Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

WHY ARE THERE SO MANY OCCURRENCES OF “NA”S IN “HISTORICAL HIGHLIGHTS: 2002 AND EARLIER CENSUS YEARS”?

0
Posted

WHY ARE THERE SO MANY OCCURRENCES OF “NA”S IN “HISTORICAL HIGHLIGHTS: 2002 AND EARLIER CENSUS YEARS”?

0

The “Historical Highlights: 2002 and Earlier Census Years” table was expanded to include several more crops in 2002 than what was presented in 1997 and earlier years. Resources would not permit the intensive retabulation of national and state level data needed to provide these data in this table prior to 2002. Return to Top WHY ARE THE TOTAL NUMBER OF FARMS WITH CROPS SALES AND TOTAL NUMBER OF FARMS WITH LIVESTOCK SALES LESS THAN THE TOTAL NUMBER OF FARMS IN TABLE 2? [chapter 1, table 2] This question refers to the number of farms in Table 2, Market Value of Agricultural Products Sold. Numbers are shown for operations with crop sales and operations with livestock sales. If an operation had both crop and livestock sales, they are included in both categories and would lead to duplication if these subtotals are added together. In addition, some farm operations are included in the Census of Agriculture even though they had less than $1000 of sales of agricultural products or government pay

Related Questions

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.

Experts123