659,356 1.7 15,170 44.7 28.8 44,810 2,954 1,700 112,065 23.4 76.6 3,260 47.2 2,860 296

Bernalillo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 777 (Z) 618 83.2 3.9 (D) (D) 20 32,403 27.6 72.4 170 67.4 58 106Catron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,005 (X) 206 15.0 49.5 1,645 7,985 8 40,568 3.8 96.2 18 3.6 18 (Z)Chaves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123,012 11.8 604 40.1 36.6 2,516 4,165 284 470,114 10.6 89.4 319 93.2 301 16Cibola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –951 (X) 155 29.0 54.2 1,691 10,909 4 26,477 (NA) (NA) 8 51.8 4 3Colfax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,517 (X) 284 10.9 45.8 2,216 7,804 21 72,303 4.3 95.7 47 3.4 44 3

Curry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,625 9.7 677 13.9 49.8 916 1,354 233 343,576 11.4 88.6 183 100.0 175 8De Baca. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,453 15.1 188 32.4 52.1 1,409 7,497 15 81,069 23.6 76.4 45 20.6 44 (Z)Dona Ana. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159,891 5.5 1,691 81.1 5.6 581 343 252 148,934 48.9 51.1 494 25.2 456 34Eddy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,895 2.4 510 44.7 31.6 1,183 2,320 82 161,198 30.2 69.8 219 57.2 203 14Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,867 (X) 272 26.5 46.7 1,218 4,478 8 27,732 1.9 98.1 31 26.3 27 4

Guadalupe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,970 (X) 208 20.2 61.1 1,462 7,028 10 50,409 3.3 96.7 13 14.2 12 1Harding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –317 (X) 129 4.7 76.0 992 7,689 11 88,434 (NA) (NA) 3 100.0 3 (Z)Hidalgo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,770 9.3 144 17.4 54.2 1,128 7,830 17 115,611 68.3 31.7 38 79.7 37 1Lea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,413 2.7 554 28.5 38.8 2,258 4,076 98 177,433 23.0 77.0 137 100.0 116 13Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,915 (X) 343 36.2 40.2 1,606 4,681 11 32,408 2.1 97.9 25 33.0 21 4

Los Alamos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 6 83.3 – (D) (D) (Z) 2,667 (NA) (NA) 4 100.0 – 4Luna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,602 5.6 171 25.1 43.9 710 4,149 47 277,421 70.0 30.0 90 96.2 85 4McKinley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,833 (X) 150 16.7 48.0 3,170 21,132 6 42,673 (NA) (NA) 14 84.1 2 5Mora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,986 (X) 410 19.0 33.7 955 2,328 15 35,683 6.6 93.4 30 2.1 29 (Z)Otero. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,469 0.4 622 60.5 15.4 1,208 1,941 11 16,952 53.1 46.9 42 64.8 30 11

Quay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,444 7.2 594 14.5 51.7 1,652 2,780 23 38,951 11.8 88.2 104 7.6 102 2Rio Arriba. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,352 (X) 988 55.8 16.4 1,431 1,449 11 10,679 16.6 83.4 104 4.3 100 2Roosevelt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95,648 31.2 804 14.6 42.7 1,501 1,867 190 236,422 13.0 87.0 137 100.0 133 4Sandoval . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,368 (X) 347 55.6 18.7 763 2,199 6 16,256 47.3 52.7 72 24.0 56 11San Juan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56,733 2.3 808 71.2 5.3 1,757 2,174 37 45,829 72.9 27.1 263 0.6 197 17

San Miguel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,751 (X) 565 21.6 38.4 2,092 3,702 12 21,731 10.0 90.0 46 2.6 43 3Santa Fe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,752 (X) 460 65.2 13.3 684 1,486 12 25,615 74.1 25.9 46 60.4 30 14Sierra . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,817 4.4 223 41.3 28.7 1,363 6,112 19 86,933 29.8 70.2 33 35.9 31 2Socorro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,635 5.9 388 48.2 25.5 1,523 3,926 36 92,206 12.3 87.7 161 20.3 158 2

Taos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –360 (X) 453 59.2 12.6 466 1,029 3 7,558 17.7 82.3 92 5.4 89 2Torrance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,320 8.4 461 20.4 46.2 1,697 3,681 36 78,920 26.1 73.9 32 100.0 30 1Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,777 45.3 419 2.1 70.2 2,243 5,354 143 342,360 10.1 89.9 75 92.4 75 1Valencia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,019 0.5 718 85.7 3.6 369 514 18 24,673 20.9 79.1 159 9.2 151 5

NEW YORK. . . . . . . . . . . . . 992,222 0.2 37,255 30.4 9.4 7,661 206 3,118 83,689 36.4 63.6 12,100 7.4 36 2,570

Albany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,819 0.1 484 38.2 3.3 69 143 19 39,990 48.4 51.6 103 10.8 (Z) 48Allegany. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,994 3.7 867 14.9 8.9 180 208 46 52,552 21.7 78.3 8 71.5 2 3Bronx . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – – – – – – – – – – 3 100.0 – –Broome . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,364 0.3 588 23.6 5.4 98 167 29 48,966 20.0 80.0 115 27.6 – 31Cattaraugus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,544 1.2 1,157 22.3 5.8 202 175 58 50,434 26.9 73.1 14 89.0 – 9

Cayuga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,433 4.0 881 26.2 13.1 238 270 128 145,335 26.6 73.4 13 27.0 – 10Chautauqua . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44,433 2.0 1,734 36.3 4.5 256 148 99 57,232 36.0 64.0 481 2.2 – 13Chemung . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,261 0.2 427 26.9 6.8 69 162 12 28,253 32.6 67.4 17 65.3 (Z) 13Chenango . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,086 1.8 960 24.9 8.3 190 198 52 54,460 10.0 90.0 85 7.8 – 3Clinton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,894 1.6 604 21.4 13.9 169 279 78 129,863 21.7 78.3 14 27.2 1 7

Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,594 2.4 498 32.9 13.7 120 240 52 104,807 34.1 65.9 7 69.6 (Z) 4Cortland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,975 1.5 569 21.6 9.5 127 223 40 69,786 8.8 91.2 8 100.0 – 5Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,416 2.4 788 18.4 11.0 192 243 51 64,112 14.4 85.6 456 1.2 – 453Dutchess . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,897 0.1 667 45.6 8.7 112 168 32 47,544 66.7 33.3 35 57.0 1 25Erie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,511 0.1 1,289 45.3 4.0 162 125 92 71,654 45.9 54.1 875 0.8 1 178

Essex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,578 0.5 236 26.7 13.1 55 233 9 36,576 43.2 56.8 8 21.4 – 6Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,813 1.9 532 18.6 14.5 138 260 48 90,231 13.0 87.0 9 40.5 1 6Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,384 0.4 246 31.3 6.1 38 153 8 34,240 15.6 84.4 8 27.3 – 5Genesee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,718 2.2 580 39.0 12.6 177 306 125 215,410 38.2 61.8 9 53.1 (Z) 5Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,525 1.0 342 38.6 8.5 58 169 14 42,032 40.1 59.9 5 47.8 – 3

Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 24 54.2 – 1 59 (Z) 8,583 (NA) (NA) 1 63.3 – 1Herkimer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,597 2.2 690 17.2 9.1 159 231 50 72,213 13.5 86.5 10 41.0 – 7Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,508 1.1 1,028 14.7 18.0 331 322 100 96,831 10.4 89.6 17 23.0 – 10Kings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 1 100.0 – (D) (D) (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 14 100.0 1 –Lewis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,773 6.3 721 16.1 13.5 197 273 72 100,108 9.8 90.2 5 58.0 – 2

Livingston. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,148 2.2 801 32.5 12.9 209 262 84 104,943 34.3 65.7 8 42.4 (Z) 5Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,035 1.7 734 25.2 11.7 168 229 62 83,929 12.1 87.9 6 72.9 – 2Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,777 0.1 631 59.6 9.5 107 169 54 85,477 84.6 15.4 236 3.5 (Z) 77Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,297 1.6 624 22.8 12.5 152 244 52 83,010 19.5 80.5 11 26.0 – 8Nassau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,369 (Z) 65 87.7 – 1 17 8 126,938 (NA) (NA) 499 39.9 5 183




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

NEW YORK—Con.

New York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 4 100.0 – (Z) 1 (Z) 97,500 100.0 – 259 8.5 – –Niagara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,676 0.6 801 43.2 7.7 148 185 60 74,789 66.4 33.6 284 0.6 – 46Oneida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,835 0.5 1,087 25.9 9.6 220 203 78 72,098 28.9 71.1 34 18.9 – 27Onondaga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,525 0.2 725 39.3 10.6 156 216 82 113,330 29.9 70.1 95 11.2 (Z) 73Ontario . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,852 1.2 896 41.5 11.7 195 217 87 97,183 43.2 56.8 11 25.3 – 6

Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,963 0.3 706 40.2 6.9 108 153 66 93,803 61.7 38.3 644 3.5 2 27Orleans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,038 3.9 504 33.9 10.7 133 264 69 136,740 88.7 11.3 4 24.3 (Z) 2Oswego . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,671 0.5 682 30.5 4.8 103 151 32 46,226 56.3 43.7 975 1.1 (Z) 14Otsego . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,715 1.2 1,028 19.0 8.5 206 201 51 49,322 13.0 87.0 6 73.2 – 3Putnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,332 0.2 52 61.5 5.8 7 129 2 46,654 96.5 3.5 124 5.8 (Z) 118

Queens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 2 100.0 – (D) (D) (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1,754 3.5 1 48Rensselaer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,756 0.2 549 37.9 7.3 92 168 28 51,224 42.7 57.3 27 23.3 (Z) 18Richmond. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 16 100.0 – (Z) 3 2 107,500 (NA) (NA) 324 0.5 – –Rockland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,546 (Z) 29 62.1 – (D) (D) 3 108,931 95.2 4.8 592 4.5 – 25St. Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,074 1.8 1,451 11.8 14.8 403 278 100 68,722 8.9 91.1 14 42.7 – 8

Saratoga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,123 0.4 592 48.8 5.2 75 127 33 56,128 30.0 70.0 20 72.6 1 12Schenectady. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197 (Z) 200 45.0 2.0 22 109 4 20,040 60.0 40.0 28 99.8 (Z) 25Schoharie. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,544 2.1 579 24.0 7.1 113 195 27 46,596 27.7 72.3 117 2.0 (Z) 115Schuyler. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,654 2.1 405 29.4 6.2 74 182 18 44,225 25.4 74.6 2 70.6 (Z) 1Seneca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,077 3.1 466 29.4 14.6 127 273 45 97,090 40.8 59.2 4 28.4 – 2

Steuben . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,334 0.9 1,501 17.6 11.9 373 249 85 56,498 31.6 68.4 75 17.4 3 8Suffolk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,139 0.1 651 76.3 1.5 34 52 201 309,035 88.3 11.7 985 17.9 13 125Sullivan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,591 0.9 381 35.2 7.1 64 167 38 99,089 7.1 92.9 141 6.0 (Z) 138Tioga. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,783 1.6 604 22.8 9.3 128 212 30 49,568 20.4 79.6 7 95.0 – 4Tompkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,718 0.5 563 38.9 8.9 101 179 42 74,437 21.1 78.9 250 0.6 – 10

Ulster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,919 0.5 532 44.7 6.6 83 157 34 64,692 83.5 16.5 449 2.5 2 440Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 921 0.1 72 59.7 1.4 6 89 3 34,944 90.3 9.7 12 16.8 (Z) 8Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,947 3.4 887 24.2 13.9 206 232 82 92,413 14.5 85.5 8 59.1 1 4Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,099 2.6 904 37.8 8.4 165 183 104 114,885 69.7 30.3 437 0.8 – 6Westchester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,069 (Z) 129 68.2 3.9 10 77 9 68,636 95.4 4.6 1,234 1.5 – 126Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,998 9.0 767 28.4 12.4 215 281 178 232,078 17.0 83.0 6 49.0 (Z) 4Yates. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,383 6.7 722 22.6 5.3 115 159 50 69,769 41.8 58.2 83 1.3 (Z) 1

NORTH CAROLINA . . . . . . . 2,464,936 1.2 53,930 45.6 7.2 9,079 168 6,962 129,087 28.9 71.1 11,400 5.1 287 945

Alamance. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,182 0.1 831 43.2 3.7 98 118 29 34,552 36.5 63.5 27 18.5 4 18Alexander. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,614 5.3 661 54.8 2.3 58 88 67 101,171 5.0 95.0 5 40.5 (Z) 1Alleghany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,423 10.1 544 47.4 5.0 73 134 24 43,820 44.8 55.2 3 35.1 2 (Z)Anson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,939 7.1 539 33.4 8.2 100 186 107 199,416 2.9 97.1 10 23.0 1 6Ashe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,861 9.2 1,152 49.6 2.3 108 94 29 25,331 79.9 20.1 3 60.4 1 1

Avery. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,471 8.8 495 62.8 1.4 31 62 28 56,317 98.8 1.2 6 27.4 3 1Beaufort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,860 1.7 395 30.4 26.1 170 430 74 187,051 66.0 34.0 48 98.6 3 3Bertie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,807 8.2 330 28.5 21.5 143 432 85 257,652 34.6 65.4 12 53.6 6 1Bladen. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64,281 12.0 551 35.9 12.5 145 264 255 462,158 15.5 84.5 51 20.2 2 31Brunswick. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,900 0.5 271 48.3 6.6 41 152 35 128,620 48.9 51.1 1,640 0.3 11 1

Buncombe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,978 0.3 1,192 63.8 1.9 95 80 22 18,314 60.6 39.4 42 20.6 3 25Burke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,312 1.7 439 62.9 1.4 32 73 31 70,403 55.5 44.5 24 12.8 2 19Cabarrus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,287 0.4 658 43.9 3.0 73 111 31 46,464 19.1 80.9 26 12.6 2 21Caldwell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,143 1.8 411 54.0 2.4 35 85 16 38,550 59.4 40.6 12 18.5 2 8Camden. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,141 3.6 70 24.3 45.7 (D) (D) 20 281,614 (NA) (NA) (Z) 94.7 (Z) (Z)

Carteret . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,004 0.3 128 60.2 5.5 60 467 16 123,992 97.5 2.5 8 95.2 1 4Caswell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,799 (X) 517 22.8 9.1 117 226 24 46,547 54.2 45.8 3 92.6 1 (Z)Catawba . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,626 0.4 715 47.3 3.9 79 110 21 29,997 35.3 64.7 1,188 0.5 3 18Chatham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,237 4.7 1,128 48.0 2.4 119 105 122 108,045 4.7 95.3 365 1.4 1 5Cherokee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,056 3.5 262 55.0 1.9 22 85 11 42,309 10.6 89.4 4 41.1 (Z) 2

Chowan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,587 11.0 173 31.2 24.3 60 346 38 220,549 73.0 27.0 6 40.3 3 2Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,184 (X) 168 54.8 1.8 13 80 1 7,940 34.6 65.4 1 55.2 1 (Z)Cleveland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,105 2.4 1,131 40.5 2.7 117 104 41 36,073 26.3 73.7 192 1.3 3 14Columbus. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65,099 8.4 828 40.5 10.4 160 193 106 128,320 39.0 61.0 50 13.9 2 3Craven. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,561 0.5 275 33.1 16.7 79 287 49 178,804 51.2 48.8 32 50.0 3 12

Cumberland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,254 0.1 478 46.4 10.9 90 189 58 120,513 25.0 75.0 48 19.6 5 40Currituck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,774 1.7 82 50.0 23.2 35 424 9 112,293 96.8 3.2 3 75.8 2 1Dare . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 8 50.0 37.5 (D) (D) 1 114,500 100.0 – 7 93.7 1 6Davidson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,692 0.3 1,138 46.7 2.7 105 92 26 22,871 30.4 69.6 21 7.9 2 18Davie. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,034 0.7 705 46.7 2.8 76 108 14 19,908 30.9 69.1 6 26.7 2 3

Duplin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,399 18.4 1,190 43.4 10.2 235 197 715 601,057 8.3 91.7 31 82.3 7 5Durham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,844 (Z) 238 58.4 3.8 26 110 7 27,987 82.3 17.7 38 12.8 3 30Edgecombe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,285 4.0 281 30.6 27.4 164 582 98 348,345 41.5 58.5 13 38.8 5 4Forsyth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,200 (Z) 783 61.2 1.1 52 66 14 18,064 80.4 19.6 58 10.9 6 47Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,497 1.6 574 36.9 9.2 128 224 40 70,199 65.5 34.5 9 35.7 3 2




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

NORTH CAROLINA—Con.

Gaston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,203 0.2 450 47.3 1.6 42 93 12 26,540 23.8 76.2 972 0.8 3 29Gates . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,600 27.3 129 30.2 24.8 64 496 32 249,000 45.9 54.1 2 92.4 (Z) 1Graham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,131 2.0 143 60.1 1.4 8 56 2 12,343 27.3 72.7 1 42.4 – 1Granville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,550 (X) 674 30.4 10.5 147 217 22 32,829 86.3 13.7 8 34.3 2 3Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,074 17.6 271 29.5 24.4 98 361 159 586,395 18.5 81.5 6 82.5 1 2

Guilford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,597 0.2 1,095 54.0 3.9 111 102 45 41,509 67.8 32.2 79 16.1 10 57Halifax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,140 5.0 380 31.1 23.9 195 512 64 169,658 45.5 54.5 38 7.5 3 7Harnett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,759 3.0 730 47.1 7.8 114 157 105 143,881 28.5 71.5 18 20.9 4 10Haywood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,860 1.2 795 58.9 2.1 65 81 12 15,420 45.9 54.1 35 5.1 2 6Henderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56,608 3.5 525 58.3 3.2 49 93 61 115,745 88.2 11.8 17 21.6 5 8

Hertford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,002 2.0 136 30.1 30.1 80 587 96 708,926 22.0 78.0 9 74.5 4 2Hoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,557 4.1 201 48.8 13.9 63 315 45 221,438 23.7 76.3 4 76.2 1 2Hyde . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,484 13.8 144 41.0 39.6 103 716 33 228,250 97.8 2.2 2 40.6 1 1Iredell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,455 1.6 1,262 43.3 3.5 147 116 146 115,370 5.2 94.8 19 42.7 3 10Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,807 0.9 248 67.3 1.6 16 66 8 32,875 95.3 4.7 4 42.3 1 1

Johnston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,809 2.7 1,144 45.2 7.7 194 170 146 127,197 45.8 54.2 19 52.0 4 7Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,689 29.3 154 20.8 27.3 76 494 90 582,643 21.5 78.5 2 84.7 (Z) 1Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,100 0.7 304 48.7 6.3 46 152 22 72,586 43.9 56.1 11 22.7 2 7Lenoir . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,100 2.8 428 32.7 18.7 122 284 141 330,315 29.5 70.5 15 87.6 2 9Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,182 1.4 618 50.6 2.9 58 93 18 28,929 22.0 78.0 10 38.0 1 5

McDowell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,352 4.5 282 48.9 2.5 24 87 23 80,681 68.1 31.9 8 51.8 1 3Macon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,161 0.9 347 57.3 0.3 22 65 5 13,248 52.9 47.1 6 25.3 2 2Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,876 (X) 973 47.9 1.5 84 86 10 10,690 81.8 18.2 2 70.8 (Z) 1Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,596 3.2 305 25.9 23.3 111 363 40 130,790 63.1 36.9 89 8.8 1 2Mecklenburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,426 0.1 300 60.0 2.0 25 85 72 238,380 93.3 6.7 2,767 0.3 11 107

Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,449 2.4 358 61.7 1.7 26 73 4 10,818 87.3 12.7 3 30.7 (Z) 1Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,953 6.2 292 38.0 7.5 42 143 68 233,849 4.0 96.0 7 24.4 1 3Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,991 3.6 820 47.8 3.4 101 123 91 111,017 18.0 82.0 27 39.9 14 7Nash . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,164 1.8 478 41.4 16.9 160 335 108 226,851 50.6 49.4 32 14.7 14 16New Hanover . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,857 0.1 77 70.1 – (D) (D) 3 43,442 96.4 3.6 36 47.0 4 8

Northampton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 62,679 22.3 328 33.5 25.3 151 459 61 187,088 29.0 71.0 4 79.6 1 1Onslow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,985 0.5 404 44.3 5.7 64 158 90 222,911 19.4 80.6 25 97.6 3 17Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,490 0.2 627 43.2 4.3 71 113 22 35,270 50.9 49.1 17 18.7 2 13Pamlico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,745 3.4 68 35.3 35.3 52 770 16 242,338 93.0 7.0 2 100.0 (Z) 1Pasquotank . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,376 1.5 157 27.4 35.0 99 633 35 220,624 98.1 1.9 8 89.5 2 5

Pender . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,762 7.9 296 43.2 11.1 63 212 102 343,453 22.0 78.0 8 69.4 3 1Perquimans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,410 21.7 193 16.6 34.7 94 489 38 199,192 61.1 38.9 3 91.7 1 1Person. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –14,143 (X) 374 34.8 11.2 95 254 18 48,455 82.2 17.8 1,059 0.2 1 4Pitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,458 0.5 448 30.1 25.4 186 415 120 268,087 47.8 52.2 14 90.2 4 6Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,277 1.6 260 55.0 1.5 27 104 5 17,465 61.3 38.7 3 45.6 1 1

Randolph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 95,341 4.6 1,583 45.5 2.6 157 99 148 93,478 9.5 90.5 22 42.9 4 8Richmond. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,423 8.6 257 33.9 6.6 49 192 66 256,942 7.8 92.2 12 23.0 1 7Robeson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,232 3.1 873 43.6 17.2 287 328 191 218,371 31.3 68.7 38 52.2 3 20Rockingham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –598 (X) 871 36.6 6.0 136 156 29 32,784 78.5 21.5 241 1.6 4 18Rowan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,506 1.2 951 43.3 4.8 115 121 36 38,120 59.4 40.6 312 1.7 3 13

Rutherford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,957 0.2 653 39.5 2.6 68 104 9 14,096 19.9 80.1 16 17.8 2 12Sampson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244,802 26.6 1,178 37.1 12.1 298 253 676 573,592 11.6 88.4 25 74.1 8 3Scotland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,957 1.8 159 37.7 20.1 58 367 47 293,101 11.4 88.6 12 56.0 2 4Stanly . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,362 3.3 719 44.9 6.3 108 150 57 78,777 14.5 85.5 13 31.6 1 8Stokes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,288 1.4 934 39.3 3.3 107 115 23 24,506 70.1 29.9 968 0.2 1 2

Surry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54,397 4.3 1,268 47.5 2.8 129 102 89 70,274 24.1 75.9 19 25.7 3 8Swain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66 (Z) 83 49.4 4.8 7 86 1 13,771 (NA) (NA) 2 47.4 (Z) 1Transylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,285 3.0 256 64.1 1.2 18 71 17 64,910 75.4 24.6 24 7.9 2 2Tyrrell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,887 18.0 91 19.8 39.6 74 809 29 323,110 72.6 27.4 1 60.2 (Z) (Z)Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 112,979 4.6 1,224 52.9 6.1 191 156 261 213,482 10.8 89.2 24 45.8 3 8

Vance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,002 (X) 228 24.6 18.9 75 329 14 60,715 96.3 3.7 9 18.7 2 5Wake. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,834 (Z) 846 55.7 4.3 93 110 56 66,520 74.7 25.3 128 11.6 14 73Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,596 8.6 297 24.9 12.8 75 254 27 90,902 32.6 67.4 3 45.9 2 (Z)Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,215 5.1 193 32.1 33.7 114 593 46 239,114 73.7 26.3 4 88.2 2 1Watauga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,927 1.3 731 54.9 1.0 52 71 12 15,889 56.7 43.3 6 25.4 1 3

Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,619 1.5 722 42.5 13.3 171 237 318 440,064 13.7 86.3 42 25.5 4 12Wilkes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 101,710 7.3 1,273 50.6 2.5 124 98 208 163,005 2.5 97.5 22 30.4 1 7Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,589 (X) 315 38.1 21.9 115 364 79 250,689 76.5 23.5 16 25.7 5 9Yadkin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,328 6.8 1,044 50.1 3.7 117 112 65 62,283 23.6 76.4 6 70.2 2 2Yancey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,225 6.2 622 66.9 0.8 39 62 6 8,997 77.0 23.0 3 56.4 1 1

NORTH DAKOTA . . . . . . . . . 1,082,886 6.7 30,619 6.7 56.8 39,295 1,283 3,233 105,600 76.1 23.9 1,140 10.8 145 64

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,866 16.4 394 6.1 61.4 605 1,535 24 61,396 27.3 72.7 (Z) 61.5 (Z) –Barnes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,189 13.2 838 9.2 46.3 857 1,023 94 112,428 91.7 8.3 2 55.6 (Z) 1Benson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,142 10.1 567 5.1 62.1 733 1,293 55 97,390 77.1 22.9 3 99.3 1 1Billings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,073 37.9 238 3.4 68.5 811 3,407 13 53,017 19.4 80.6 1 57.1 (Z) (Z)Bottineau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,682 23.3 879 5.0 51.1 948 1,079 72 82,198 89.8 10.2 2 85.8 (Z) 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

NORTH DAKOTA—Con.

Bowman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,726 25.4 360 3.1 63.1 759 2,109 26 72,831 32.4 67.6 1 39.8 1 (Z)Burke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,973 29.7 455 2.0 64.0 600 1,319 32 70,070 87.4 12.6 1 47.8 (Z) (Z)Burleigh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,324 1.2 946 14.3 41.1 866 915 45 47,632 44.4 55.6 13 16.8 3 10Cass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75,590 1.7 961 14.5 54.8 1,127 1,173 209 217,437 93.6 6.4 16 34.1 2 13Cavalier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,729 11.2 607 3.1 65.2 819 1,349 91 149,142 98.3 1.7 1 21.1 – 1

Dickey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56,297 39.4 533 8.8 51.6 599 1,125 72 135,066 70.1 29.9 4 93.7 3 1Divide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,015 27.3 532 3.9 68.0 761 1,430 41 77,053 85.1 14.9 2 98.0 2 (Z)Dunn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,698 38.6 582 4.6 68.2 1,106 1,900 47 79,986 33.2 66.8 1 31.8 1 (Z)Eddy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,495 31.2 325 4.3 60.0 349 1,073 21 65,197 69.6 30.4 1 86.0 (Z) (Z)Emmons . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,630 36.2 699 2.9 61.1 838 1,199 47 67,631 33.4 66.6 9 30.2 9 (Z)

Foster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,250 15.4 309 7.1 58.6 383 1,239 40 128,531 65.9 34.1 1 95.6 1 (Z)Golden Valley . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,188 19.5 231 3.9 63.2 580 2,513 19 84,113 43.1 56.9 1 25.3 1 (Z)Grand Forks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,906 0.6 863 11.7 42.3 756 876 145 167,833 89.1 10.9 11 86.2 9 2Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,824 31.2 548 5.7 70.1 1,057 1,928 42 76,712 22.7 77.3 11 2.0 11 (Z)Griggs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,605 23.8 423 5.7 45.6 379 896 30 70,296 83.5 16.5 2 100.0 1 (Z)

Hettinger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,019 35.1 489 6.3 57.7 681 1,392 35 72,493 79.2 20.8 (Z) 69.2 (Z) –Kidder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,454 38.4 584 4.8 63.7 794 1,360 44 76,074 44.1 55.9 12 97.5 12 (Z)LaMoure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55,298 50.9 621 5.3 50.6 677 1,090 80 128,105 78.2 21.8 4 97.5 4 (Z)Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,462 52.0 445 3.6 63.1 578 1,298 36 79,973 26.0 74.0 2 99.4 1 (Z)McHenry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,925 28.4 901 5.0 59.6 1,126 1,250 67 74,880 54.0 46.0 19 34.4 18 (Z)

McIntosh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,116 37.8 526 5.9 54.9 569 1,081 39 74,791 43.9 56.1 (Z) 100.0 (Z) (Z)McKenzie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,754 9.4 632 5.2 66.5 1,193 1,888 56 88,408 58.9 41.1 13 12.2 12 (Z)McLean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,168 13.6 918 6.0 58.0 1,095 1,193 84 91,798 82.2 17.8 14 11.3 2 1Mercer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,159 2.2 456 6.1 50.9 536 1,176 22 48,798 45.0 55.0 422 0.4 1 4Morton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,525 4.3 855 6.9 63.0 1,276 1,493 69 81,035 28.5 71.5 47 1.7 1 3

Mountrail . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,438 14.8 682 2.3 66.9 1,068 1,566 53 78,302 74.6 25.4 1 63.6 (Z) (Z)Nelson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,159 8.2 598 5.4 41.0 532 889 41 68,893 83.1 16.9 1 100.0 (Z) (Z)Oliver . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,190 13.7 307 6.8 60.3 404 1,315 23 73,547 38.4 61.6 442 0.1 3 (Z)Pembina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,030 3.6 524 5.9 52.3 614 1,171 142 271,214 96.3 3.7 2 70.0 (Z) 1Pierce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,959 4.2 487 6.4 61.4 531 1,090 36 74,528 71.0 29.0 1 97.6 (Z) 1

Ramsey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,412 6.6 554 8.8 52.3 636 1,148 55 99,570 95.3 4.7 (Z) 76.1 (Z) (Z)Ransom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,353 27.3 528 5.9 42.4 501 948 60 113,313 70.6 29.4 12 88.6 10 1Renville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,725 35.4 353 3.4 70.8 527 1,493 44 125,031 91.9 8.1 (Z) 100.0 – (Z)Richland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73,246 18.3 813 10.7 56.3 891 1,096 201 247,663 87.2 12.8 6 72.2 2 2Rolette. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,272 1.6 523 3.1 51.8 508 971 32 61,279 68.0 32.0 2 100.0 (Z) 1

Sargent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,125 22.0 469 7.5 52.9 505 1,077 78 166,719 81.7 18.3 4 98.7 4 (Z)Sheridan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,615 38.9 393 1.8 62.8 469 1,193 25 62,791 72.3 27.7 (Z) 100.0 (Z) (Z)Sioux. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,365 5.8 179 7.3 80.4 702 3,925 13 73,670 13.3 86.7 (Z) 82.8 (Z) (Z)Slope . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,910 67.2 259 2.3 68.0 763 2,944 20 78,274 41.2 58.8 1 12.1 1 (Z)Stark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,999 2.8 774 11.5 49.5 777 1,004 48 61,721 45.3 54.7 2 77.7 (Z) (Z)

Steele . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,849 35.3 318 6.6 59.1 401 1,261 52 164,148 96.6 3.4 1 100.0 1 –Stutsman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58,542 11.5 988 7.1 56.7 1,215 1,230 97 97,865 74.9 25.1 9 96.7 3 4Towner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,613 32.4 418 6.2 63.2 549 1,313 45 107,227 92.1 7.9 (Z) 93.3 (Z) (Z)Traill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,115 22.7 427 6.3 66.7 530 1,240 101 236,445 98.3 1.7 1 64.9 (Z) 1

Walsh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,042 14.6 905 7.1 42.3 759 839 150 165,655 97.3 2.7 2 49.5 (Z) 1Ward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,659 2.0 966 11.1 58.7 1,109 1,148 91 94,127 83.0 17.0 8 93.5 1 7Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,224 28.7 579 3.8 57.9 668 1,154 61 105,829 82.9 17.1 1 100.0 (Z) (Z)Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,962 1.5 858 6.6 60.4 1,181 1,376 66 76,873 83.7 16.3 26 31.8 23 2

OHIO . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 708,005 0.3 77,797 39.5 9.0 14,583 187 4,264 54,804 54.1 45.9 11,100 7.9 32 1,470

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 1,320 33.9 5.8 198 150 20 15,501 50.8 49.2 648 0.4 (Z) 2Allen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –561 (X) 968 36.9 11.3 188 194 41 42,628 73.3 26.7 40 26.8 (Z) 30Ashland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,953 0.5 1,089 34.3 5.9 161 148 50 46,127 30.9 69.1 7 90.4 (Z) 4Ashtabula. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,214 0.4 1,283 37.9 4.1 170 133 40 31,125 49.8 50.2 285 0.9 (Z) 9Athens. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,081 0.2 673 26.7 4.8 105 156 8 11,826 44.0 56.0 8 80.4 – 7

Auglaize. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,696 1.2 1,020 31.3 11.0 218 214 70 69,044 43.4 56.6 16 58.5 (Z) 5Belmont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,615 0.3 753 26.4 6.6 142 188 15 19,623 29.7 70.3 257 2.5 (Z) 8Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –738 (X) 1,400 38.7 7.0 221 158 31 22,270 82.4 17.6 5 73.2 (Z) 4Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 464 (Z) 1,060 53.7 5.1 138 130 35 33,258 68.4 31.6 147 47.6 1 45Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,587 12.0 749 28.4 4.5 124 165 23 31,085 52.1 47.9 3 87.4 (Z) 1

Champaign. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,616 2.1 937 45.9 11.8 208 222 50 53,839 74.1 25.9 9 92.8 2 3Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,818 0.9 756 52.1 12.8 165 219 71 93,796 78.3 21.7 24 94.6 2 19Clermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,942 (X) 973 59.0 5.1 116 119 18 18,662 87.5 12.5 652 2.8 (Z) 19Clinton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,534 0.3 811 37.4 18.4 239 294 53 65,184 89.0 11.0 2 71.9 – 1Columbiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,216 0.8 1,184 45.1 3.3 136 115 44 36,790 30.1 69.9 16 41.9 (Z) 11

Coshocton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,421 2.2 1,043 28.0 7.2 180 172 35 33,132 35.3 64.7 330 5.9 (Z) 8Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,444 1.0 693 29.1 18.0 234 338 69 99,358 56.2 43.8 5 30.7 (Z) 3Cuyahoga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,194 (Z) 159 86.2 – 4 26 19 117,113 96.5 3.5 518 0.1 (Z) 261Darke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,270 1.7 1,764 41.8 10.2 339 192 304 172,452 17.3 82.7 8 66.9 (Z) 3Defiance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,704 0.9 982 37.7 11.8 209 213 43 43,995 75.3 24.7 6 26.0 (Z) 5




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

OHIO—Con.

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,121 0.2 785 54.9 14.0 163 207 50 64,270 77.8 22.2 19 33.5 1 11Erie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,830 0.2 392 41.6 16.3 95 242 33 83,181 90.0 10.0 24 2.8 2 11Fairfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,232 0.2 1,173 50.3 8.6 196 167 41 35,020 70.6 29.4 13 97.5 (Z) 9Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,818 0.4 480 33.8 28.1 203 423 46 96,523 87.8 12.2 4 47.6 (Z) 2Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,053 (Z) 561 62.4 7.8 82 145 32 56,153 91.1 8.9 201 16.1 2 184

Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,733 1.8 783 39.8 14.4 197 252 70 89,539 62.1 37.9 6 27.5 (Z) 4Gallia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –845 (X) 936 32.5 2.8 118 126 14 15,271 37.1 62.9 1,193 0.4 – 4Geauga . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,997 0.1 975 56.7 1.4 66 68 23 23,318 58.6 41.4 7 95.4 (Z) 1Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,786 0.1 819 53.7 10.5 169 206 51 61,731 83.1 16.9 14 89.0 1 9Guernsey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,529 0.2 910 28.8 3.7 137 151 13 14,126 26.8 73.2 5 34.8 (Z) 4

Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,907 (Z) 399 67.9 2.8 30 74 24 59,236 81.6 18.4 423 13.9 1 159Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,090 0.3 976 35.0 16.0 262 269 46 47,319 77.5 22.5 21 29.7 (Z) 15Hardin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,375 2.2 842 29.6 16.6 246 293 96 113,479 35.9 64.1 4 93.4 (Z) 2Harrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,963 1.3 450 18.4 12.4 138 308 17 37,400 12.8 87.2 1 65.6 – 1Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,273 1.3 844 29.3 14.9 236 280 59 69,808 90.5 9.5 9 14.6 (Z) 2

Highland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,246 (X) 1,381 35.8 9.8 273 198 44 31,560 72.7 27.3 5 42.5 – 2Hocking . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,739 (X) 434 32.5 1.8 50 115 4 8,189 58.5 41.5 5 98.9 – 3Holmes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,868 1.9 1,809 31.1 2.2 207 114 97 53,645 10.6 89.4 7 82.6 – 3Huron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,179 1.2 865 34.0 13.4 228 264 66 76,760 80.3 19.7 10 17.6 1 7Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,649 1.0 458 27.9 6.1 74 161 6 13,893 37.8 62.2 2 39.5 – 2

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,418 0.2 461 29.1 5.4 67 146 7 14,675 39.2 60.8 2,047 0.4 (Z) 9Knox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,348 1.6 1,258 39.3 7.2 209 166 55 43,576 44.0 56.0 9 70.9 (Z) 4Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,091 0.8 333 70.6 1.5 20 59 72 217,694 98.9 1.1 870 0.1 5 27Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,404 (X) 644 34.8 1.2 65 101 4 5,793 47.8 52.2 7 70.4 – 5Licking. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,181 0.9 1,482 47.4 5.9 237 160 106 71,338 37.3 62.7 20 52.3 (Z) 14

Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,284 1.0 1,055 41.5 11.5 225 213 49 46,417 56.7 43.3 7 95.3 – 3Lorain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,312 0.6 975 52.5 8.6 162 166 98 100,294 86.8 13.2 426 0.2 (Z) 39Lucas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,339 0.1 405 62.5 12.1 78 192 41 102,351 92.9 7.1 728 1.3 1 90Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,427 2.4 730 37.8 22.5 246 337 61 83,248 76.8 23.2 3 94.3 (Z) 2Mahoning . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,379 0.1 652 45.1 2.6 77 117 28 42,179 45.8 54.2 7 16.0 (Z) 6

Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,598 0.4 520 29.8 23.3 206 395 48 91,544 74.3 25.7 11 62.3 (Z) 7Medina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,093 0.2 1,188 59.6 4.3 123 103 40 34,069 59.0 41.0 16 59.4 1 7Meigs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,511 10.8 552 24.8 5.6 90 164 19 34,661 75.6 24.4 6 73.4 – 2Mercer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,119 4.2 1,268 33.0 10.6 269 212 277 218,748 12.7 87.3 9 74.2 (Z) 3Miami . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,445 0.2 1,071 53.1 10.0 184 172 40 37,170 78.4 21.6 16 81.0 1 11

Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,839 (X) 654 17.6 4.1 107 164 7 10,898 19.8 80.2 10 36.9 (Z) 1Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,120 (Z) 832 63.5 5.8 102 122 33 39,591 87.5 12.5 257 47.5 1 96Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,132 2.3 508 16.3 6.5 100 197 9 18,293 26.3 73.7 5 65.4 (Z) 1Morrow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,145 2.5 863 41.1 9.7 179 207 36 41,422 65.4 34.6 3 91.9 (Z) 1Muskingum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 668 (Z) 1,222 30.9 6.6 193 158 26 20,961 38.6 61.4 21 55.2 (Z) 10

Noble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –502 (X) 602 22.4 4.8 107 178 5 8,754 40.1 59.9 1 26.2 – 1Ottawa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,735 0.5 517 39.1 11.4 114 221 24 46,242 92.0 8.0 52 16.1 (Z) (Z)Paulding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,955 4.6 651 32.4 22.6 238 366 67 102,416 52.0 48.0 4 50.3 – 2Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,238 1.5 639 36.0 3.9 92 144 14 22,277 60.1 39.9 3 30.2 – 1Pickaway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,377 1.2 791 42.5 20.0 275 348 59 74,062 82.1 17.9 79 19.3 2 4

Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,558 (X) 505 28.1 4.4 84 166 8 16,414 55.6 44.4 5 65.6 (Z) 2Portage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,500 0.3 962 56.2 2.9 97 101 25 25,670 66.5 33.5 18 73.3 (Z) 9Preble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,653 0.5 1,065 45.2 10.0 198 186 58 54,610 55.7 44.3 5 93.4 – 3Putnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,959 5.0 1,348 25.5 12.9 332 246 88 65,524 61.4 38.6 5 60.9 (Z) 3Richland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,210 0.1 1,086 37.0 4.9 159 146 46 42,683 42.6 57.4 19 49.7 (Z) 16

Ross . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,200 0.2 952 31.7 12.1 247 259 37 39,357 77.4 22.6 41 82.5 (Z) 8Sandusky . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,228 0.8 802 38.8 15.1 196 245 51 63,647 88.9 11.1 16 17.7 (Z) 6Scioto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,319 (X) 709 36.7 4.2 96 136 15 20,969 40.3 59.7 18 23.8 (Z) 12Seneca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,944 0.4 1,185 29.4 14.0 280 237 56 46,919 78.5 21.5 6 52.8 (Z) 3Shelby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,744 0.7 1,022 31.2 10.2 207 203 65 63,848 41.5 58.5 7 58.2 (Z) 4

Stark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,066 0.2 1,337 53.9 4.2 145 109 69 51,642 41.1 58.9 52 89.0 1 33Summit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,234 (Z) 377 73.7 1.9 21 56 11 29,294 90.6 9.4 73 27.7 1 52Trumbull. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,604 0.1 1,016 40.4 4.2 126 124 31 30,087 50.7 49.3 212 2.2 (Z) 16Tuscarawas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,871 1.0 1,076 32.4 5.5 160 148 52 48,394 19.3 80.7 30 91.6 (Z) 18Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,566 0.6 1,021 45.2 14.5 256 251 89 86,944 46.3 53.7 7 82.2 (Z) 2

Van Wert . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 762 0.2 681 28.6 25.0 250 367 59 86,721 81.7 18.3 6 52.9 (Z) 4Vinton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –957 (X) 237 25.3 5.9 44 184 4 16,004 78.9 21.1 1 95.6 – (Z)Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,343 0.1 1,036 63.3 5.9 126 122 30 28,590 88.3 11.7 20 91.3 1 17Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,439 0.4 952 22.7 4.2 141 149 18 19,380 42.0 58.0 998 0.9 (Z) 8

Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,694 1.5 1,894 40.5 5.9 267 141 159 83,758 20.3 79.7 15 90.9 (Z) 7Williams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,896 1.5 1,099 37.9 9.8 213 194 45 40,588 58.6 41.4 5 94.0 (Z) 3Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,422 0.7 1,066 37.5 19.0 306 287 81 76,151 76.2 23.8 11 47.2 (Z) 6Wyandot . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,168 5.6 607 31.6 21.3 201 331 72 118,853 35.7 64.3 6 79.3 (Z) 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

OKLAHOMA . . . . . . . . . . . . 796,487 1.0 83,300 24.2 18.0 33,662 404 4,456 53,498 18.4 81.6 2,020 51.0 718 675

Adair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,149 10.9 1,130 27.9 8.1 238 211 80 71,183 1.7 98.3 9 10.0 1 6Alfalfa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,867 18.0 666 8.1 37.8 461 693 71 107,324 21.2 78.8 8 64.1 1 2Atoka . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,926 5.5 1,206 18.3 14.5 492 408 22 18,517 7.9 92.1 76 0.4 (Z) 74Beaver. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,519 6.7 960 5.7 42.3 1,019 1,061 120 124,834 6.4 93.6 44 99.5 37 1Beckham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 494 0.1 1,012 15.4 25.4 533 527 35 34,762 24.5 75.5 10 87.9 4 4

Blaine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,925 10.5 825 9.6 36.0 537 651 77 93,594 24.3 75.7 9 66.6 3 2Bryan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,142 (X) 1,673 24.0 12.9 458 274 55 32,581 21.8 78.2 18 15.5 4 5Caddo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,311 8.5 1,504 13.0 27.7 711 473 89 59,106 37.4 62.6 63 71.6 41 9Canadian . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,272 (X) 1,360 29.3 21.2 501 368 85 62,352 26.6 73.4 13 77.7 3 4Carter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,363 0.1 1,353 24.3 13.5 431 318 24 17,625 7.3 92.7 180 83.5 1 28

Cherokee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44,362 7.5 1,221 29.1 7.4 221 181 94 77,043 70.2 29.8 11 9.7 3 6Choctaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,620 5.0 1,095 18.9 15.5 337 308 29 26,501 10.3 89.7 15 8.3 (Z) 8Cimarron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,805 24.0 545 4.0 56.3 1,122 2,058 182 334,022 9.2 90.8 81 98.9 78 (Z)Cleveland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,239 (X) 1,294 50.5 5.3 165 128 13 10,218 31.7 68.3 27 39.2 (Z) 25Coal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,277 (X) 617 13.8 19.4 263 426 14 22,569 6.4 93.6 6 6.4 (Z) 4

Comanche . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,303 0.4 1,188 23.7 16.8 425 358 33 27,687 25.2 74.8 20 14.0 2 16Cotton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,003 24.0 488 6.8 34.0 334 685 38 77,641 21.7 78.3 3 36.7 1 1Craig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,112 (X) 1,289 24.0 12.9 436 338 58 44,717 12.6 87.4 3 18.9 – (Z)Creek . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,242 (X) 1,838 36.0 6.9 366 199 17 9,419 19.6 80.4 23 67.4 (Z) 8Custer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,589 1.2 802 16.5 34.7 545 679 44 55,433 33.1 66.9 10 66.7 4 4

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,335 14.2 1,393 26.7 8.5 282 203 132 94,478 2.9 97.1 6 46.8 – 2Dewey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,302 7.7 774 7.6 35.7 584 755 26 33,769 25.9 74.1 7 83.9 2 (Z)Ellis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,557 7.5 727 5.6 37.7 673 925 43 58,550 9.7 90.3 46 99.5 43 1Garfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,421 0.9 1,083 17.9 30.8 632 584 75 68,985 43.7 56.3 6 69.8 (Z) 3Garvin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,880 0.7 1,637 25.0 13.9 469 286 38 23,395 22.8 77.2 14 73.7 1 5

Grady . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,164 2.3 1,804 25.2 17.0 602 333 96 53,011 14.0 86.0 23 55.8 13 2Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,965 10.5 744 10.2 42.7 595 799 58 78,022 54.8 45.2 4 77.5 (Z) 1Greer. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,153 16.3 515 8.3 31.7 325 631 18 34,839 41.3 58.7 7 76.5 4 2Harmon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,515 30.4 397 5.8 41.6 296 747 27 69,038 39.0 61.0 21 97.5 19 1Harper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,014 39.6 517 5.2 44.5 601 1,163 142 274,752 2.3 97.7 15 53.3 11 1

Haskell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,270 9.5 901 20.1 15.4 275 305 67 73,991 2.5 97.5 5 11.4 (Z) 1Hughes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,025 23.2 955 14.3 18.3 374 392 55 57,241 4.1 95.9 9 26.9 4 2Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,324 3.8 732 17.1 33.3 454 620 68 92,667 54.1 45.9 105 9.2 97 5Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,200 23.2 483 11.8 34.6 407 843 50 103,685 7.6 92.4 9 16.2 (Z) 6Johnston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,178 5.7 682 20.7 16.0 326 478 26 38,428 7.2 92.8 11 13.4 4 1

Kay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,998 (X) 1,003 21.7 26.1 480 478 47 47,302 58.6 41.4 29 47.5 1 22Kingfisher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,051 6.5 1,063 12.8 29.4 553 520 88 82,965 22.7 77.3 16 64.1 4 7Kiowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,199 7.0 662 11.9 43.4 580 877 50 75,495 42.3 57.7 13 24.5 2 9Latimer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . , (X) 738 24.8 10.8 206 279 14 19,064 3.0 97.0 2 8.3 (Z) 1Le Flore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,681 10.1 1,927 31.8 8.8 411 213 169 87,790 5.1 94.9 18 10.4 3 11

Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,746 0.6 2,218 23.3 9.3 472 213 25 11,385 14.0 86.0 12 77.6 3 1Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,485 0.4 1,205 24.9 14.4 366 303 41 34,407 24.0 76.0 10 53.3 1 2Love . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,594 (X) 725 23.4 17.0 244 337 17 22,883 16.6 83.4 3 59.7 1 1McClain . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,472 1.8 1,273 36.1 12.5 307 241 35 27,379 26.8 73.2 6 63.4 2 2McCurtain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65,665 11.6 1,855 30.8 7.5 358 193 149 80,410 3.0 97.0 11 11.0 1 5

McIntosh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,139 (X) 944 21.1 11.7 266 282 18 18,601 12.1 87.9 5 6.6 – 4Major. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –90 (X) 879 13.7 31.7 509 579 72 82,397 14.1 85.9 17 99.8 8 5Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,802 (X) 477 26.2 11.9 164 344 12 24,631 33.7 66.3 4 25.7 2 2Mayes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,906 1.5 1,552 31.8 8.2 302 195 45 29,227 9.4 90.6 97 0.6 – 83Murray. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,369 1.3 525 22.3 17.7 202 385 20 38,884 4.4 95.6 19 22.0 2 13

Muskogee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,525 0.7 1,740 32.6 7.7 352 202 36 20,794 30.9 69.1 110 2.6 7 16Noble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –10,587 (X) 776 13.3 26.9 395 509 35 44,526 38.5 61.5 5 45.7 (Z) 2Nowata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,346 (X) 887 21.2 16.0 311 351 29 32,893 6.5 93.5 6 44.9 (Z) 1Okfuskee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,172 6.2 901 18.5 15.3 290 322 24 26,335 6.8 93.2 4 36.0 (Z) 2Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,193 (Z) 1,268 52.1 5.3 172 136 21 16,859 57.7 42.3 90 26.2 3 74

Okmulgee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,179 (X) 1,268 26.3 9.0 289 228 15 11,520 19.4 80.6 12 7.8 1 9Osage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,305 4.8 1,420 26.1 23.6 1,186 835 63 44,049 6.9 93.1 19 8.1 (Z) 14Ottawa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,644 6.4 1,137 32.9 7.4 226 199 71 62,727 40.3 59.7 6 78.5 – 3Pawnee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,089 (X) 826 23.2 18.0 281 340 25 29,806 9.4 90.6 16 14.0 (Z) 3Payne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,686 (X) 1,445 30.4 10.9 341 236 29 19,907 11.5 88.5 8 33.6 (Z) 4

Pittsburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,370 0.9 1,687 26.3 13.8 505 299 30 17,724 15.4 84.6 11 3.7 (Z) 7Pontotoc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,382 0.7 1,368 25.4 11.6 368 269 26 19,014 8.1 91.9 19 74.5 1 4Pottawatomie . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,859 1.6 1,663 28.0 7.5 343 206 22 13,134 21.5 78.5 16 52.8 1 6Pushmataha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,342 (X) 780 19.5 15.9 310 397 10 12,226 9.5 90.5 3 9.8 (Z) 1Roger Mills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,247 5.0 677 7.2 47.6 739 1,091 27 40,316 8.5 91.5 8 69.9 6 1

Rogers. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,001 (X) 1,803 45.7 6.3 310 172 26 14,397 17.6 82.4 79 1.2 1 64Seminole . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,400 0.8 1,167 23.5 10.9 279 239 18 15,838 13.4 86.6 24 44.2 (Z) 3Sequoyah. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,855 1.2 1,259 32.4 7.5 222 177 25 20,026 19.0 81.0 16 4.5 2 11Stephens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,969 0.3 1,359 23.5 14.8 420 309 34 25,007 9.7 90.3 14 84.4 1 1Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109,891 23.9 1,002 7.5 44.7 1,181 1,179 663 661,186 8.1 91.9 279 99.9 254 6




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

OKLAHOMA—Con.

Tillman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,153 21.4 592 9.1 38.7 485 818 53 90,319 43.0 57.0 10 73.6 7 1Tulsa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,077 (Z) 1,146 54.5 5.4 151 132 23 20,447 73.4 26.6 23 38.1 8 7Wagoner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 683 0.2 1,217 40.7 8.2 260 214 35 29,105 64.4 35.6 20 0.8 (Z) 18Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,553 0.3 847 39.2 10.2 223 263 20 23,289 20.8 79.2 3 35.3 (Z) 1Washita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,522 5.8 1,006 13.3 34.3 568 565 69 68,997 29.3 70.7 12 62.8 7 3Woods . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,838 3.2 761 9.6 41.5 816 1,073 56 72,997 16.1 83.9 6 99.2 2 2Woodward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,899 4.1 842 13.2 34.6 726 863 67 79,885 5.5 94.5 17 95.8 5 6

OREGON . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,172,970 1.3 40,033 62.5 10.2 17,080 427 3,195 79,822 68.7 31.3 6,930 14.3 6,080 566

Baker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,878 (X) 703 34.7 27.0 870 1,237 47 67,454 23.9 76.1 (6) (NA) 468 3Benton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,098 0.9 912 71.2 5.5 130 143 85 92,747 87.7 12.3 (6) (NA) 32 6Clackamas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187,625 2.2 4,676 82.2 1.3 215 46 332 71,002 82.3 17.7 (6) (NA) 118 174Clatsop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,516 0.2 248 55.2 2.4 22 90 7 29,746 18.3 81.7 (6) (NA) 3 9Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,716 2.4 878 72.2 1.6 62 71 29 32,756 82.5 17.5 (6) (NA) 11 6

Coos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,452 1.6 748 47.7 6.4 144 193 22 29,357 38.0 62.0 (6) (NA) 35 8Crook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –8,037 (X) 685 56.1 19.9 938 1,369 33 47,990 30.8 69.2 (6) (NA) 224 1Curry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 330 0.1 207 43.5 18.4 70 340 12 56,681 66.2 33.8 (6) (NA) 10 3Deschutes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –10,215 (X) 1,632 78.6 2.8 138 85 21 12,857 42.7 57.3 (6) (NA) 107 22Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,115 0.5 2,110 53.7 7.5 390 185 37 17,615 36.5 63.5 (6) (NA) 112 6

Gilliam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,386 (X) 156 5.8 73.1 643 4,122 17 111,346 70.2 29.8 (6) (NA) 9 (Z)Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,623 2.9 394 26.1 39.1 892 2,265 17 43,335 17.9 82.1 (6) (NA) 185 3Harney. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,586 9.5 524 22.3 43.7 1,575 3,006 36 67,845 20.6 79.4 (6) (NA) 464 2Hood River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,562 9.1 562 70.5 0.5 29 52 60 106,048 97.4 2.6 (6) (NA) 49 3Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,630 0.6 1,953 70.3 3.6 252 129 54 27,748 69.8 30.2 (6) (NA) 202 39

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –12,405 (X) 428 34.1 24.3 701 1,639 41 95,292 84.4 15.6 (6) (NA) 137 3Josephine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,586 0.7 728 78.4 1.0 32 44 13 17,867 49.2 50.8 (6) (NA) 52 5Klamath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,082 2.0 1,228 42.8 19.5 703 572 105 85,568 56.9 43.1 (6) (NA) 708 10Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,116 1.7 462 19.0 40.0 748 1,619 57 123,351 47.3 52.7 (6) (NA) 662 2Lane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,522 0.4 2,577 71.8 3.6 235 91 88 34,080 66.7 33.3 (6) (NA) 80 58

Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 791 0.1 374 64.2 3.5 33 88 6 16,874 53.5 46.5 (6) (NA) 1 5Linn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,204 2.9 2,346 63.8 7.7 386 164 152 64,713 72.7 27.3 (6) (NA) 78 12Malheur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,183 10.9 1,272 34.7 21.1 1,175 924 232 182,134 47.9 52.1 (6) (NA) 1,019 6Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199,715 2.9 3,203 72.0 4.3 341 106 431 134,457 84.6 15.4 (6) (NA) 133 86Morrow . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,140 24.1 375 21.9 54.7 1,125 2,999 237 632,816 43.9 56.1 (6) (NA) 218 5

Multnomah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,187 0.1 710 83.2 1.5 34 48 68 95,144 97.8 2.2 (6) (NA) 29 11Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,376 5.6 1,324 64.4 5.2 169 128 90 67,663 74.9 25.1 (6) (NA) 41 5Sherman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –10,148 (X) 210 10.5 65.2 508 2,418 15 71,357 88.9 11.1 (6) (NA) 9 (Z)Tillamook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,074 8.1 333 37.8 3.3 40 119 89 267,111 1.1 98.9 (6) (NA) 3 4Umatilla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57,635 4.1 1,648 53.9 23.1 1,331 808 206 124,803 76.2 23.8 (6) (NA) 306 25

Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,368 1.2 993 49.3 19.4 478 482 48 48,352 63.7 36.3 (6) (NA) 194 4Wallowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,509 3.0 503 37.8 32.4 518 1,030 21 41,302 34.1 65.9 (6) (NA) 152 1Wasco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,313 2.3 538 34.0 30.5 1,087 2,020 43 80,340 77.9 22.1 (6) (NA) 65 2Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 128,167 0.8 1,900 74.4 2.6 131 69 232 122,011 93.4 6.6 (6) (NA) 69 26Wheeler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,337 16.8 164 17.7 47.6 738 4,501 6 38,152 9.9 90.1 (6) (NA) 32 (Z)Yamhill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132,481 8.8 2,329 73.8 4.2 196 84 209 89,548 82.4 17.6 (6) (NA) 59 11

PENNSYLVANIA. . . . . . . . . . 1,268,303 0.4 58,105 37.8 4.2 7,745 133 4,257 73,263 31.0 69.0 9,950 6.7 14 1,460

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,933 2.1 1,261 49.2 6.5 181 144 140 110,871 38.2 61.8 (6) (NA) 2 10Allegheny . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,453 (Z) 464 61.6 1.3 34 73 9 20,239 87.3 12.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 219Armstrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,366 2.2 739 21.5 6.6 131 177 46 62,687 76.1 23.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 5Beaver. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,478 0.1 645 39.1 1.6 63 97 11 16,788 36.2 63.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 21Bedford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,524 2.0 1,093 22.3 5.9 193 176 57 52,595 15.3 84.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 8

Berks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79,360 0.9 1,791 48.4 4.5 216 120 287 160,233 41.8 58.2 (6) (NA) 1 32Blair . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,728 0.8 504 31.0 6.7 86 170 63 125,698 9.4 90.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 15Bradford. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,745 2.0 1,495 22.3 8.4 302 202 100 66,753 7.2 92.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Bucks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,801 0.1 917 70.1 3.4 77 84 62 67,219 80.7 19.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 55Butler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,131 0.2 1,174 33.8 3.5 144 123 32 27,647 51.1 48.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 9

Cambria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,616 0.3 634 34.4 5.8 88 139 18 28,773 43.1 56.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 15Cameron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –116 (X) 35 17.1 – 4 122 (Z) 9,571 54.9 45.1 (6) (NA) – (Z)Carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,389 0.3 206 49.5 2.4 19 93 8 39,549 87.0 13.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 24Centre . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,192 0.5 1,213 37.6 4.2 165 136 53 44,011 27.8 72.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 23Chester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150,264 0.8 1,918 59.6 2.9 168 88 377 196,440 76.5 23.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 42

Clarion. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,926 0.8 591 18.3 6.9 109 184 18 29,843 27.7 72.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Clearfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,396 0.2 468 33.5 3.2 61 130 11 23,910 45.5 54.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 6Clinton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,797 1.8 420 36.0 4.5 53 127 27 63,595 22.7 77.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 5Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,803 1.1 884 32.6 4.6 124 140 35 39,732 55.0 45.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 6Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,450 0.8 1,416 29.1 4.8 222 157 58 41,025 21.4 78.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 5

Cumberland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,787 0.4 1,116 38.0 4.6 143 128 90 80,351 19.2 80.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 24Dauphin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,846 0.2 852 47.2 2.9 95 111 46 54,562 21.2 78.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 31Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,336 (Z) 76 82.9 – (D) (D) 7 94,132 98.7 1.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 28Elk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,967 (X) 226 38.9 0.4 22 98 3 12,757 36.3 63.7 (6) (NA) – 6Erie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,147 0.3 1,283 37.7 3.9 166 129 64 50,187 65.2 34.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 43




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

PENNSYLVANIA—Con.

Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,336 0.3 978 36.2 3.7 125 128 21 21,824 41.2 58.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 40Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –113 (X) 59 40.7 1.7 6 96 1 11,288 32.9 67.1 (6) (NA) – (Z)Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59,735 2.3 1,418 31.1 6.1 245 173 218 153,986 10.6 89.4 (6) (NA) 1 8Fulton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,229 3.4 561 18.0 6.2 101 179 26 45,770 10.4 89.6 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,113 0.2 881 19.4 3.5 142 161 7 8,169 30.9 69.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Huntingdon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,983 2.7 848 28.4 6.1 143 169 43 51,238 14.4 85.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,576 1.3 903 25.2 5.4 157 174 56 62,004 65.3 34.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,754 0.6 548 22.4 4.0 87 159 12 22,036 31.5 68.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Juniata . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,098 7.5 644 34.9 3.1 86 134 68 104,998 6.8 93.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Lackawanna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,873 (Z) 289 33.2 1.4 33 114 14 46,820 65.7 34.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 36

Lancaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 217,248 1.8 5,293 44.5 1.2 412 78 798 150,831 11.1 88.9 (6) (NA) 2 71Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,515 0.2 703 35.3 3.8 87 124 22 31,808 24.5 75.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 10Lebanon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,558 2.8 1,104 46.4 1.5 125 113 191 173,101 9.0 91.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Lehigh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,974 0.1 618 62.1 5.5 91 148 50 80,694 73.0 27.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 29Luzerne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,219 0.1 548 40.5 3.5 73 134 22 40,887 81.0 19.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 21

Lycoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,475 0.8 1,323 30.7 3.3 177 134 49 37,187 32.9 67.1 (6) (NA) 1 11McKean . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,588 0.3 265 30.6 4.9 42 157 5 18,083 21.8 78.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 7Mercer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,592 0.9 1,239 28.1 3.2 164 133 44 35,300 31.9 68.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 13Mifflin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,581 2.6 752 29.8 2.8 90 120 55 73,787 8.6 91.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,625 0.1 324 52.8 2.5 33 102 7 20,306 71.2 28.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 7

Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,624 (Z) 729 67.6 1.6 48 66 35 48,608 71.5 28.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 65Montour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,544 1.3 304 29.6 4.6 40 131 27 90,178 71.2 28.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Northampton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,104 0.1 487 56.3 9.9 78 159 22 44,871 63.2 36.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 15Northumberland. . . . . . . . . . . . 15,781 1.2 719 39.9 6.0 119 166 99 138,008 26.8 73.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 11Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,936 7.5 752 27.0 5.3 129 172 70 92,783 13.3 86.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Philadelphia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150 (Z) 9 88.9 – (D) (D) (Z) 40,333 100.0 – (6) (NA) – 294Pike . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 693 0.1 51 37.3 11.8 10 198 2 35,216 70.3 29.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Potter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,113 5.2 343 16.3 10.5 94 275 26 77,090 35.4 64.6 (6) (NA) – 1Schuylkill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,536 0.6 838 43.2 5.4 111 132 70 83,878 45.0 55.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 26Snyder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,242 4.6 784 35.6 3.8 100 128 81 102,807 9.6 90.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 2

Somerset . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,654 2.5 1,194 22.0 7.3 223 187 66 55,112 13.5 86.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 32Sullivan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 448 0.7 170 18.8 7.1 31 183 7 41,529 10.2 89.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Susquehanna . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,644 1.5 1,116 28.9 5.6 189 170 43 38,659 6.5 93.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Tioga. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,966 1.8 973 13.9 7.9 200 206 49 49,959 13.1 86.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,034 2.6 521 27.4 4.0 69 133 55 105,597 10.2 89.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 4

Venango . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,876 0.2 473 30.9 4.0 65 136 8 16,463 33.2 66.8 (6) (NA) – 7Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,005 0.6 499 27.5 4.2 78 156 15 30,347 14.1 85.9 (6) (NA) – 5Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,497 0.1 2,506 41.1 2.0 261 104 30 12,038 45.7 54.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 7Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,943 0.6 661 20.3 5.0 113 171 21 32,487 14.3 85.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Westmoreland . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,588 0.1 1,353 36.7 2.4 151 112 35 26,211 44.1 55.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 40Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,165 1.1 358 21.5 5.3 62 173 12 34,651 21.7 78.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 1York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,416 0.4 2,546 61.5 3.9 285 112 148 57,985 38.1 61.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 27

RHODE ISLAND. . . . . . . . . . 18,978 0.1 858 59.8 1.3 61 71 56 64,739 84.9 15.1 429 6.7 3 119

Bristol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 449 0.1 37 73.0 – 1 34 4 100,135 99.1 0.9 3 29.2 (Z) 3Kent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 533 (Z) 100 63.0 1.0 8 78 4 37,550 90.1 9.9 3 79.4 (Z) 1Newport . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,386 0.2 166 63.3 1.2 11 65 15 90,916 87.3 12.7 10 13.7 (Z) 9Providence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,126 (Z) 290 59.3 0.7 17 58 12 40,848 70.6 29.4 395 2.4 (Z) 96Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,484 0.3 265 55.1 2.3 25 93 21 79,804 87.7 12.3 17 81.3 3 11

SOUTH CAROLINA . . . . . . . 488,366 0.5 24,541 41.7 8.3 4,846 197 1,490 60,705 39.8 60.2 7,170 4.6 267 566

Abbeville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,442 1.7 538 35.1 8.7 95 177 11 20,734 25.5 74.5 5 13.8 (Z) 3Aiken. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,941 0.6 929 43.5 4.6 144 155 50 54,306 15.8 84.2 258 4.9 4 19Allendale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,106 3.7 156 20.5 24.4 108 690 10 66,532 80.2 19.8 18 53.2 14 1Anderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,419 0.4 1,644 49.9 3.5 177 108 37 22,534 40.3 59.7 123 0.3 2 20Bamberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,936 4.2 340 17.9 16.8 105 310 15 44,297 67.8 32.2 13 47.5 12 1

Barnwell. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,768 1.6 370 33.2 10.8 85 230 7 19,103 66.4 33.6 17 44.9 12 3Beaufort . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,094 0.1 116 61.2 12.1 44 383 10 85,181 96.0 4.0 30 88.6 14 14Berkeley. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,996 0.6 398 56.3 5.3 57 143 26 65,241 95.8 4.2 649 1.2 1 65Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,938 4.4 281 27.0 19.9 95 337 12 41,214 68.8 31.2 108 1.8 16 1Charleston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,935 0.1 417 64.5 5.3 48 114 18 43,329 88.5 11.5 14 79.7 4 6

Cherokee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,988 0.4 430 39.3 4.2 64 149 24 55,791 7.9 92.1 16 2.8 2 12Chester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,054 1.0 430 30.2 8.4 97 226 18 40,877 8.6 91.4 6 28.1 1 4Chesterfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,995 6.5 595 27.6 10.3 129 216 62 104,903 12.4 87.6 10 14.5 2 6Clarendon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,681 3.7 390 31.5 20.3 148 379 62 158,000 45.6 54.4 13 61.0 10 2Colleton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,307 0.7 495 36.8 10.3 137 278 13 26,661 78.2 21.8 8 55.8 1 2

Darlington. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,813 1.3 361 33.0 18.8 161 447 40 109,637 47.7 52.3 829 1.4 4 6Dillon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,355 2.6 197 15.7 27.9 112 570 69 351,508 32.9 67.1 6 87.3 1 5Dorchester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,052 0.9 365 51.0 5.8 58 158 13 34,685 20.8 79.2 58 8.1 1 13Edgefield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,868 2.7 325 35.1 11.4 74 229 49 149,397 91.8 8.2 14 0.8 10 4Fairfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,940 1.2 237 33.3 13.5 56 238 16 68,806 4.6 95.4 674 0.1 (Z) 2




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

SOUTH CAROLINA—Con.

Florence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,012 (Z) 612 37.3 13.7 171 280 35 57,279 84.9 15.1 58 35.8 2 15Georgetown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,121 0.4 226 44.7 13.3 55 242 24 105,938 91.8 8.2 55 16.3 6 7Greenville. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,732 0.1 909 56.9 3.2 87 96 18 19,971 81.9 18.1 56 5.4 4 48Greenwood. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,540 0.5 501 43.3 5.2 81 161 6 11,415 21.2 78.8 16 9.3 1 13Hampton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,997 1.9 248 19.4 23.0 128 516 6 24,907 89.3 10.7 19 44.3 6 12

Horry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,721 (X) 988 40.9 8.9 188 191 54 55,112 70.8 29.2 157 11.6 19 30Jasper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,573 0.6 163 37.4 12.9 79 485 9 52,423 96.5 3.5 4 100.0 3 1Kershaw. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,949 1.0 479 47.0 5.6 70 146 84 176,357 2.5 97.5 22 25.8 1 7Lancaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,590 1.7 637 43.5 4.6 81 128 46 71,758 3.6 96.4 27 2.9 (Z) 12Laurens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,023 1.6 931 38.8 6.6 143 153 16 16,808 13.2 86.8 8 12.1 2 5

Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,358 9.2 324 25.3 18.2 123 378 34 103,935 30.9 69.1 9 55.7 4 2Lexington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,741 0.5 1,086 56.4 2.8 103 95 96 88,133 36.2 63.8 268 5.6 12 44McCormick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,970 9.5 97 34.0 14.4 23 240 2 15,773 8.6 91.4 3 2.6 1 2Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,371 1.4 213 38.0 16.9 93 438 24 113,413 67.7 32.3 15 52.9 7 5Marlboro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,252 1.2 222 23.4 26.1 115 518 23 101,432 48.2 51.8 16 25.5 2 3

Newberry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,925 3.1 633 34.0 6.6 104 164 57 89,866 (NA) (NA) 8 14.6 1 6Oconee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,773 1.8 878 54.0 2.5 78 89 56 64,235 (NA) (NA) 2,576 (Z) 1 10Orangeburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,496 2.5 968 28.2 13.4 274 283 69 71,413 46.8 53.2 73 61.6 49 10Pickens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,271 0.4 622 61.3 1.3 47 75 7 10,732 78.2 21.8 34 5.6 1 29Richland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,069 (Z) 429 48.3 5.4 63 148 7 15,632 (NA) (NA) 540 1.1 5 32

Saluda. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,822 14.6 574 28.2 8.7 107 186 64 111,564 8.6 91.4 8 14.1 7 (Z)Spartanburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,442 0.2 1,412 55.7 2.3 126 90 25 17,894 64.5 35.5 61 6.6 6 48Sumter. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,480 0.8 537 42.8 12.5 136 253 55 102,693 27.7 72.3 32 79.2 11 16Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,684 0.5 299 31.8 6.0 51 170 2 5,763 (NA) (NA) 8 3.0 (Z) 4Williamsburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,175 3.3 681 27.0 15.9 206 302 28 40,593 80.9 19.1 9 95.8 (Z) 2York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,093 0.5 858 42.8 5.0 119 139 83 96,589 (NA) (NA) 217 3.9 3 15

SOUTH DAKOTA . . . . . . . . . 1,254,104 6.9 31,736 13.6 49.0 43,785 1,380 3,835 120,829 41.1 58.9 528 42.0 373 93

Aurora . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,158 27.1 401 9.5 49.1 351 875 52 129,314 22.7 77.3 1 51.7 (Z) (Z)Beadle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47,406 13.3 728 15.5 51.4 810 1,112 97 133,773 36.6 63.4 12 78.8 9 2Bennett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,350 26.6 231 2.6 71.4 727 3,148 23 100,619 27.5 72.5 9 96.6 8 (Z)Bon Homme . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,085 10.7 665 11.0 39.8 345 518 67 100,095 36.0 64.0 6 33.6 5 (Z)Brookings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,110 4.4 962 22.6 28.3 418 435 98 101,449 43.8 56.2 15 95.9 9 5

Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47,355 4.8 1,155 18.1 46.4 1,155 1,000 169 146,469 66.0 34.0 5 26.8 1 3Brule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,738 15.2 365 9.6 60.0 447 1,225 51 139,627 24.2 75.8 3 10.1 1 1Buffalo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,465 15.7 73 4.1 74.0 285 3,903 13 181,068 15.3 84.7 4 15.9 4 –Butte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,672 5.8 639 12.2 46.9 1,262 1,976 57 88,856 21.9 78.1 131 2.4 129 1Campbell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,147 44.9 293 6.8 60.8 391 1,335 25 86,519 41.7 58.3 4 38.3 3 (Z)

Charles Mix . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,397 20.8 755 10.6 52.3 736 975 97 128,001 37.9 62.1 14 25.3 11 3Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,333 49.8 588 11.1 47.4 526 894 102 174,250 31.1 68.9 5 87.4 4 1Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,908 2.6 536 15.1 52.4 373 695 75 140,047 87.6 12.4 7 93.9 5 2Codington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,875 4.7 694 25.8 32.4 387 557 74 106,069 46.4 53.6 8 90.8 3 4Corson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,654 37.4 344 4.1 80.5 1,389 4,038 38 109,331 10.6 89.4 2 34.2 1 (Z)

Custer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,801 (X) 303 15.5 42.6 589 1,944 12 41,155 7.5 92.5 5 20.5 4 (Z)Davison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,004 1.6 481 26.0 31.6 279 579 43 88,861 43.7 56.3 4 15.8 1 3Day. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,206 20.2 704 9.7 39.2 531 754 57 80,614 62.8 37.2 1 77.1 1 (Z)Deuel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,285 19.7 583 13.0 34.8 328 562 66 112,751 34.0 66.0 2 80.5 1 (Z)Dewey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,412 6.7 358 3.6 72.9 1,368 3,821 29 80,810 4.4 95.6 2 23.3 (Z) 1

Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,573 32.9 394 14.5 44.4 237 601 62 157,792 22.8 77.2 2 82.6 1 –Edmunds . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,706 44.9 386 7.3 62.2 585 1,516 75 194,440 41.6 58.4 1 47.1 – –Fall River . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,257 5.5 278 9.4 68.0 982 3,533 51 184,540 4.5 95.5 38 3.5 36 1Faulk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,756 55.9 265 3.8 77.0 535 2,018 64 240,177 52.7 47.3 1 40.3 (Z) (Z)Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,559 17.1 548 13.0 38.1 350 639 82 149,956 47.8 52.2 9 44.9 4 1

Gregory . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,322 21.6 587 8.9 58.4 651 1,109 44 74,365 22.9 77.1 2 46.6 1 1Haakon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,758 38.3 268 3.0 77.6 1,222 4,558 39 145,041 15.8 84.2 3 54.3 1 1Hamlin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,058 22.5 451 17.3 41.2 307 681 58 128,818 62.3 37.7 4 94.3 4 (Z)Hand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,446 44.3 480 7.1 67.1 868 1,809 77 160,294 34.2 65.8 2 66.3 1 (Z)Hanson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,921 23.5 319 17.6 48.6 249 780 49 152,241 48.8 51.2 1 31.2 (Z) –

Harding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,878 20.8 223 4.0 87.4 1,674 7,507 31 137,507 (NA) (NA) 1 33.6 (Z) (Z)Hughes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,443 2.5 258 14.3 53.1 368 1,425 21 82,992 49.0 51.0 23 20.7 18 4Hutchinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,486 20.4 768 12.4 48.4 506 658 99 128,954 44.7 55.3 3 71.0 2 (Z)Hyde . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,974 31.7 187 4.8 70.6 469 2,507 23 122,032 21.2 78.8 1 54.0 (Z) –Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,414 16.7 308 2.9 76.9 1,191 3,866 23 76,156 8.7 91.3 1 45.1 (Z) (Z)

Jerauld . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,480 17.2 272 8.1 47.1 336 1,237 34 125,283 28.7 71.3 2 72.5 1 (Z)Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,958 25.8 163 3.7 74.8 516 3,169 19 113,798 25.9 74.1 1 22.7 (Z) (Z)Kingsbury. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,958 31.7 599 14.9 48.1 519 866 86 143,913 45.1 54.9 3 89.0 1 2Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,793 11.9 513 18.7 42.3 325 634 67 129,663 54.4 45.6 2 84.2 1 1Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,877 0.7 239 18.4 28.5 141 589 10 41,803 9.9 90.1 8 53.5 2 3

Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,158 5.9 841 27.2 25.3 310 368 88 104,599 62.8 37.2 3 85.8 1 2Lyman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,416 19.1 420 7.6 64.3 885 2,108 42 100,431 33.5 66.5 3 22.0 1 (Z)McCook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,002 24.4 539 17.8 44.2 345 640 73 134,933 57.6 42.4 1 71.0 (Z) 1McPherson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,302 48.4 413 5.3 62.2 537 1,300 60 146,208 10.8 89.2 2 58.4 1 (Z)Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,047 39.3 529 10.4 52.7 525 992 101 191,830 35.9 64.1 1 61.2 (Z) (Z)




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

SOUTH DAKOTA—Con.

Meade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,902 4.2 895 12.4 58.3 2,229 2,490 66 74,160 9.5 90.5 6 41.3 3 1Mellette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,825 32.4 200 4.5 78.5 660 3,302 31 153,055 (NA) (NA) 1 35.2 (Z) (Z)Miner. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,629 38.0 370 7.6 44.9 291 787 41 111,143 48.3 51.7 1 43.1 – (Z)Minnehaha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,217 0.4 1,209 32.1 24.2 422 349 120 99,184 56.0 44.0 21 36.7 2 16Moody . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,492 28.7 580 21.6 30.5 283 488 78 134,267 49.6 50.4 4 69.5 2 1

Pennington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,546 0.6 696 18.8 41.8 1,210 1,738 43 61,981 24.5 75.5 20 83.5 3 13Perkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,664 24.8 452 2.9 81.6 1,782 3,942 46 100,781 6.3 93.7 1 47.9 (Z) (Z)Potter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,368 29.0 256 9.4 57.4 453 1,769 29 113,719 57.4 42.6 3 42.6 2 (Z)Roberts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,544 20.4 936 12.7 39.9 593 633 88 94,020 64.1 35.9 3 85.5 2 (Z)Sanborn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,143 38.1 394 8.1 46.7 380 965 43 108,350 37.5 62.5 1 53.1 (Z) (Z)

Shannon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,236 6.2 200 6.0 60.0 1,267 6,333 13 64,900 6.6 93.4 1 83.6 – (Z)Spink. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44,899 35.2 682 8.1 61.9 911 1,336 134 196,792 61.3 38.7 17 88.8 16 (Z)Stanley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,397 15.1 166 8.4 72.9 866 5,219 18 107,000 33.6 66.4 1 53.0 (Z) (Z)Sully . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,136 63.6 228 5.3 68.4 573 2,515 36 157,123 72.0 28.0 12 7.0 11 (Z)Todd . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,370 3.6 249 2.8 73.5 917 3,681 27 107,410 14.7 85.3 9 89.8 8 (Z)

Tripp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,464 29.3 666 8.7 63.4 1,054 1,582 91 136,932 15.8 84.2 6 56.7 3 2Turner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,437 27.6 713 16.0 35.5 348 487 99 139,344 45.7 54.3 19 97.3 17 1Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,634 10.0 522 18.0 37.7 277 530 80 153,056 61.1 38.9 22 98.1 20 1Walworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,020 9.5 299 12.0 54.8 427 1,429 31 102,415 45.9 54.1 7 9.5 1 5Yankton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,863 3.6 690 17.8 35.5 342 496 78 113,458 58.3 41.7 13 42.1 6 6Ziebach . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,017 46.2 227 4.8 79.7 1,173 5,167 21 93,709 5.7 94.3 1 38.6 (Z) –

TENNESSEE . . . . . . . . . . . . 337,443 0.2 87,595 43.6 4.3 11,682 133 2,200 25,113 48.8 51.2 10,800 3.9 22 890

Anderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,124 (X) 596 53.2 1.3 48 80 4 6,656 34.3 65.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 22Bedford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,673 2.0 1,667 42.7 5.0 219 132 86 51,366 6.6 93.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 7Benton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –212 (X) 595 37.5 3.5 78 131 5 8,718 30.5 69.5 (6) (NA) – 2Bledsoe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,076 21.7 560 27.1 6.3 93 166 26 45,796 25.7 74.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Blount . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,047 (X) 1,302 54.6 1.5 105 81 24 18,806 61.8 38.2 (6) (NA) 1 12

Bradley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,008 0.6 921 48.0 3.3 95 103 59 64,244 7.3 92.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 12Campbell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –289 (X) 419 45.1 1.7 34 82 3 8,136 33.9 66.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Cannon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,426 (X) 974 38.9 3.3 122 125 14 14,348 42.0 58.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,332 2.9 973 33.6 5.7 183 188 25 25,350 82.4 17.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Carter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,302 (X) 573 63.2 1.6 37 65 7 12,908 35.2 64.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 18

Cheatham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,884 (X) 669 38.4 2.4 72 108 8 11,299 76.8 23.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Chester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –611 (X) 512 28.1 4.9 79 154 5 9,402 66.8 33.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Claiborne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,722 0.7 1,388 47.6 2.2 135 97 17 12,483 32.7 67.3 (6) (NA) – 3Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –150 (X) 514 37.7 5.3 70 137 21 40,362 10.5 89.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Cocke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,184 0.4 880 43.4 1.1 73 83 15 16,527 44.1 55.9 (6) (NA) 1 4

Coffee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,322 0.6 1,069 48.0 5.8 145 136 30 28,210 41.6 58.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 5Crockett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,129 3.9 420 37.4 16.2 145 345 35 83,595 95.6 4.4 (6) (NA) 1 2Cumberland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,711 2.7 854 41.7 4.7 110 129 36 41,779 15.6 84.4 (6) (NA) 2 4Davidson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –325 (X) 560 53.6 2.5 51 90 11 19,579 79.8 20.2 (6) (NA) 1 120Decatur . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,267 (X) 438 19.4 6.4 88 202 4 9,932 35.2 64.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

DeKalb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,833 3.1 887 44.6 3.2 100 113 37 41,879 85.2 14.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Dickson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,952 (X) 1,448 40.0 2.0 158 109 12 8,347 36.9 63.1 (6) (NA) – 4Dyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,372 1.7 534 36.0 18.5 213 398 45 84,434 92.2 7.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 6Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,657 1.9 894 34.7 11.2 274 306 38 42,544 77.1 22.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Fentress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,329 4.7 573 41.2 5.4 80 139 33 57,222 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,194 5.1 1,135 48.5 5.8 153 135 59 52,110 42.0 58.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Gibson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,438 2.4 1,092 42.4 11.5 311 285 64 58,984 85.5 14.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 7Giles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,613 (X) 1,922 30.1 3.9 271 141 29 14,925 17.6 82.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Grainger. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –749 (X) 1,216 46.3 1.2 103 85 16 13,308 56.0 44.0 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,377 0.5 3,367 56.9 1.2 247 73 55 16,285 21.8 78.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 8

Grundy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,691 8.6 409 49.1 2.4 42 103 42 103,090 20.5 79.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Hamblen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,126 (X) 736 55.6 1.8 58 79 20 27,785 45.4 54.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 9Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –903 (X) 700 54.1 2.7 63 91 11 16,009 20.3 79.7 (6) (NA) 1 61Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,192 (X) 568 38.4 2.5 64 113 6 11,118 38.6 61.4 (6) (NA) – (Z)Hardeman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,712 0.8 602 23.3 10.8 154 255 13 21,249 77.0 23.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 3

Hardin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,062 0.3 634 31.9 6.9 112 177 9 13,844 71.8 28.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Hawkins. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,167 (X) 2,014 49.4 1.3 168 83 22 10,879 48.0 52.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Haywood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,479 7.4 408 23.0 22.8 211 517 45 109,135 97.5 2.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Henderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –950 (X) 1,084 27.1 6.8 173 160 18 16,749 31.7 68.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,249 2.2 965 33.5 7.5 194 201 46 47,888 51.6 48.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 3

Hickman. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,327 (X) 756 29.4 5.7 129 170 9 11,291 28.1 71.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Houston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,624 (X) 336 26.5 4.8 49 145 5 13,485 14.4 85.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Humphreys. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,014 (X) 718 29.7 8.1 135 188 10 13,710 37.1 62.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,903 (X) 609 37.3 4.8 79 130 4 7,186 46.3 53.7 (6) (NA) – (Z)Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,666 (X) 1,311 52.6 1.3 108 82 23 17,573 16.6 83.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 3

Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,844 (X) 666 55.1 1.1 49 74 7 10,505 44.4 55.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Knox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,853 (X) 1,410 60.3 1.1 94 66 20 14,352 67.5 32.5 (6) (NA) 1 62Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,437 4.7 64 15.6 54.7 90 1,409 18 276,281 99.9 0.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Lauderdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,914 5.1 624 38.0 15.9 215 345 38 61,125 94.7 5.3 (6) (NA) 1 4Lawrence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –125 (X) 1,869 38.7 3.4 236 126 30 15,858 31.1 68.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 4




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

TENNESSEE—Con.

Lewis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,122 (X) 251 26.3 6.8 37 147 3 10,183 59.0 41.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,473 4.6 1,926 35.5 5.7 284 148 46 24,065 37.8 62.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Loudon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,167 4.0 954 56.4 2.3 83 87 51 53,069 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) (Z) 10McMinn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,324 0.4 1,204 46.3 3.1 128 106 33 27,452 9.4 90.6 (6) (NA) – 5McNairy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,053 (X) 822 23.7 5.1 134 163 9 10,807 68.9 31.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 3

Macon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,922 4.7 1,317 40.7 3.0 145 110 26 19,371 68.1 31.9 (6) (NA) – 3Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,855 0.4 740 38.6 9.7 162 219 27 36,657 80.2 19.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 15Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,682 0.6 298 35.2 8.4 51 171 14 48,510 11.1 88.9 (6) (NA) – 4Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,583 (X) 1,312 36.5 4.2 175 133 22 16,752 11.0 89.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Maury . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –360 (X) 1,754 38.4 4.7 241 137 21 11,819 25.2 74.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 12

Meigs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –688 (X) 340 30.9 4.4 49 144 6 16,594 14.9 85.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,539 (X) 955 45.2 2.6 99 104 22 22,712 11.7 88.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 6Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,955 0.1 1,090 39.8 6.6 167 153 28 25,623 69.3 30.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 21Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,806 2.5 387 27.9 7.2 63 162 10 24,907 6.5 93.5 (6) (NA) – 1Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –363 (X) 403 33.0 3.0 57 140 10 25,194 9.2 90.8 (6) (NA) – 1

Obion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,657 1.7 701 33.2 15.4 264 376 63 89,678 68.0 32.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 6Overton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 175 0.1 1,106 44.1 2.9 124 112 16 14,817 14.6 85.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Perry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,625 (X) 266 27.4 7.9 50 187 3 9,583 35.6 64.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Pickett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –551 (X) 401 45.9 2.2 42 104 11 26,309 22.9 77.1 (6) (NA) – 1Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,055 5.3 274 50.7 4.7 32 115 22 78,639 8.8 91.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Putnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,251 (X) 1,302 49.2 2.4 119 91 11 8,779 31.3 68.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 12Rhea . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,479 0.5 455 42.0 4.4 61 134 18 39,141 44.4 55.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Roane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,073 (X) 722 47.9 1.2 63 88 6 7,839 31.5 68.5 (6) (NA) – 6Robertson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,431 0.7 1,621 47.8 5.6 233 144 65 40,025 76.5 23.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 5Rutherford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,486 (X) 2,088 49.8 2.9 211 101 19 9,299 23.7 76.3 (6) (NA) 1 27

Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 839 0.3 296 39.9 3.4 35 117 6 19,760 4.5 95.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Sequatchie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –63 (X) 208 38.5 6.3 28 136 5 23,067 14.8 85.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Sevier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,779 (X) 907 49.6 1.2 75 83 10 10,878 24.2 75.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 6Shelby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,810 (Z) 716 59.2 6.6 116 162 24 33,144 92.3 7.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 188Smith. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,140 0.9 1,126 33.0 3.3 141 126 11 9,879 39.7 60.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 2

Stewart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,482 (X) 367 28.9 5.2 55 151 5 13,455 65.3 34.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Sullivan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,863 (X) 1,453 61.3 1.3 101 69 23 15,557 25.5 74.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 25Sumner . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,399 (X) 1,957 50.2 2.5 193 99 26 13,371 54.1 45.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 25Tipton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,961 2.0 627 46.4 9.7 169 269 32 50,429 93.1 6.9 (6) (NA) 1 6Trousdale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –142 (X) 360 33.9 3.3 47 129 7 18,489 67.2 32.8 (6) (NA) – 1

Unicoi . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –262 (X) 166 60.8 1.8 9 56 4 24,837 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) (Z) 2Union . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,859 (X) 585 43.9 1.2 48 82 3 5,014 39.2 60.8 (6) (NA) – 1Van Buren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –154 (X) 230 35.7 4.3 32 137 3 11,965 15.2 84.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32,198 4.1 1,594 49.6 3.9 173 108 94 58,901 86.6 13.4 (6) (NA) 1 12Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,790 0.6 1,913 63.1 2.0 134 70 38 20,018 33.2 66.8 (6) (NA) 1 6

Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –743 (X) 713 25.5 7.2 125 175 10 13,739 13.6 86.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Weakley. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,122 3.0 1,231 42.2 7.9 240 195 59 47,722 57.2 42.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 3White. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,302 (X) 1,168 41.6 2.9 137 118 19 16,506 13.3 86.7 (6) (NA) – 3Williamson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,356 (X) 1,712 46.7 3.2 202 118 26 15,144 41.6 58.4 (6) (NA) 1 2Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,556 (X) 2,142 44.3 2.7 235 110 19 8,684 21.8 78.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 12

TEXAS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,220,629 0.5 228,926 32.6 18.0 129,878 567 14,135 61,744 26.4 73.6 29,600 30.3 8,630 4,230

Anderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,064 (X) 1,735 33.0 8.3 365 210 23 13,293 28.6 71.4 (6) (NA) 1 12Andrews. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,788 1.1 169 30.8 39.6 804 4,757 9 51,308 25.8 74.2 (6) (NA) 11 3Angelina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,795 0.1 931 47.0 4.2 117 125 18 19,801 4.1 95.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 13Aransas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –833 (X) 62 51.6 11.3 50 807 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) – (Z)Archer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,221 11.2 495 13.9 42.8 536 1,083 58 117,147 2.6 97.4 (6) (NA) – 9

Armstrong . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,093 22.3 269 5.9 53.5 506 1,882 27 98,978 15.7 84.3 (6) (NA) 11 (Z)Atascosa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,142 2.7 1,539 24.6 19.9 670 435 52 33,663 33.3 66.7 (6) (NA) 33 5Austin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –295 (X) 2,086 35.0 8.1 367 176 24 11,524 23.6 76.4 (6) (NA) 8 2Bailey . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,528 10.9 436 9.4 45.2 394 905 128 293,197 18.2 81.8 (6) (NA) 114 1Bandera. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,759 (X) 780 29.4 20.8 367 470 7 8,924 12.6 87.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Bastrop . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,517 1.0 2,187 40.8 8.0 423 193 28 12,722 15.4 84.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 8Baylor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –145 (X) 253 13.8 46.6 328 1,295 43 168,209 7.4 92.6 (6) (NA) 1 3Bee. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,608 1.6 866 24.4 22.6 510 588 19 22,484 38.2 61.8 (6) (NA) 2 1Bell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,072 0.1 2,080 44.1 8.6 451 217 41 19,631 42.7 57.3 (6) (NA) 3 83Bexar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,877 0.1 2,385 51.4 6.1 441 185 81 33,844 73.5 26.5 (6) (NA) 31 231

Blanco . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,159 3.2 784 21.0 25.3 389 497 12 15,370 53.9 46.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Borden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,376 39.4 132 1.5 70.5 480 3,636 8 59,371 49.5 50.5 (6) (NA) 2 –Bosque . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,747 6.2 1,285 22.5 18.0 563 438 38 29,533 31.0 69.0 (6) (NA) 2 2Bowie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,300 1.1 1,337 33.5 8.2 308 230 37 27,930 18.5 81.5 (6) (NA) 5 52Brazoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,472 0.1 2,455 51.1 11.5 614 250 47 19,316 52.3 47.7 (6) (NA) 66 28

Brazos. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,099 0.4 1,350 40.3 10.5 309 229 47 34,859 18.8 81.2 (6) (NA) 4 28Brewster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –8,302 (X) 136 16.2 63.2 1,676 12,320 5 38,294 9.6 90.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Briscoe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,779 14.5 264 8.3 48.1 426 1,612 15 55,223 54.0 46.0 (6) (NA) 21 1Brooks. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 857 1.0 351 15.7 21.7 440 1,253 8 21,575 3.6 96.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,834 0.4 1,347 23.8 19.3 482 358 26 19,101 13.5 86.5 (6) (NA) 14 6




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

TEXAS—Con.

Burleson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,034 4.3 1,550 27.6 11.6 389 251 36 23,386 28.8 71.2 (6) (NA) 1 2Burnet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,555 (X) 1,370 30.1 17.4 565 413 10 7,487 7.9 92.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Caldwell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,076 4.1 1,402 37.5 9.9 305 217 35 25,029 11.9 88.1 (6) (NA) 1 3Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,145 1.0 328 26.5 29.6 248 756 19 57,601 48.6 51.4 (6) (NA) 32 2Callahan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –686 (X) 893 25.0 20.8 515 577 17 18,906 12.0 88.0 (6) (NA) 1 (Z)

Cameron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52,641 1.2 1,120 59.0 14.9 350 313 75 66,640 83.5 16.5 (6) (NA) 188 51Camp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48,709 25.5 399 36.6 4.0 69 174 82 204,692 1.1 98.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Carson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,025 1.4 363 12.4 57.6 452 1,244 44 121,361 32.2 67.8 (6) (NA) 65 1Cass . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25,671 6.4 956 28.9 9.0 193 202 32 33,753 9.8 90.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Castro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161,830 68.3 535 7.1 55.1 564 1,053 593 1,107,742 12.7 87.3 (6) (NA) 356 3

Chambers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,631 0.7 610 41.1 21.3 275 451 13 21,925 41.0 59.0 (6) (NA) 109 3Cherokee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122,376 16.9 1,508 32.7 7.0 286 190 123 81,684 70.1 29.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 8Childress . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,652 13.4 300 8.3 40.3 369 1,229 14 45,307 53.4 46.6 (6) (NA) 3 –Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,112 7.1 892 17.7 28.8 654 734 39 43,906 10.0 90.0 (6) (NA) 1 24Cochran. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,675 41.5 292 3.4 58.2 439 1,504 40 135,397 94.2 5.8 (6) (NA) 88 1

Coke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,789 (X) 335 6.6 44.8 485 1,449 13 38,042 4.5 95.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 11Coleman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,180 (X) 829 6.8 38.0 642 775 16 18,983 21.8 78.2 (6) (NA) 1 57Collin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,014 (Z) 2,135 58.5 5.4 310 145 38 17,855 67.2 32.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 202Collingsworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,906 34.3 449 12.9 35.2 507 1,129 34 76,223 72.9 27.1 (6) (NA) 38 1Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,931 2.5 1,770 26.8 14.6 539 304 42 23,495 44.8 55.2 (6) (NA) 194 2

Comal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,150 (X) 852 35.9 11.6 203 239 6 6,609 26.5 73.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 17Comanche . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,416 15.9 1,352 19.2 19.0 543 402 103 75,823 14.3 85.7 (6) (NA) 25 3Concho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,551 11.5 411 8.8 51.8 544 1,324 14 34,815 48.0 52.0 (6) (NA) 5 1Cooke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,899 (X) 1,765 38.4 12.0 459 260 46 26,215 16.0 84.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Coryell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,923 0.6 1,221 22.7 21.8 493 404 35 28,412 14.8 85.2 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)

Cottle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,346 11.6 233 2.6 46.4 574 2,464 13 55,918 31.2 68.8 (6) (NA) 7 (Z)Crane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,025 (X) 44 31.8 59.1 (D) (D) 1 29,614 0.2 99.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Crockett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –9,000 (X) 198 3.5 71.7 1,735 8,765 10 51,707 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 1 1Crosby. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,181 40.5 373 5.9 54.7 490 1,313 40 105,997 91.0 9.0 (6) (NA) 134 2Culberson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,959 (X) 74 4.1 68.9 1,695 22,899 7 100,959 46.7 53.3 (6) (NA) 10 1

Dallam. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46,676 24.2 412 3.4 62.9 884 2,146 370 897,376 22.5 77.5 (6) (NA) 395 2Dallas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,394 (Z) 730 61.2 4.9 89 122 19 26,008 88.4 11.6 (6) (NA) 1 235Dawson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,294 17.7 581 7.7 55.4 572 985 55 95,332 94.7 5.3 (6) (NA) 94 1Deaf Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93,019 28.5 703 13.1 54.1 964 1,372 842 1,197,464 4.6 95.4 (6) (NA) 72 4Delta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 415 1.2 507 32.0 11.8 142 280 11 21,055 44.8 55.2 (6) (NA) – 1

Denton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,492 (X) 2,358 62.4 5.3 349 148 49 20,824 24.0 76.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 370DeWitt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,676 1.8 1,786 21.7 16.3 577 323 30 16,530 7.7 92.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Dickens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,934 8.0 396 4.0 37.9 567 1,432 12 29,740 41.8 58.2 (6) (NA) 7 (Z)Dimmit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327 0.3 268 22.4 38.8 571 2,129 27 102,567 9.2 90.8 (6) (NA) 9 2Donley. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,266 16.8 440 5.9 34.5 584 1,328 74 167,305 12.1 87.9 (6) (NA) 9 4

Duval. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,735 (X) 1,228 8.2 25.8 850 692 13 10,546 14.0 86.0 (6) (NA) 3 2Eastland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,137 1.4 1,166 15.7 20.5 498 427 30 26,035 30.0 70.0 (6) (NA) 2 3Ector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –10,322 (X) 287 65.9 16.4 504 1,755 2 6,526 14.9 85.1 (6) (NA) 4 2Edwards. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,444 (X) 349 6.9 53.9 974 2,789 7 21,413 2.3 97.7 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Ellis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 408 (Z) 2,089 45.0 9.0 464 222 43 20,793 62.0 38.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 18

El Paso . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,024 0.1 600 74.2 7.7 114 190 68 113,140 42.8 57.2 (6) (NA) 216 129Erath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76,116 13.0 1,977 25.1 14.2 581 294 208 105,065 4.8 95.2 (6) (NA) 10 3Falls . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,057 4.1 1,199 24.9 17.2 409 341 68 56,709 25.7 74.3 (6) (NA) 2 3Fannin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,680 1.6 1,976 31.2 11.8 483 245 57 29,030 34.3 65.7 (6) (NA) 3 4Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,953 2.6 2,973 27.9 7.6 552 186 52 17,388 10.2 89.8 (6) (NA) 1 2

Fisher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,967 24.1 595 10.3 37.0 479 805 19 31,790 52.1 47.9 (6) (NA) 3 –Floyd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64,183 48.4 551 5.1 47.9 574 1,041 159 288,132 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 213 (Z)Foard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,519 12.0 203 6.4 45.8 286 1,411 9 46,631 43.9 56.1 (6) (NA) 5 –Fort Bend. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,247 0.6 1,560 48.2 11.4 415 266 50 31,956 73.3 26.7 (6) (NA) 36 69Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,605 13.8 549 29.7 12.0 132 241 64 116,364 2.0 98.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 2

Freestone. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,313 (X) 1,468 27.3 12.9 429 292 33 22,176 6.4 93.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Frio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,568 12.9 537 13.8 38.4 603 1,123 71 132,153 45.1 54.9 (6) (NA) 72 2Gaines. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81,197 28.9 724 8.1 49.4 759 1,048 145 199,743 73.0 27.0 (6) (NA) 421 2Galveston. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,455 (X) 664 60.1 8.3 127 192 6 8,509 40.8 59.2 (6) (NA) 8 5Garza . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 473 0.6 246 13.0 48.8 500 2,031 10 39,585 64.6 35.4 (6) (NA) 7 –

Gillespie. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,370 0.4 1,812 26.5 19.9 645 356 24 13,223 20.6 79.4 (6) (NA) 1 3Glasscock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,485 32.9 199 5.5 72.9 493 2,477 14 68,528 83.7 16.3 (6) (NA) 22 –Goliad . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,673 7.0 984 19.2 18.1 506 514 17 17,208 10.2 89.8 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Gonzales . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108,429 33.1 1,816 20.3 19.3 696 383 278 152,849 7.8 92.2 (6) (NA) 1 5Gray . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,218 5.1 351 12.5 43.3 453 1,290 95 270,276 7.9 92.1 (6) (NA) 21 1

Grayson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,367 0.1 2,597 46.9 6.6 441 170 42 16,121 47.8 52.2 (6) (NA) 4 27Gregg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,760 (X) 444 52.5 3.4 47 105 2 5,441 22.8 77.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 28Grimes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,130 1.4 1,704 34.6 10.0 415 243 32 18,660 14.2 85.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Guadalupe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,694 0.7 2,442 43.8 6.3 385 158 37 15,235 44.0 56.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 7Hale . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 102,490 16.0 915 10.1 44.0 605 661 225 246,170 45.7 54.3 (6) (NA) 329 3




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

TEXAS—Con.

Hall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,748 14.8 311 5.1 45.7 432 1,388 21 66,363 78.3 21.7 (6) (NA) 17 (Z)Hamilton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,318 9.1 996 11.1 23.6 450 451 42 41,770 6.3 93.7 (6) (NA) 1 (Z)Hansford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79,210 51.7 290 9.0 65.5 593 2,045 367 1,265,145 6.5 93.5 (6) (NA) 187 1Hardeman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,093 3.8 344 5.8 41.6 346 1,006 17 48,980 40.6 59.4 (6) (NA) 5 (Z)Hardin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,007 (X) 517 64.0 3.7 69 133 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 3 13

Harris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,280 (Z) 2,452 61.7 4.7 305 124 53 21,565 66.2 33.8 (6) (NA) 10 332Harrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,150 0.7 1,116 37.8 10.8 229 205 12 11,037 13.8 86.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 9Hartley. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,461 53.7 253 7.1 63.6 789 3,120 447 1,767,885 15.3 84.7 (6) (NA) 332 (Z)Haskell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,899 24.4 579 9.2 41.1 492 850 41 70,459 65.0 35.0 (6) (NA) 36 9Hays . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,602 (X) 1,106 43.0 11.3 278 252 15 13,213 27.3 72.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 14

Hemphill. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,195 16.8 239 7.9 53.6 546 2,286 92 386,987 0.5 99.5 (6) (NA) 3 (Z)Henderson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,693 0.2 1,798 38.7 7.1 341 190 43 24,037 31.5 68.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 211Hidalgo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60,770 0.8 2,104 59.8 12.1 593 282 202 96,042 90.3 9.7 (6) (NA) 310 78Hill . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,776 1.6 2,014 32.4 11.0 504 250 54 26,822 55.2 44.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 8Hockley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,663 5.6 767 15.0 40.4 491 641 90 117,623 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 171 1

Hood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,859 1.6 935 48.8 8.8 202 216 22 23,240 19.0 81.0 (6) (NA) 4 8Hopkins . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,094 9.5 1,923 28.5 10.0 431 224 134 69,797 3.0 97.0 (6) (NA) 3 7Houston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,082 3.1 1,514 22.5 13.8 465 307 34 22,776 18.4 81.6 (6) (NA) 1 4Howard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,555 1.6 466 18.7 39.9 518 1,112 15 32,416 77.9 22.1 (6) (NA) 4 (Z)Hudspeth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,166 (X) 131 7.6 62.6 2,122 16,196 27 207,458 79.7 20.3 (6) (NA) 267 (Z)

Hunt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,621 (X) 2,784 47.1 5.6 400 144 28 10,081 41.7 58.3 (6) (NA) 1 147Hutchinson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 722 0.2 262 23.7 42.0 553 2,111 29 111,882 20.0 80.0 (6) (NA) 49 76Irion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,353 (X) 151 23.8 51.7 536 3,552 3 23,099 3.3 96.7 (6) (NA) 1 (Z)Jack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,072 (X) 884 13.2 24.2 596 674 16 17,593 5.1 94.9 (6) (NA) – 1Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,507 (X) 917 23.1 26.0 471 513 42 45,649 73.1 26.9 (6) (NA) 45 1

Jasper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –611 (X) 763 59.9 2.9 96 126 5 6,308 31.2 68.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 4Jeff Davis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,785 (X) 79 12.7 74.7 1,489 18,845 6 80,570 2.3 97.7 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,261 (X) 775 47.5 17.0 388 501 17 21,772 45.2 54.8 (6) (NA) 167 22Jim Hogg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,107 (X) 234 4.3 50.0 604 2,579 7 29,658 2.1 97.9 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Jim Wells . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,465 1.1 912 23.1 20.6 498 546 47 51,912 28.1 71.9 (6) (NA) 1 6

Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,799 0.3 2,579 56.1 4.7 362 140 44 16,906 15.5 84.5 (6) (NA) – 13Jones . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,573 4.7 918 16.9 28.0 517 563 39 42,728 49.3 50.7 (6) (NA) 3 1Karnes. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,662 (X) 1,157 13.8 19.6 475 410 18 15,768 14.7 85.3 (6) (NA) 1 3Kaufman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,530 0.3 2,438 51.9 5.7 420 172 30 12,321 21.7 78.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 5Kendall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,809 (X) 967 34.1 17.3 327 338 7 7,263 13.8 86.2 (6) (NA) 1 2

Kenedy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 921 5.4 28 10.7 75.0 474 16,931 9 320,786 – 100.0 (6) (NA) – (Z)Kent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,682 (X) 182 5.5 51.6 561 3,081 5 29,016 12.9 87.1 (6) (NA) 1 (Z)Kerr. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,870 (X) 977 27.2 19.2 564 578 12 12,276 9.4 90.6 (6) (NA) 1 6Kimble . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,341 (X) 528 16.5 43.0 616 1,166 7 13,932 8.9 91.1 (6) (NA) 1 1King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,064 35.2 41 4.9 56.1 547 13,334 12 286,732 11.0 89.0 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)

Kinney . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,723 (X) 148 5.4 72.3 614 4,146 5 32,088 14.3 85.7 (6) (NA) 4 1Kleberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,693 1.7 348 46.6 14.7 (D) (D) 58 166,055 17.0 83.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 5Knox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,170 10.7 271 12.9 48.7 564 2,082 46 170,406 31.8 68.2 (6) (NA) 30 (Z)Lamar . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,593 (X) 1,725 28.5 12.8 470 273 39 22,600 30.2 69.8 (6) (NA) 3 15Lamb. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,682 22.2 931 6.0 41.8 629 675 260 279,504 36.7 63.3 (6) (NA) 304 2

Lampasas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,535 (X) 861 25.1 21.5 412 479 13 15,534 10.1 89.9 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)La Salle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,793 4.8 315 6.7 54.9 559 1,773 23 73,565 12.1 87.9 (6) (NA) 3 1Lavaca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,073 1.9 2,861 29.1 8.5 602 210 46 15,959 7.7 92.3 (6) (NA) 8 1Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,499 4.0 1,848 29.9 8.7 366 198 23 12,417 18.6 81.4 (6) (NA) 1 2Leon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –852 (X) 1,908 25.5 13.7 563 295 51 26,883 5.8 94.2 (6) (NA) – 2

Liberty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,084 (X) 1,596 50.3 7.1 305 191 21 13,119 53.8 46.2 (6) (NA) 76 494Limestone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,985 2.5 1,430 20.3 18.5 530 371 33 22,922 12.6 87.4 (6) (NA) – 4Lipscomb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,305 11.9 307 3.9 55.7 578 1,883 42 137,909 8.0 92.0 (6) (NA) 26 1Live Oak . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,705 (X) 845 14.7 29.1 525 622 14 16,560 13.1 86.9 (6) (NA) 1 5Llano. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,041 (X) 692 18.8 34.8 533 771 12 16,964 4.8 95.2 (6) (NA) 1 3

Loving . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –103 (X) 14 – 100.0 515 36,799 1 37,357 – 100.0 (6) (NA) 1 –Lubbock. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79,508 1.5 1,142 32.0 29.4 557 488 144 125,783 45.7 54.3 (6) (NA) 191 9Lynn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 68,495 54.6 478 9.6 56.7 530 1,110 49 102,180 96.6 3.4 (6) (NA) 59 (Z)McCulloch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,163 0.9 621 10.0 32.2 546 880 13 20,879 22.5 77.5 (6) (NA) 2 3McLennan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,012 0.4 2,571 46.7 8.8 538 209 61 23,746 35.6 64.4 (6) (NA) 2 22

McMullen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 326 2.9 223 4.5 71.3 597 2,677 6 28,691 2.8 97.2 (6) (NA) – 1Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,193 24.8 890 24.6 12.2 245 275 61 68,064 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) (Z) 2Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305 0.3 252 28.2 9.9 60 237 4 16,218 18.2 81.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Martin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,459 10.2 379 10.6 54.1 526 1,388 14 37,135 91.7 8.3 (6) (NA) 17 4Mason . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,336 4.5 633 10.4 43.4 556 878 45 70,771 5.3 94.7 (6) (NA) 8 1

Matagorda . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,253 4.4 991 26.2 24.9 619 625 116 116,781 75.5 24.5 (6) (NA) 219 4Maverick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,785 0.8 214 34.6 26.2 476 2,225 35 162,243 12.0 88.0 (6) (NA) 99 6Medina . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,007 3.1 1,951 27.8 18.7 805 413 61 31,134 38.1 61.9 (6) (NA) 55 6Menard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,077 (X) 336 10.7 44.3 549 1,633 7 22,098 10.5 89.5 (6) (NA) 4 (Z)Midland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,140 (X) 477 48.6 16.6 362 758 7 15,516 54.0 46.0 (6) (NA) 37 1




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

TEXAS—Con.

Milam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,239 3.2 1,991 26.2 12.5 577 290 72 36,339 24.4 75.6 (6) (NA) 1 3Mills . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,274 8.2 768 16.1 25.9 427 556 22 28,629 8.0 92.0 (6) (NA) 2 1Mitchell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,171 4.1 451 12.0 33.0 488 1,082 12 27,370 57.2 42.8 (6) (NA) 2 (Z)Montague. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 1,399 19.4 17.1 504 360 32 22,782 11.8 88.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,210 0.1 1,701 61.8 4.8 198 116 20 11,798 57.5 42.5 (6) (NA) – 49

Moore . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,280 4.9 276 10.9 63.4 550 1,991 303 1,098,815 14.0 86.0 (6) (NA) 247 6Morris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,326 4.0 403 33.3 10.9 100 247 20 49,965 2.0 98.0 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Motley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,376 14.4 201 2.5 57.2 487 2,423 10 49,224 32.4 67.6 (6) (NA) 8 (Z)Nacogdoches . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,725 1.1 1,290 32.2 6.3 274 212 198 153,467 1.2 98.8 (6) (NA) 1 7Navarro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,211 0.8 1,864 29.9 11.9 537 288 37 19,598 32.4 67.6 (6) (NA) – 12

Newton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –938 (X) 385 56.6 2.1 69 180 1 3,416 28.7 71.3 (6) (NA) 1 1Nolan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,577 2.2 516 14.0 34.3 481 933 13 25,955 53.1 46.9 (6) (NA) 2 1Nueces . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,250 0.5 649 36.7 29.4 524 807 63 96,502 94.9 5.1 (6) (NA) – 47Ochiltree . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52,993 19.8 367 11.2 61.3 559 1,524 242 658,997 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 64 2Oldham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,636 21.5 136 5.9 65.4 936 6,885 66 484,919 3.5 96.5 (6) (NA) 2 (Z)

Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,563 (X) 496 70.2 6.0 73 148 4 7,639 27.6 72.4 (6) (NA) 3 13Palo Pinto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,190 (X) 965 31.2 19.8 485 503 15 15,890 15.5 84.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 6Panola. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,095 6.2 948 27.6 13.0 223 235 46 48,756 3.0 97.0 (6) (NA) – 4Parker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,314 0.2 3,215 59.3 5.0 487 151 48 14,806 26.9 73.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 6Parmer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,236 23.9 660 8.6 52.9 576 873 604 915,015 11.9 88.1 (6) (NA) 314 1

Pecos . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,191 3.6 270 10.7 68.9 2,916 10,800 38 141,548 61.8 38.2 (6) (NA) 75 4Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 605 0.1 689 38.9 7.4 130 189 6 8,388 20.6 79.4 (6) (NA) (Z) 8Potter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,245 (X) 305 34.1 24.3 522 1,711 19 63,902 6.7 93.3 (6) (NA) 5 (Z)Presidio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,669 (X) 123 9.8 67.5 1,504 12,225 51 415,870 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 20 1Rains. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,673 7.9 584 42.8 7.7 94 160 12 20,188 19.4 80.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 1

Randall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,681 3.5 748 29.4 29.7 512 685 261 349,112 4.2 95.8 (6) (NA) 30 2Reagan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,216 1.4 123 1.6 70.7 538 4,376 7 53,398 67.0 33.0 (6) (NA) 18 1Real . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,356 (X) 301 16.6 45.8 400 1,329 3 8,967 10.0 90.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1Red River. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,515 3.3 1,217 21.9 16.1 423 347 31 25,353 14.1 85.9 (6) (NA) 5 2Reeves . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,546 1.9 166 10.8 48.2 1,010 6,084 19 111,825 39.5 60.5 (6) (NA) 110 2

Refugio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,177 6.0 274 24.1 29.9 506 1,847 21 78,172 58.6 41.4 (6) (NA) – 1Roberts . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,317 14.4 94 2.1 74.5 495 5,262 13 140,766 16.8 83.2 (6) (NA) 7 (Z)Robertson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,534 3.6 1,555 23.9 14.5 515 331 75 48,059 15.4 84.6 (6) (NA) 15 3Rockwall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –201 (X) 385 60.5 4.2 46 121 3 7,790 35.1 64.9 (6) (NA) – –Runnels . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,965 6.6 897 13.2 32.6 585 652 27 30,541 54.1 45.9 (6) (NA) 3 1

Rusk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,699 3.6 1,391 29.3 8.4 272 196 39 28,288 35.5 64.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 5Sabine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,526 4.9 219 36.5 5.5 31 141 7 31,292 5.5 94.5 (6) (NA) – 2San Augustine. . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,822 16.3 308 27.6 6.5 59 191 25 81,104 4.0 96.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 1San Jacinto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,119 3.1 598 49.8 5.0 93 156 6 9,227 26.0 74.0 (6) (NA) – 2San Patricio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,739 1.8 575 38.8 28.3 345 601 69 119,762 77.0 23.0 (6) (NA) 1 9

San Saba. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,144 1.5 706 10.9 39.0 709 1,005 23 32,490 17.0 83.0 (6) (NA) 2 1Schleicher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,378 (X) 307 5.9 64.2 778 2,535 9 30,023 9.9 90.1 (6) (NA) 3 (Z)Scurry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,028 1.8 674 16.2 30.9 565 838 23 34,163 39.5 60.5 (6) (NA) 3 12Shackelford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,699 (X) 252 13.5 45.6 557 2,211 15 59,726 8.4 91.6 (6) (NA) (Z) –Shelby . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77,176 20.0 1,100 26.4 6.8 192 175 241 218,763 0.8 99.2 (6) (NA) (Z) 5

Sherman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 81,547 75.1 322 7.8 64.9 546 1,696 295 916,366 16.1 83.9 (6) (NA) 292 1Smith. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,131 0.7 2,264 47.8 4.5 287 127 64 28,051 75.0 25.0 (6) (NA) 1 41Somervell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,237 (X) 339 35.7 13.3 84 249 2 5,973 25.6 74.4 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Starr . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,678 3.3 870 6.3 30.6 570 656 67 76,717 16.1 83.9 (6) (NA) 29 9Stephens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –6,038 (X) 435 7.4 37.9 428 984 9 20,133 5.7 94.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 11

Sterling . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,912 (X) 66 12.1 65.2 633 9,591 6 87,697 1.0 99.0 (6) (NA) 1 (Z)Stonewall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 396 1.8 316 5.4 50.6 524 1,659 9 28,573 33.8 66.2 (6) (NA) 2 –Sutton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –8,385 (X) 191 5.2 75.4 880 4,606 6 33,592 3.7 96.3 (6) (NA) 2 1Swisher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 90,762 54.9 578 6.9 47.9 566 980 296 512,611 10.4 89.6 (6) (NA) 162 1Tarrant . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,511 (Z) 1,227 65.9 6.1 173 141 29 23,701 74.7 25.3 (6) (NA) (Z) 178

Taylor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,284 0.1 1,183 30.3 20.2 534 451 55 46,840 11.8 88.2 (6) (NA) 4 10Terrell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,867 (X) 76 6.6 89.5 1,413 18,593 4 51,250 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Terry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,901 24.7 620 12.9 46.5 445 718 63 102,179 93.8 6.2 (6) (NA) 148 (Z)Throckmorton . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,799 18.5 257 5.1 48.6 561 2,184 16 63,887 14.8 85.2 (6) (NA) – (Z)Titus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,885 0.4 776 32.7 8.5 178 230 56 72,666 1.5 98.5 (6) (NA) – 8

Tom Green . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,203 0.9 1,024 43.1 28.4 845 825 97 94,944 19.4 80.6 (6) (NA) 33 22Travis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,401 (Z) 1,306 46.4 9.9 298 229 17 13,106 58.5 41.5 (6) (NA) 1 122Trinity . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,034 7.6 555 29.5 8.1 105 189 9 16,132 3.9 96.1 (6) (NA) – 4Tyler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,481 (X) 615 54.5 4.9 80 129 5 7,646 33.9 66.1 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Upshur. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,309 2.9 1,236 40.9 6.2 196 159 41 33,024 5.3 94.7 (6) (NA) (Z) 5

Upton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,218 (X) 83 6.0 71.1 723 8,716 5 58,000 57.8 42.2 (6) (NA) 6 1Uvalde. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,728 2.5 686 20.6 38.0 969 1,412 69 100,633 39.6 60.4 (6) (NA) 68 6Val Verde . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –9,420 (X) 285 31.9 47.0 1,661 5,829 11 38,263 6.3 93.7 (6) (NA) 1 13Van Zandt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,606 4.2 2,842 46.0 6.0 422 149 73 25,696 45.5 54.5 (6) (NA) 1 6Victoria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –538 (X) 1,286 34.8 16.2 514 400 29 22,600 48.0 52.0 (6) (NA) 7 10




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

TEXAS—Con.

Walker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –603 (X) 1,043 43.3 8.6 206 198 25 24,326 54.5 45.5 (6) (NA) (Z) 5Waller . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,359 (X) 1,453 49.1 8.6 277 191 38 26,073 57.9 42.1 (6) (NA) 18 3Ward . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –5,838 (X) 86 23.3 36.0 466 5,414 2 19,547 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 8 8Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,023 1.0 2,303 38.1 5.3 355 154 37 15,927 18.2 81.8 (6) (NA) (Z) 3Webb . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –4,842 (X) 568 7.9 49.1 2,043 3,596 24 41,618 5.4 94.6 (6) (NA) 6 41

Wharton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41,908 6.5 1,538 31.7 22.1 638 415 146 95,169 67.8 32.2 (6) (NA) 307 4Wheeler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56,197 41.6 565 9.9 38.8 534 944 94 166,411 3.5 96.5 (6) (NA) 3 1Wichita . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,319 0.1 606 38.0 17.7 302 498 16 26,120 51.4 48.6 (6) (NA) 40 2Wilbarger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,607 3.9 502 18.7 34.7 872 1,738 32 63,892 57.8 42.2 (6) (NA) 30 4Willacy. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,178 11.6 334 27.8 33.5 370 1,107 19 56,608 77.5 22.5 (6) (NA) – –

Williamson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,404 0.1 2,510 45.0 11.2 583 232 46 18,484 65.9 34.1 (6) (NA) – 30Wilson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,690 3.2 2,157 32.4 8.8 446 207 43 19,799 17.8 82.2 (6) (NA) 12 4Winkler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,330 (X) 44 13.6 45.5 492 11,175 2 43,773 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) – 2Wise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,033 (X) 2,696 49.9 6.8 493 183 33 12,352 22.7 77.3 (6) (NA) 1 4Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,723 10.9 1,495 41.0 5.9 228 153 58 38,662 6.4 93.6 (6) (NA) (Z) 5

Yoakum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,933 11.9 298 9.4 53.0 455 1,527 50 167,426 83.7 16.3 (6) (NA) 99 1Young . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –116 (X) 755 13.8 29.4 510 675 24 31,690 7.2 92.8 (6) (NA) – 3Zapata. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,128 (X) 388 4.6 49.5 398 1,025 10 25,369 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 4 2Zavala . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,892 19.2 257 4.7 59.9 707 2,752 49 189,471 22.2 77.8 (6) (NA) 60 2

UTAH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244,518 0.4 15,282 54.8 14.0 11,731 768 1,116 73,020 23.1 76.9 4,970 21.1 3,860 638

Beaver. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64,116 45.8 256 30.9 23.8 139 544 161 630,254 6.5 93.5 (6) (NA) 120 2Box Elder . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,062 2.3 1,113 47.4 21.7 1,401 1,259 114 102,286 25.9 74.1 (6) (NA) 421 23Cache . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,867 0.8 1,194 51.1 9.4 247 207 97 80,925 15.2 84.8 (6) (NA) 259 34Carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,662 (X) 243 66.3 15.2 199 821 3 13,708 17.5 82.5 (6) (NA) 36 6Daggett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –311 (X) 28 10.7 39.3 (D) (D) 2 60,107 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 23 1

Davis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,727 (X) 582 80.4 2.4 66 113 30 52,211 87.1 12.9 (6) (NA) 92 44Duchesne. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,269 (X) 932 42.9 16.1 1,305 1,400 46 49,407 10.6 89.4 (6) (NA) 218 4Emery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,657 1.8 459 39.2 14.8 (D) (D) 11 24,950 13.1 86.9 (6) (NA) 162 2Garfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,877 (X) 225 37.3 17.8 80 355 6 26,831 8.1 91.9 (6) (NA) 70 2Grand . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,259 (X) 94 59.6 11.7 53 561 2 23,149 34.0 66.0 (6) (NA) 10 3

Iron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,021 7.3 438 40.6 28.8 479 1,094 77 176,717 48.2 51.8 (6) (NA) 200 9Juab . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,764 4.5 236 32.2 33.5 270 1,146 12 51,750 33.4 66.6 (6) (NA) 80 6Kane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –65 (X) 131 29.0 37.4 156 1,190 3 25,840 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) 12 2Millard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,764 18.9 646 29.9 31.1 445 689 113 175,169 25.5 74.5 (6) (NA) 381 5Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –243 (X) 255 61.2 12.5 (D) (D) 7 29,341 10.2 89.8 (6) (NA) 39 1

Piute . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,941 35.3 108 32.4 20.4 (D) (D) 9 83,593 8.4 91.6 (6) (NA) 74 1Rich . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,184 13.2 135 21.5 51.9 509 3,772 13 97,415 2.4 97.6 (6) (NA) 222 1Salt Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –11,486 (X) 712 82.3 3.1 82 116 19 27,232 71.2 28.8 (6) (NA) 60 258San Juan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,404 (X) 231 23.4 44.2 1,559 6,747 8 32,537 21.2 78.8 (6) (NA) 20 3Sanpete . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,522 4.7 759 42.7 18.3 357 471 94 123,412 5.1 94.9 (6) (NA) 143 4

Sevier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,159 3.8 568 52.1 11.4 165 290 52 92,120 26.2 73.8 (6) (NA) 171 6Summit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,520 0.5 557 53.5 15.8 376 674 20 35,023 5.8 94.2 (6) (NA) 91 10Tooele . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,294 1.2 380 48.7 18.4 415 1,092 18 47,734 14.2 85.8 (6) (NA) 68 8Uintah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,790 (X) 908 56.8 11.1 (D) (D) 30 32,522 11.2 88.8 (6) (NA) 194 8Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50,721 0.7 2,046 73.6 5.2 343 168 117 57,187 37.5 62.5 (6) (NA) 399 103

Wasatch. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,429 (X) 380 69.7 3.7 70 183 6 14,966 16.1 83.9 (6) (NA) 46 3Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,243 (X) 481 53.2 14.3 217 451 7 15,085 41.6 58.4 (6) (NA) 59 35Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,970 10.0 173 30.6 8.7 42 245 11 60,827 7.1 92.9 (6) (NA) 45 1Weber . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –7,279 (X) 1,012 74.7 2.8 87 86 27 26,292 25.4 74.6 (6) (NA) 148 52

VERMONT . . . . . . . . . . . . . 199,593 1.3 6,571 33.7 8.4 1,245 189 473 71,993 15.1 84.9 447 9.7 4 60

Addison . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40,394 5.5 676 31.8 16.4 193 286 106 156,691 10.7 89.3 4 72.5 (Z) 2Bennington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,329 0.4 228 44.7 8.8 41 180 8 34,289 30.6 69.4 6 50.3 (Z) 4Caledonia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,238 2.3 505 30.7 7.5 84 167 24 47,107 17.0 83.0 4 62.0 (Z) 2Chittenden . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,577 0.2 473 40.2 7.6 77 162 28 59,427 36.9 63.1 28 15.6 1 24Essex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,747 3.4 98 31.6 12.2 20 202 7 69,286 14.3 85.7 2 25.9 (Z) (Z)

Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44,066 5.3 770 25.2 11.8 190 247 115 149,916 6.0 94.0 6 54.1 (Z) 3Grand Isle . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,693 7.8 99 35.4 6.1 16 165 9 93,293 15.9 84.1 1 24.1 (Z) (Z)Lamoille . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,649 1.5 317 29.7 6.0 54 170 14 43,319 27.5 72.5 3 89.1 (Z) 1Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,243 3.1 680 30.6 4.9 110 162 32 47,071 19.0 81.0 3 81.4 (Z) 1Orleans . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,709 5.9 583 23.8 10.8 132 227 57 98,353 5.7 94.3 3 78.7 (Z) 2

Rutland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,601 0.6 623 33.7 9.8 121 195 24 38,502 17.2 82.8 9 53.2 (Z) 6Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,981 0.4 425 37.9 2.6 54 127 15 34,680 26.3 73.7 9 50.0 (Z) 6Windham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,605 0.8 397 45.8 8.6 62 155 18 46,149 41.8 58.2 362 1.1 (Z) 3Windsor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,761 0.5 697 42.9 2.7 90 129 16 22,723 34.1 65.9 8 81.2 (Z) 5

VIRGINIA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 548,236 0.2 47,606 35.9 7.5 8,625 181 2,361 49,593 30.4 69.6 8,830 3.6 26 720

Accomack . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,165 2.4 318 46.9 14.5 91 286 109 343,186 43.5 56.5 9 70.6 4 1Albemarle. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 108,522 100.2 10919 1034.5 109.4 10177 10193 1019 1020,857 1035.3 1064.7 15 22.9 1 12Alleghany11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121,328 120.3 12202 1228.7 124.5 1233 12163 122 129,837 1214.4 1285.7 64 5.1 – 1Amelia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,555 9.8 456 29.2 9.9 91 200 52 113,164 6.5 93.5 2 95.0 (Z) –Amherst . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,088 0.5 460 19.8 8.7 100 217 6 13,843 15.9 84.1 20 4.5 – 13




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

VIRGINIA—Con.

Appomattox . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,849 1.2 389 19.3 8.0 85 218 7 17,177 21.7 78.3 1 96.0 (Z) (Z)Arlington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 2 100.0 – (D) (D) (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) 81.8 (Z) –Augusta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1327,815 131.2 131,691 1339.9 138.3 13306 13181 13144 1385,106 139.9 1390.1 14 83.4 (Z) 8Bath . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 661 0.7 124 15.3 21.8 52 422 3 20,323 4.0 96.0 (Z) 53.1 (Z) (Z)Bedford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 143,794 140.4 141,289 1430.2 144.7 14199 14155 1419 1415,031 1418.4 1481.6 6 64.8 (Z) 1

Bland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,030 1.2 417 23.3 10.8 94 226 9 20,537 5.6 94.4 (Z) 100.0 – (Z)Botetourt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,180 0.9 610 34.9 7.4 97 159 10 16,364 18.5 81.5 16 16.0 (Z) 15Brunswick. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,316 (X) 333 27.9 10.5 79 237 13 37,934 58.2 41.8 21 4.5 (Z) 19Buchanan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 0.1 94 37.2 – 9 97 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 2 72.2 – –Buckingham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,953 3.7 389 27.8 9.3 81 209 20 52,067 9.4 90.6 1 67.2 – (Z)

Campbell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151,025 (Z) 15664 1519.3 159.8 15139 15209 1516 1523,476 1528.5 1571.5 9 33.0 (Z) 4Caroline . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,624 2.2 237 37.1 12.7 59 250 12 48,599 83.3 16.7 4 31.3 1 (Z)Carroll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1610,866 162.0 953 30.8 3.3 122 128 26 27,190 25.3 74.7 2 82.0 (Z) 1Charles City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,789 2.2 88 45.5 18.2 29 326 6 71,341 78.4 21.6 1 72.2 (Z) (Z)Charlotte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,699 2.2 535 18.7 9.2 134 250 16 29,542 41.7 58.3 1 69.3 (Z) (Z)

Chesterfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,643 0.1 17214 1752.8 174.7 1723 17109 179 1740,556 1759.0 1741.0 997 0.3 (Z) 33Clarke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,426 1.1 472 43.9 6.4 74 157 16 33,085 33.8 66.2 1 64.2 – (Z)Craig . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,223 4.1 228 25.4 9.2 48 212 4 15,829 14.1 85.9 (Z) 100.0 – (Z)Culpeper . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,292 1.1 669 39.3 8.1 125 187 37 54,877 51.3 48.7 3 53.1 – 2Cumberland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,608 10.1 283 21.2 10.6 63 221 28 100,014 9.0 91.0 1 97.3 (Z) (Z)

Dickenson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 726 0.5 117 32.5 2.6 12 101 1 6,291 28.0 72.0 4 13.4 – 3Dinwiddie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181,494 180.1 19361 1928.0 1910.5 1992 19256 1915 1940,706 1964.3 1935.7 2 72.4 1 –Essex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,863 2.0 127 22.8 26.0 58 459 8 63,756 95.2 4.8 1 77.3 (Z) (Z)Fairfax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 202,690 (Z) 21151 2166.9 210.7 2110 2166 215 2135,550 2182.1 2117.9 79 4.8 (Z) 75Fauquier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,813 0.8 1,344 43.4 6.2 238 177 45 33,810 21.0 79.0 5 66.5 1 2

Floyd. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,880 9.5 829 25.2 5.5 135 163 33 39,567 31.7 68.3 1 96.9 (Z) (Z)Fluvanna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,860 1.6 328 26.8 6.4 60 184 4 12,607 21.7 78.3 137 0.7 – 1Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,229 1.4 1,012 24.2 6.4 173 170 37 36,068 17.3 82.7 4 91.2 (Z) 1Frederick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228,582 220.3 22720 2239.2 225.6 22113 22156 2222 2230,058 2267.0 2233.0 5 55.6 (Z) 2Giles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,136 0.9 407 27.5 6.4 68 168 5 13,123 22.0 78.0 329 1.4 – (Z)

Gloucester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,023 0.5 153 57.5 9.2 26 168 5 30,059 82.1 17.9 3 61.6 (Z) 1Goochland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,698 0.3 315 42.9 6.7 52 166 6 18,254 25.8 74.2 1 88.1 (Z) (Z)Grayson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,653 6.3 23939 2336.0 236.4 23151 23160 2328 2329,636 2324.5 2375.5 1 93.2 (Z) (Z)Greene . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 922 0.7 214 28.5 3.7 33 152 6 27,173 14.3 85.7 1 87.1 (Z) –Greensville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241,234 240.4 24113 2420.4 2418.6 2442 24376 246 2449,221 2490.3 249.7 2 41.3 (Z) –

Halifax25. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,147 (X) 905 19.7 11.7 222 245 28 30,634 65.2 34.8 17 16.0 1 2Hanover . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,021 0.5 682 48.2 6.2 101 147 32 46,626 78.4 21.6 7 48.1 1 4Henrico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,319 0.1 26185 2650.8 264.9 2628 26152 268 2641,135 2688.6 2611.4 5 94.1 (Z) (Z)Henry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 274,767 270.4 27305 2727.2 274.6 2753 27174 274 2714,705 2732.7 2767.3 20 25.6 (Z) 5Highland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,586 17.6 293 10.6 17.4 96 328 13 43,478 2.9 97.1 5 100.0 – (Z)

Isle of Wight . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,139 1.1 204 35.8 24.5 87 424 32 157,147 42.0 58.0 39 92.7 (Z) 2James City . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28721 (Z) 2864 2854.7 284.7 289 28140 282 2836,578 2886.8 2813.2 12 92.3 (Z) 10King and Queen . . . . . . . . . . . 3,092 4.5 154 21.4 14.3 59 382 7 45,792 76.0 24.0 1 76.2 (Z) (Z)King George . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,435 0.2 169 29.0 5.3 32 189 3 17,574 78.7 21.3 3 35.5 (Z) 1King William . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,997 2.5 135 28.1 21.5 61 455 14 106,630 88.2 11.8 21 97.1 1 1

Lancaster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,218 0.6 61 44.3 11.5 12 204 2 37,131 96.9 3.1 1 94.3 (Z) (Z)Lee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 1,103 37.4 2.6 128 116 12 10,985 45.0 55.0 1 100.0 – 1Loudoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,742 0.1 1,516 64.4 4.5 165 109 39 25,515 49.4 50.6 23 33.8 (Z) 16Louisa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,160 0.2 474 29.7 8.0 87 184 10 21,335 23.5 76.5 2,129 0.1 (Z) (Z)Lunenburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –971 (X) 375 18.9 12.0 92 244 14 37,131 56.8 43.2 1 70.1 (Z) (Z)

Madison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,001 1.3 531 36.3 8.1 103 194 18 33,955 18.4 81.6 1 98.8 (Z) (Z)Mathews . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,185 3.5 47 55.3 8.5 (D) (D) 4 92,468 92.6 7.4 1 100.0 (Z) –Mecklenburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,687 1.2 581 20.8 15.1 168 289 27 45,850 69.1 30.9 10 19.7 1 2Middlesex. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,375 1.1 101 53.5 8.9 21 210 5 51,554 89.2 10.8 1 83.5 (Z) (Z)Montgomery . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294,286 290.2 29650 2940.2 296.6 29100 29153 2918 2927,560 2932.4 2967.6 22 11.1 (Z) 7

Nelson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,160 2.2 456 28.5 7.0 85 186 8 16,590 64.3 35.7 1 97.8 (Z) (Z)New Kent . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,357 0.9 100 29.0 7.0 19 193 3 30,860 90.7 9.3 29 3.1 (Z) 28Northampton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,021 9.9 187 43.3 19.3 52 281 44 236,321 74.6 25.4 3 47.1 2 (Z)Northumberland. . . . . . . . . . . . 3,178 2.7 128 38.3 18.0 40 314 7 57,875 95.3 4.7 1 100.0 – (Z)Nottoway . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,048 2.2 408 25.7 6.4 71 175 27 67,343 9.1 90.9 1 46.9 (Z) 1

Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,536 3.1 486 31.1 8.8 105 216 37 75,693 52.3 47.7 1 66.7 (Z) (Z)Page . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,821 7.7 549 46.4 4.0 64 117 109 198,033 1.2 98.8 3 90.9 (Z) 2Patrick . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,885 2.1 629 34.8 3.5 91 144 15 24,208 44.3 55.7 2 80.6 (Z) –Pittsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 308,715 300.5 301,304 3022.1 309.7 30289 30221 3055 3041,866 3056.2 3043.8 10 36.6 1 1Powhatan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,059 0.7 229 35.8 10.0 55 239 8 35,376 19.3 80.7 2 96.9 (Z) (Z)

Prince Edward. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,282 1.1 395 20.3 7.6 79 200 12 29,914 22.4 77.6 2 44.8 (Z) 1Prince George. . . . . . . . . . . . . 311,516 310.1 31218 3132.6 319.6 3155 31253 314 3119,683 3188.6 3111.4 18 6.6 (Z) (Z)Prince William . . . . . . . . . . . . . 322,872 (Z) 32350 3259.1 322.0 3233 3293 3210 3227,203 3239.9 3260.1 310 1.9 (Z) 65Pulaski. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,366 0.3 448 36.8 8.3 81 181 14 32,203 6.1 93.9 5 13.3 (Z) 4Rappahannock . . . . . . . . . . . . 864 0.9 443 40.2 6.8 78 177 7 16,002 29.5 70.5 1 94.9 (Z) (Z)




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

VIRGINIA—Con.

Richmond. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,976 5.8 141 20.6 19.9 45 318 7 47,199 87.5 12.5 (Z) 97.8 (Z) (Z)Roanoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332,167 330.1 34342 3451.5 341.5 3431 3490 344 3411,202 3450.6 3449.4 14 26.4 (Z) 12Rockbridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355,714 350.9 35789 3531.9 358.9 35157 35199 3519 3523,504 3513.6 3586.4 6 75.1 (Z) 3Rockingham . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3661,854 362.4 362,043 3640.7 363.9 36249 36122 36447 36218,631 363.0 3697.0 31 69.6 1 13Russell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,848 1.1 1,128 36.6 5.5 169 150 21 18,615 16.1 83.9 18 10.0 (Z) 1

Scott . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,442 2.4 1,490 38.3 2.1 158 106 13 8,519 53.7 46.3 2 42.8 (Z) 1Shenandoah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,197 2.9 989 41.3 4.6 133 135 70 70,433 9.2 90.8 6 72.6 (Z) 2Smyth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,983 0.7 877 48.6 6.3 125 142 22 24,941 13.4 86.6 7 87.4 (Z) 6Southampton . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379,732 373.0 37275 3717.8 3733.1 37169 37613 3735 37127,280 3762.6 3737.4 8 78.7 1 1Spotsylvania . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381,156 (Z) 38369 3846.1 387.0 3856 38153 386 3816,089 3829.3 3870.7 5 12.7 (Z) 3

Stafford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 909 0.1 236 50.8 3.8 26 111 2 10,530 46.4 53.6 8 12.5 (Z) 7Surry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,150 2.8 121 24.0 24.0 48 394 19 156,008 (NA) (NA) 1,967 0.1 (Z) (Z)Sussex . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,750 4.2 130 16.9 30.8 74 571 25 192,877 (NA) (NA) 1 54.8 1 1Tazewell. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,924 0.4 551 31.6 13.6 139 252 18 32,183 6.5 93.5 2 19.2 (Z) 2Warren . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,846 0.4 361 44.0 5.0 49 136 6 15,377 18.8 81.2 11 13.6 (Z) 9

Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 396,331 390.5 391,821 3949.8 393.5 39197 39108 3951 3927,785 3919.7 3980.3 10 31.1 – 10Westmoreland . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,226 5.7 165 25.5 27.3 68 410 20 121,879 95.0 5.0 2 80.6 (Z) 1Wise . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40570 400.1 40140 4044.3 406.4 4019 40136 401 406,729 4032.0 4068.0 6 12.6 – 5Wythe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,372 1.0 876 31.5 6.4 151 172 31 34,849 7.6 92.4 4 47.1 (Z) 3York . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 411,626 410.2 4244 4288.6 – 421 4217 423 4266,409 4289.2 4210.8 938 0.4 – 30

Independent Cities

Alexandria . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – (21) (NA) (NA) (21) (21) (21) (NA) (NA) (NA) 360 0.3 (Z) –Bedford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (14) (NA) (14) (NA) (NA) (14) (14) (14) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Bristol . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (39) (NA) (39) (NA) (NA) (39) (39) (39) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Buena Vista . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (35) (NA) (35) (NA) (NA) (35) (35) (35) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Charlottesville . . . . . . . . . . . . . (10) (NA) (10) (NA) (NA) (10) (10) (10) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –

Chesapeake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,023 0.5 43268 4364.2 4310.4 4361 43228 4336 43133,951 4392.1 437.9 539 1.3 (Z) 12Clifton Forge11 . . . . . . . . . . . . (X) (NA) (X) (NA) (NA) (X) (X) (X) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Colonial Heights . . . . . . . . . . . (18) (NA) (17) (NA) (NA) (17) (17) (17) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) 100.0 – –Covington. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (12) (NA) (12) (NA) (NA) (12) (12) (12) (NA) (NA) (NA) 2 – – 2Danville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (30) (NA) (30) (NA) (NA) (30) (30) (30) (NA) (NA) (NA) 15 – (Z) 7

Emporia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (24) (NA) (24) (NA) (NA) (24) (24) (24) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1 – – 1Fairfax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (20) (NA) (21) (NA) (NA) (21) (21) (21) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Falls Church . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (20) (NA) (21) (NA) (NA) (21) (21) (21) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (37) (NA) (37) (NA) (NA) (37) (37) (37) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1 100.0 – 1Fredericksburg . . . . . . . . . . . . (38) (NA) (38) (NA) (NA) (38) (38) (38) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1 – – 1

Galax . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (16) (NA) (23) (NA) (NA) (23) (23) (23) (NA) (NA) (NA) 2 13.9 – 2Hampton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – (42) (NA) (NA) (42) (42) (42) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1 2.6 (Z) 1Harrisonburg. . . . . . . . . . . . . . (36) (NA) (36) (NA) (NA) (36) (36) (36) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) 100.0 – –Hopewell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (31) (NA) (31) (NA) (NA) (31) (31) (31) (NA) (NA) (NA) 154 – – 21Lexington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (35) (NA) (35) (NA) (NA) (35) (35) (35) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –

Lynchburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (15) (NA) (15) (NA) (NA) (15) (15) (15) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) – – (Z)Manassas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (32) (NA) (32) (NA) (NA) (32) (32) (32) (NA) (NA) (NA) 3 100.0 – –Manassas Park . . . . . . . . . . . . (32) (NA) (32) (NA) (NA) (32) (32) (32) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) 100.0 – (Z)Martinsville . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (27) (NA) (27) (NA) (NA) (27) (27) (27) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Newport News. . . . . . . . . . . . . – – (42) (NA) (NA) (42) (42) (42) (NA) (NA) (NA) 40 5.9 (Z) 29

Norfolk. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – (43) (NA) (NA) (43) (43) (43) (NA) (NA) (NA) 3 9.5 (Z) 2Norton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (40) (NA) (40) (NA) (NA) (40) (40) (40) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1 – – 1Petersburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (18) (NA) (19) (NA) (NA) (19) (19) (19) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Poquoson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (41) (NA) (42) (NA) (NA) (42) (42) (42) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Portsmouth. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – (43) (NA) (NA) (43) (43) (43) (NA) (NA) (NA) 2 98.2 (Z) –

Radford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (29) (NA) (29) (NA) (NA) (29) (29) (29) (NA) (NA) (NA) 3 – – 3Richmond. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – (26) (NA) (NA) (26) (26) (26) (NA) (NA) (NA) 89 0.1 (Z) 89Roanoke . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – (34) (NA) (NA) (34) (34) (34) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) 100.0 (Z) –Salem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (33) (NA) (34) (NA) (NA) (34) (34) (34) (NA) (NA) (NA) 3 – – 3South Boston25 . . . . . . . . . . . . (X) (NA) (X) (NA) (NA) (X) (X) (X) (NA) (NA) (NA) (X) (NA) (X) (X)

Staunton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (13) (NA) (13) (NA) (NA) (13) (13) (13) (NA) (NA) (NA) – – – –Suffolk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,797 1.3 247 52.2 15.4 71 286 41 165,745 87.3 12.7 81 8.2 (Z) 79Virginia Beach. . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,298 (Z) 172 58.1 5.2 28 165 10 56,169 79.9 20.1 4 89.7 (Z) (Z)Waynesboro . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (13) (NA) (13) (NA) (NA) (13) (13) (13) (NA) (NA) (NA) 8 99.5 (Z) 3Williamsburg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (28) (NA) (28) (NA) (NA) (28) (28) (28) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) 12.5 (Z) –Winchester . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . (22) (NA) (22) (NA) (NA) (22) (22) (22) (NA) (NA) (NA) (Z) 100.0 – –

WASHINGTON. . . . . . . . . . . 1,596,733 0.9 35,939 57.5 12.8 15,318 426 5,331 148,327 67.2 32.8 5,310 27.7 3,040 1,020

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,988 14.2 717 15.9 50.2 1,067 1,488 203 282,921 77.3 22.7 197 59.4 187 7Asotin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,630 (X) 180 30.0 51.1 280 1,558 9 50,478 64.0 36.0 5 93.9 (Z) 5Benton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 86,515 2.1 1,313 73.4 7.8 608 463 401 305,081 91.5 8.5 780 5.6 239 19Chelan. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120,092 7.0 1,193 69.1 2.6 112 94 169 142,000 97.1 2.9 80 19.2 51 12Clallam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,688 0.2 455 74.3 0.7 22 49 18 39,051 (NA) (NA) 16 60.0 6 8




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

WASHINGTON—Con.

Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,962 0.2 1,596 79.2 1.1 71 44 54 34,091 52.3 47.7 183 64.8 6 40Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,985 (X) 255 24.7 42.4 295 1,156 27 103,984 85.6 14.4 5 23.2 4 1Cowlitz. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,934 0.5 532 66.0 1.7 40 74 31 57,444 35.5 64.5 170 3.3 4 12Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,155 7.4 947 49.9 24.9 879 928 124 131,307 95.0 5.0 33 33.9 25 4Ferry . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 355 0.5 207 21.7 22.7 799 3,862 4 20,995 21.2 78.8 6 37.0 5 1

Franklin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 111,040 10.5 943 36.3 29.0 665 705 350 371,668 84.9 15.1 457 27.6 438 15Garfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –16,746 (X) 198 18.2 61.1 312 1,578 20 99,889 79.3 20.7 1 50.0 1 (Z)Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 192,007 14.7 1,801 32.4 27.0 1,074 596 882 489,592 71.1 28.9 963 29.9 933 22Grays Harbor . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,482 1.1 510 55.9 3.5 54 105 30 58,853 46.4 53.6 26 42.8 3 12Island . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,789 0.3 348 77.3 0.6 15 43 10 28,164 22.1 77.9 9 71.9 1 7

Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,517 0.8 207 71.5 0.5 12 59 7 32,232 14.6 85.4 12 25.8 1 3King . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,643 0.1 1,548 88.2 0.3 42 27 120 77,555 60.5 39.5 360 28.1 7 331Kitsap . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,926 0.2 587 89.6 0.5 16 27 31 52,322 43.4 56.6 30 76.4 2 23Kittitas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,898 3.9 931 51.2 9.2 231 248 56 60,541 68.2 31.8 209 4.0 200 7Klickitat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,043 6.1 702 36.2 25.4 607 864 52 74,681 76.7 23.3 34 58.3 27 4

Lewis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,467 2.0 1,402 57.9 2.3 131 93 89 63,802 24.0 76.0 25 54.9 7 7Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,859 8.5 747 12.6 61.2 1,233 1,651 94 125,241 91.1 8.9 39 78.8 36 2Mason . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,164 2.2 320 78.8 2.2 22 68 52 162,525 9.7 90.3 17 38.9 1 4Okanogan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 89,302 13.4 1,486 49.4 14.9 1,241 835 137 92,475 84.8 15.2 88 38.5 73 7Pacific . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,045 4.6 341 56.6 5.0 52 152 31 89,933 14.1 85.9 9 35.8 3 4

Pend Oreille . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 263 38.4 9.5 61 233 3 12,798 46.9 53.1 3 51.0 1 1Pierce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,763 0.2 1,474 80.7 0.7 57 39 94 63,887 37.1 62.9 227 33.2 8 120San Juan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,441 0.6 225 67.1 1.8 17 76 3 13,840 36.8 63.2 2 64.3 (Z) 1Skagit . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94,185 3.8 872 59.7 4.9 114 131 217 249,294 70.1 29.9 44 27.7 9 25Skamania. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 99 60.6 – 6 58 12 116,444 13.9 86.1 13 5.8 1 1

Snohomish . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35,767 0.3 1,574 80.8 1.3 69 44 127 80,652 45.7 54.3 144 15.3 5 71Spokane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –8,044 (X) 2,225 52.2 12.1 643 289 94 42,181 82.3 17.7 176 78.7 11 110Stevens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,592 0.3 1,269 34.5 12.6 528 416 28 22,258 40.9 59.1 25 35.5 10 5Thurston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,815 0.6 1,155 76.0 2.1 74 64 115 99,286 43.0 57.0 45 65.2 7 25Wahkiakum. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –152 (X) 125 43.2 2.4 12 99 3 23,832 2.8 97.2 1 43.1 (Z) (Z)

Walla Walla . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,830 2.9 890 47.4 28.2 701 787 339 381,003 (NA) (NA) 154 30.3 125 12Whatcom . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 97,092 2.5 1,485 62.2 2.4 148 100 288 193,845 26.4 73.6 88 31.1 25 50Whitman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –44,698 (X) 1,087 14.4 58.3 1,328 1,222 163 149,615 95.5 4.5 9 75.0 3 5Yakima . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 471,669 11.4 3,730 66.5 5.7 1,679 450 844 226,239 60.2 39.8 627 15.7 571 36

WEST VIRGINIA . . . . . . . . . –29,891 (X) 20,812 27.3 6.3 3,585 172 483 23,199 14.4 85.6 5,150 1.8 (Z) 190

Barbour . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,046 (X) 445 24.5 7.9 79 176 4 8,715 16.9 83.1 (6) (NA) – 1Berkeley. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –936 (X) 676 51.8 3.0 76 113 18 27,263 66.4 33.6 (6) (NA) – 9Boone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –68 (X) 24 16.7 – 3 134 (Z) 2,458 66.1 33.9 (6) (NA) – 1Braxton . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,255 (X) 314 13.1 9.2 66 212 2 5,417 15.1 84.9 (6) (NA) – 1Brooke. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –425 (X) 98 32.7 5.1 14 141 1 7,429 25.5 74.5 (6) (NA) – 5

Cabell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,448 (X) 438 31.5 1.6 42 97 3 6,781 78.9 21.1 (6) (NA) – 16Calhoun . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –524 (X) 244 14.3 7.4 50 206 1 4,988 10.8 89.2 (6) (NA) – (Z)Clay . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 117 7.7 3.4 19 160 (Z) 3,094 14.1 85.9 (6) (NA) – (Z)Doddridge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,711 (X) 455 20.0 7.0 95 208 1 3,240 24.8 75.2 (6) (NA) – (Z)Fayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –430 (X) 240 38.3 2.1 24 101 2 6,479 41.5 58.5 (6) (NA) – 5

Gilmer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,514 (X) 249 9.6 16.1 66 265 3 10,237 5.6 94.4 (6) (NA) – (Z)Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,335 1.7 357 23.8 17.6 108 302 39 109,947 1.0 99.0 (6) (NA) – 1Greenbrier . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –68 (X) 783 25.0 11.0 193 246 35 44,667 3.0 97.0 (6) (NA) – 4Hampshire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,094 0.6 635 29.6 9.9 139 218 20 30,932 14.6 85.4 (6) (NA) – 1Hancock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –192 (X) 85 48.2 1.2 7 83 1 7,012 77.2 22.8 (6) (NA) – 2

Hardy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,470 3.3 468 29.7 13.7 128 274 124 264,160 0.8 99.2 (6) (NA) – 3Harrison. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,617 (X) 798 28.2 4.5 120 150 5 6,419 19.2 80.8 (6) (NA) – 9Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,295 (X) 842 20.7 3.8 129 153 5 5,576 23.5 76.5 (6) (NA) – 2Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,133 0.2 474 58.6 7.2 72 152 17 36,584 41.0 59.0 (6) (NA) (Z) 2Kanawha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 210 44.3 – 20 95 1 3,100 33.5 66.5 (6) (NA) – 33

Lewis. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –485 (X) 372 15.1 9.1 79 212 3 7,175 13.5 86.5 (6) (NA) – 1Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 345 0.2 242 30.6 3.3 35 144 1 4,000 75.8 24.2 (6) (NA) – 1Logan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 21 42.9 – 2 112 (Z) 13,667 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) – 4McDowell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 7 28.6 – 1 122 (Z) 6,571 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) – 4Marion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,333 (X) 464 32.8 1.9 50 108 2 3,634 40.9 59.1 (6) (NA) – 7

Marshall . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,919 (X) 706 21.0 1.4 91 128 3 4,171 32.9 67.1 (6) (NA) – 3Mason . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,262 (X) 939 28.0 4.8 142 151 17 17,972 59.9 40.1 (6) (NA) – 2Mercer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,484 (X) 393 28.5 3.8 56 142 3 7,023 24.9 75.1 (6) (NA) – 5Mineral . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,162 0.4 465 30.5 7.3 81 174 14 30,527 6.7 93.3 (6) (NA) – 2Mingo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 35 88.6 5.7 2 45 (Z) 800 (NA) (NA) (6) (NA) – 3

Monongalia. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,864 (X) 478 28.2 2.7 60 126 2 5,136 16.9 83.1 (6) (NA) – 10Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,821 (X) 682 20.7 10.1 145 213 17 25,273 5.9 94.1 (6) (NA) – (Z)Morgan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –968 (X) 178 27.5 3.9 23 129 1 7,152 53.6 46.4 (6) (NA) – 1Nicholas. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –294 (X) 332 28.9 3.9 44 132 2 7,479 11.2 88.8 (6) (NA) – 3Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –680 (X) 166 22.3 2.4 22 134 2 10,506 23.3 76.7 (6) (NA) – 7




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

WEST VIRGINIA—Con.

Pendleton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,637 3.8 546 19.0 17.6 171 313 74 135,553 1.1 98.9 (6) (NA) (Z) (Z)Pleasants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –193 (X) 203 29.6 1.0 23 113 1 2,744 45.7 54.3 (6) (NA) – 1Pocahontas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –845 (X) 376 17.6 18.4 123 327 5 12,556 7.6 92.4 (6) (NA) – 1Preston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,570 (X) 917 22.9 4.5 142 155 10 11,161 16.8 83.2 (6) (NA) – 1Putnam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,123 (X) 505 34.9 1.8 57 112 6 12,634 81.7 18.3 (6) (NA) – 3

Raleigh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –614 (X) 230 39.6 4.8 33 142 2 8,600 22.0 78.0 (6) (NA) – 9Randolph . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 573 0.1 446 28.3 11.9 101 227 6 13,832 10.3 89.7 (6) (NA) – 3Ritchie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,105 (X) 363 16.8 7.2 81 223 3 7,377 19.0 81.0 (6) (NA) – 1Roane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,989 (X) 538 15.6 6.1 99 184 3 5,928 14.0 86.0 (6) (NA) – 1Summers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –3,085 (X) 313 18.8 7.0 55 175 5 16,419 43.7 56.3 (6) (NA) – 3

Taylor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,263 1.0 348 39.9 3.7 43 125 4 11,555 47.2 52.8 (6) (NA) – 2Tucker . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –426 (X) 198 25.8 8.6 35 178 1 5,970 15.1 84.9 (6) (NA) – 1Tyler . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 374 0.3 300 21.7 4.7 53 177 1 4,840 21.6 78.4 (6) (NA) – (Z)Upshur. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –2,347 (X) 480 33.3 4.6 69 145 3 5,794 18.2 81.8 (6) (NA) – 2Wayne . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –845 (X) 217 17.1 5.5 36 166 1 6,410 59.2 40.8 (6) (NA) – 3

Webster . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –71 (X) 110 45.5 0.9 11 102 (Z) 1,355 33.6 66.4 (6) (NA) – (Z)Wetzel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –806 (X) 336 22.6 2.4 49 146 1 2,137 26.0 74.0 (6) (NA) – 1Wirt . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –264 (X) 223 21.1 6.3 40 181 4 18,036 55.5 44.5 (6) (NA) – (Z)Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,290 (X) 696 29.5 1.4 77 111 3 4,885 31.3 68.7 (6) (NA) – 9Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 525 (NA) 35 40.0 2.9 4 104 (Z) 4,714 79.4 20.6 (6) (NA) – 2

WISCONSIN . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,164,589 0.8 77,131 27.6 8.2 15,742 204 5,623 72,906 30.1 69.9 7,590 10.7 196 623

Adams. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,845 5.1 414 25.8 11.8 124 298 53 127,309 85.5 14.5 42 100.0 40 (Z)Ashland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –559 (X) 227 12.3 11.5 59 259 6 27,454 14.7 85.3 47 2.3 (Z) 1Barron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30,049 3.4 1,647 22.8 9.4 352 214 150 91,025 20.8 79.2 16 92.4 6 4Bayfield . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,483 1.0 468 16.9 11.1 112 239 12 25,075 31.4 68.6 9 34.6 (Z) (Z)Brown . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42,294 0.6 1,117 44.0 6.4 197 176 150 134,070 11.1 88.9 522 3.4 1 31

Buffalo . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,622 4.0 1,128 16.6 14.6 316 280 96 84,997 13.7 86.3 234 4.4 5 1Burnett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,356 1.6 451 16.9 9.8 98 218 16 34,625 28.2 71.8 3 87.0 1 (Z)Calumet . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,765 2.6 733 33.8 8.6 150 205 82 111,674 18.2 81.8 8 98.2 (Z) 5Chippewa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,174 2.2 1,621 18.6 9.1 374 231 106 65,589 18.5 81.5 11 98.2 2 5Clark . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34,488 7.4 2,200 14.6 6.3 461 210 174 79,289 8.8 91.2 5 95.9 (Z) 2

Columbia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,445 1.4 1,526 29.0 11.3 348 228 105 68,881 44.3 55.7 10 85.4 (Z) 4Crawford . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,382 2.1 1,278 19.1 7.3 255 199 42 32,649 31.6 68.4 3 98.3 (Z) 2Dane . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61,370 0.4 2,887 40.4 7.6 515 179 288 99,632 29.7 70.3 125 49.2 1 48Dodge . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,266 2.3 1,968 29.4 8.3 404 205 179 90,888 30.0 70.0 14 97.9 (Z) 7Door . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,982 2.0 877 35.0 5.6 135 154 40 45,701 37.9 62.1 7 73.1 1 2

Douglas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 948 0.1 391 15.9 8.4 85 217 5 12,010 33.7 66.3 9 13.3 (Z) 4Dunn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,478 2.6 1,683 21.7 9.8 399 237 104 61,544 32.9 67.1 14 99.1 8 2Eau Claire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,376 0.6 1,174 26.6 5.1 204 174 50 42,566 35.4 64.6 31 50.8 1 10Florence. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –1,096 (X) 121 21.5 4.1 21 177 1 11,901 31.3 68.7 1 100.0 (Z) (Z)Fond du Lac . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,992 1.2 1,634 27.2 8.8 344 211 166 101,700 25.0 75.0 41 45.6 (Z) 13

Forest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 476 0.3 164 23.8 11.0 34 205 4 21,500 20.8 79.2 2 70.8 (Z) (Z)Grant. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28,060 3.7 2,490 20.2 10.1 606 243 187 74,958 20.8 79.2 275 3.1 (Z) 3Green . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,958 2.5 1,490 30.5 8.4 307 206 117 78,668 23.1 76.9 6 96.6 1 3Green Lake . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,185 3.7 670 23.0 9.6 148 221 46 68,294 43.5 56.5 4 95.9 1 2Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,623 2.8 1,686 23.1 9.9 367 218 116 69,051 25.3 74.7 4 96.6 (Z) 1

Iron . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –276 (X) 62 12.9 11.3 13 206 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1 100.0 (Z) 1Jackson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23,779 6.3 914 19.7 12.6 258 282 70 76,328 45.7 54.3 3 96.7 (Z) 1Jefferson . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33,391 2.0 1,421 37.1 6.4 248 174 139 97,621 46.2 53.8 52 52.1 2 10Juneau . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,328 3.1 805 26.8 8.9 180 224 51 63,280 52.7 47.3 7 99.6 5 1Kenosha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,613 0.2 466 51.9 8.6 89 190 34 73,043 66.4 33.6 34 7.9 (Z) 16

Kewaunee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,221 5.7 915 27.2 7.0 174 190 105 114,552 23.3 76.7 702 0.4 (Z) 1La Crosse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,993 0.4 868 24.0 9.2 174 201 42 47,986 23.3 76.7 67 42.3 (Z) 18Lafayette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,089 10.6 1,205 24.1 13.3 343 284 131 109,057 29.1 70.9 3 95.4 (Z) 1Langlade . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,959 4.1 542 22.1 11.4 141 260 56 103,972 66.5 33.5 14 81.3 4 1Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,423 1.6 593 27.0 5.1 98 166 24 40,091 40.0 60.0 10 42.5 (Z) 3

Manitowoc . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,402 2.2 1,469 35.1 6.7 257 175 147 100,271 14.0 86.0 1,324 0.4 (Z) 11Marathon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41,627 1.2 2,898 25.8 5.9 531 183 205 70,890 17.1 82.9 178 14.2 2 16Marinette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,520 1.3 729 25.8 8.5 149 204 41 56,036 23.0 77.0 41 29.1 2 4Marquette. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,853 3.7 624 25.8 10.6 146 233 38 60,188 47.2 52.8 5 91.0 (Z) 1Menominee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – – 4 75.0 – (Z) 89 (D) (NA) (NA) (NA) 1 63.1 (Z) (Z)

Milwaukee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,394 (Z) 78 62.8 1.3 6 72 9 115,308 96.6 3.4 2,057 0.3 1 174Monroe . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27,426 3.3 1,938 22.5 6.6 352 182 103 52,927 27.3 72.7 6 98.2 (Z) 3Oconto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,085 3.9 1,132 22.3 6.7 219 193 74 65,360 20.7 79.3 6 72.4 1 1Oneida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,469 0.6 183 24.6 14.8 51 279 13 69,410 81.4 18.6 32 13.8 (Z) 3Outagamie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37,474 0.7 1,430 36.7 8.1 263 184 146 102,431 21.7 78.3 72 28.1 (Z) 15

Ozaukee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,819 0.3 533 41.8 4.3 75 142 38 71,901 37.8 62.2 128 6.1 1 6Pepin . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,303 8.8 501 23.0 9.0 111 222 35 69,431 20.8 79.2 1 97.9 (Z) (Z)Pierce . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,766 2.4 1,510 30.6 6.2 267 177 72 47,900 33.1 66.9 5 97.4 (Z) 2Polk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14,293 2.2 1,659 28.7 7.7 293 177 72 43,696 26.8 73.2 10 98.9 (Z) 3Portage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29,894 2.0 1,197 27.6 9.2 292 244 139 116,081 71.3 28.7 84 92.5 61 9




County


Total($1,000)

Per-cent

oftotal1



Groundwater,

percentof total


per day)

Number

Percent

Totalacres

(1,000)

Aver-age

size offarm

(acres)Total

(mil. dol.)

Averageper farm

(dol.)

Percent from

Irri-gation

Publicsupply

Lessthan

50acres

500acres

or more Crops2

Live-stock

andpoultry3

WISCONSIN—Con.

Price . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,905 1.4 477 15.9 9.2 104 218 15 31,314 29.2 70.8 9 21.9 (Z) 1Racine. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16,917 0.4 631 53.2 8.9 124 197 73 115,949 50.9 49.1 40 34.2 2 27Richland. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13,409 5.1 1,358 19.5 6.0 258 190 52 38,529 18.3 81.7 3 97.5 (Z) 1Rock . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17,269 0.5 1,529 45.4 10.2 344 225 118 77,242 53.8 46.2 163 17.7 3 20Rusk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,789 3.9 715 13.8 9.4 173 242 30 42,326 10.0 90.0 3 77.7 1 1

St. Croix. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,162 1.2 1,864 35.7 6.4 310 166 98 52,502 29.2 70.8 8 98.9 (Z) 4Sauk . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,667 1.3 1,673 22.6 9.4 353 211 116 69,375 21.5 78.5 14 99.1 1 6Sawyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,137 1.1 230 15.7 10.0 54 235 13 54,370 47.4 52.6 3 86.6 (Z) 1Shawano . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,352 8.0 1,465 23.6 6.7 271 185 130 88,816 10.1 89.9 6 96.3 (Z) 2Sheboygan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20,796 0.6 1,116 40.9 8.3 195 175 104 93,154 20.6 79.4 513 1.8 (Z) 20

Taylor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,446 3.1 1,056 17.2 8.6 257 244 56 52,948 11.0 89.0 2 97.0 (Z) 1Trempealeau. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21,621 3.8 1,744 17.6 8.2 368 211 120 68,660 18.0 82.0 6 96.6 (Z) 3Vernon. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,835 3.8 2,230 22.9 5.5 382 171 90 40,453 19.4 80.6 206 2.9 (Z) 1Vilas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,942 0.9 71 52.1 7.0 10 137 5 71,014 96.9 3.1 8 25.6 (Z) (Z)Walworth . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15,205 0.8 988 41.1 11.2 220 222 88 88,563 43.0 57.0 15 99.5 1 9

Washburn. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,112 1.9 471 16.1 9.1 105 224 17 36,363 32.7 67.3 4 73.5 1 1Washington . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,401 0.4 844 39.7 6.2 130 154 73 86,342 38.2 61.8 16 81.8 (Z) 10Waukesha . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,407 0.1 762 58.3 5.5 98 129 36 47,088 65.2 34.8 38 99.1 3 27Waupaca . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,337 2.0 1,398 28.5 7.2 247 177 86 61,675 20.9 79.1 12 98.9 2 6Waushara. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,495 8.2 717 28.7 10.9 193 269 86 119,775 77.8 22.2 32 99.9 27 1Winnebago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,622 0.2 963 32.6 8.1 170 177 58 60,541 33.4 66.6 73 18.1 (Z) 22Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26,956 1.2 1,108 26.1 8.5 228 206 80 72,528 40.1 59.9 133 15.4 3 7

WYOMING . . . . . . . . . . . . . 184,198 1.3 9,422 21.4 44.5 34,403 3,651 864 91,688 15.9 84.1 5,170 14.8 4,500 107

Albany . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,443 0.4 320 9.4 61.9 2,384 7,451 28 88,644 6.8 93.2 344 1.4 336 7Big Horn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,572 5.4 501 25.5 27.9 412 822 37 74,295 41.9 58.1 411 6.2 387 3Campbell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,800 0.8 532 16.2 61.8 2,986 5,613 33 62,252 1.3 98.7 115 52.5 42 2Carbon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,829 3.8 290 17.6 56.6 2,330 8,033 43 148,766 2.4 97.6 320 1.9 313 3Converse . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,662 2.3 339 13.9 58.4 2,518 7,427 31 92,891 5.5 94.5 398 5.8 188 2

Crook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,318 8.5 440 6.1 69.1 1,523 3,462 37 84,441 1.2 98.8 78 19.8 66 7Fremont . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,831 1.7 1,019 29.3 25.8 2,504 2,457 60 58,738 25.0 75.0 433 4.1 411 7Goshen . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24,172 12.9 665 9.9 48.1 1,258 1,892 120 179,710 16.0 84.0 400 24.7 397 3Hot Springs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,370 2.8 147 27.9 41.5 877 5,963 8 55,367 12.7 87.3 105 27.7 77 1Johnson. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,466 2.2 272 11.8 68.8 2,155 7,924 26 97,276 2.3 97.7 124 2.8 119 1

Laramie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18,014 0.8 755 18.9 46.9 1,755 2,324 66 86,784 26.9 73.1 217 69.1 198 15Lincoln. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,640 1.9 495 30.9 24.2 365 737 24 48,873 15.3 84.7 196 5.8 177 8Natrona . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,110 0.3 380 21.8 42.6 2,871 7,555 29 75,050 10.1 89.9 227 21.6 174 12Niobrara. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,292 17.2 243 2.1 86.8 1,600 6,583 35 143,527 10.0 90.0 62 90.8 61 (Z)Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,000 1.9 711 40.5 21.5 810 1,140 53 74,335 47.1 52.9 390 12.6 338 3

Platte . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,670 7.4 462 13.6 49.1 1,344 2,910 80 172,957 9.3 90.7 275 16.9 255 2Sheridan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,067 0.8 561 26.4 40.6 1,638 2,920 42 74,349 9.2 90.8 227 0.4 220 6Sublette . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,493 3.5 270 29.6 45.6 586 2,169 27 100,511 11.4 88.6 242 11.0 238 3Sweetwater. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171 (Z) 170 24.7 32.4 1,480 8,707 7 41,753 9.7 90.3 171 29.9 93 9

Teton. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . –85 (X) 110 33.6 23.6 57 519 7 67,336 16.8 83.2 46 14.5 39 6Uinta . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,648 0.6 335 29.9 35.8 918 2,740 19 58,024 4.3 95.7 189 10.7 183 5Washakie . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,204 2.9 184 25.5 47.3 427 2,318 25 137,342 42.5 57.5 170 4.1 168 (Z)Weston . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,511 5.0 221 7.7 75.1 1,606 7,265 26 115,416 2.1 97.9 25 13.8 22 1

– Represents zero. D Data withheld to avoid disclosure. NA Not available. X Not applicable. Z Less than .05 percent or .5 of the unit presented.

1For total earnings, see Table B-9. 2Includes nursery and greenhouse crops. 3Includes related products. 4Withdrawals. 5Represents $0 to $50,000. Figure in table represents midpoint ofrange. 6Data not collected. 7Baltimore County, MD, includes Baltimore city. 8St. Louis County, MO, includes St. Louis city. 9Yellowstone National Park County became incorporated withGallatin and Park Counties, MT; effective November 7, 1997. 10Albemarle County, VA, includes Charlottesville city. 11Clifton Forge independent city became incorporated with Alleghany County, VA;effective July 1, 2001. 12Alleghany County, VA, includes Covington city. 13Augusta County, VA, includes Staunton and Waynesboro cities. 14Bedford County, VA, includes Bedford city.15Campbell County, VA, includes Lynchburg city. 16Carroll County, VA, includes Galax city. 17Chesterfield County, VA, includes Colonial Heights city. 18Dinwiddie County, VA, includes ColonialHeights and Petersburg cities. 19Dinwiddie County, VA, includes Petersburg city. 20Fairfax County, VA, includes Fairfax and Falls Church cities. 21Fairfax County, VA, includes Alexandria, Fairfax,and Falls Church cities. 22Frederick County, VA, includes Winchester city. 23Grayson County, VA, includes Galax city. 24Greenville County, VA, includes Emporia city. 25South Bostonindependent city became incorporated with Halifax County, VA; effective June 30, 1995. 26Henrico County, VA, includes Richmond city. 27Henry County, VA, includes Martinsville city. 28JamesCity County, VA, includes Williamsburg city. 29Montgomery County, VA, includes Radford city. 30Pittsylvania County, VA, includes Danville city. 31Prince George County, VA, includes Hopewellcity. 32Prince William County, VA, includes Manassas and Manassas Park cities. 33Roanoke County, VA, includes Salem city. 34Roanoke County, VA, includes Roanoke and Salem cities.35Rockbridge County, VA, includes Buena Vista and Lexington cities. 36Rockingham County, VA, includes Harrisonburg city. 37Southampton County, VA, includes Franklin city. 38SpotsylvaniaCounty, VA, includes Fredericksburg city. 39Washington County, VA, includes Bristol city. 40Wise County, VA, includes Norton city. 41York County, VA, includes Poquoson city. 42YorkCounty, VA, includes Hampton, Newport News, and Poquoson cities. 43Chesapeake city, VA, includes Norfolk and Portsmouth cities.

Survey, Census, or Data Collection Method: Farm earnings—Based on the Regional Economic Information System (REIS); for more information, see <http://www.bea.gov/regional/methods.cfm>.Agriculture—Based on the 2002 Census of Agriculture; for information, see Appendix B, Limitations of the Data and Methodology, and <http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/>. Water use—For information,see <http://pubs.usgs.gov/chapter11/>.

Sources: Farm earnings—U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis, Regional Economic Information System (REIS), downloaded estimates and software, accessed June 5, 2007 (related Internet site<http://www.bea.gov/regional/docs/reis2005dvd.cfm>). Agriculture—U.S. Department of Agriculture, National Agricultural Statistics Service, 2002 Census of Agriculture, Volume 1, Geographic AreaSeries, accessed April 9, 2007 (related Internet site <http://www.agcensus.usda.gov/>). Water use—U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), Water Use in the United States, individual state/county andUnited States by state, accessed May 19, 2006 (related Internet site <http://water.usgs.gov/watuse>).


Documents

€¦ · Table B-14. Counties — Farm Earnings, Agriculture, and Water Use [Includes United States, states, and 3,141 counties/county equivalents defined as of February 22, 2005