The contours of this decreasing size are sketched in Table 7
which shows the long-period changes in farm size distribution.
These figures reveal a striking increase in the percentage of the
smallest class (less than 20 acres), from 62% in 1950 to 77% in
1978. As a result, all large-sized farms decreased in importance.
The greatest decline was recorded for farms of 100-500 acres,
the scale usually considered to be the most economic and profit-
able. This size decreased from 11.4% in 1950 to 6.6% in 1978.
In addition, the acreage contained in these middle-sized farms fell
from 35% to 24 percent. On the other hand, large-scale farms
of 500 acres and over, though decreasing in numerical importance,
increased their acreage from 50% to 60% of the total. Thus, these
data portray the emergence of two divergent trends over the past
three decades: an increasing cluster of very small, highly diversi-
fied, and relatively uneconomic family-type farms at one end of
the size scale, and a concentration of a very small number of very
large, and most likely highly specialized (livestock) farms at the
opposite end. The outcome has been a steady squeeze on the
medium-sized farm, traditionally considered the most commer-
cially productive.
 The potentially negative impacts of these changes on agri-
cultural viability are intuitively apparent. For example, though
they represented 77% of the total number of farms in 1978, farms
of less than 20 acres accounted for the following: 91% of all
farms earning less than $500 per year; 87% of farms producing


exclusively for home production; 85% of all operators who re-
ported nonagricultural work as their main occupation; 84% of
operators who spent more than 200 days per year in off-farm
work; and 80% of farms employing unpaid (family) labor. Hence
it is safe to conclude that any increasing tendency toward smaller
farms is associated with decreased farm income and productivity,
a drop off in commercial sales, and a weakening effort in general.
Finally, the size question seems all the more serious since the most
rapid growth in farm numbers has occurred in the smallest cate-
gory of all, namely those units under three acres. Between 1950-78,
the share of such garden-type farms grew from 6% to 24% of total
farm units. In 1978, these miniature units represented over 50%
of all farms earning less than $500 annually.
 In summary, the evidence points to a measurable renaissance
in agriculture for the Territory in the 1970s. In broad outline, this
rebirth involves strong livestock and field crop components, a
fruit and nut sector which should blossom as recent plantings
reach maturity, and a waning vegetable sector. Taken together
these trends sharply reverse the historical slide since the advent
of tourism and manufacturing diversification. Yet the weaknesses
emphasized -- declining farm size, production for sale, and full-time
effort indicate on the one hand the potential fragility of the
rural base, and on the other hand, the need for a forceful and
well-integrated farm policy to sustain this take-off through the
1980s and beyond.


TABLE 7


CHANGES IN FARM SIZE DISTRIBUTION, 1950-1978 (Acres)


Farm Size
 Less than 3
 No. Farms
 Acres

 20 -99
 No. Farms
 Acres

 100 499
 No. Farms
 Acres

 500 and Over
 No. Farms
 Acres


1950


61.9
5.7


17.8
8.9


11.4
34.5


4.0
50.9


1960


68.3
5.3


19.8
10.8


8.2
21.1


3.8
62.7


1964 1970


All figures in percentages.


1975



72.8
4.4


15.9
9.6


8.6
24.8


2.8
61.3


1978



77.2
6.3


14.0
9.8


6.6
23.7


2.1
60.2


 MELVINA'S BOUTIQUE
 Lotin fo, tI. Qu,, C Lad
 CEamicji, Etc.
 Lme Tree Court
 67 King Stree7t, 2-reJ5erikted

Si;e 16-24L/n 77 2-1561