March, 1966
Agricultural Economics Series 
8
AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS(
COTTON PLANTINQALTER
/ -
/,
r
'Ir
V
Agricultural Experiment Station
of Auburn University
E. V. Smith, DirectorAurnAabm
- k
Auburn, Alabama

Statement of Review from State ASCS 
Office
This publ i cation has been reviewed 
by representatives of the State
ASCS office and the basic provisions 
of the 1966 cotton program presented
here are the same as provisions 
administered by the State office. 
The
county ASCS office should be consulted 
on conservation uses approved for
diverted acres and for meeting 
conserving base requirements.
Table of Contents
Surmary . . , . . ., 41 . *. * .
Introduction . . ,. . . . ... *. ,** * . .9 9 0 0 9 , .
The Decision to Divert Cotton Acreage, Solid 
Planting
Which Diversion Level to Choose? . . . . . .
. . . . . . . , . 2
How to Use the Tables . ..... .. . . . .
4
The Decision to Plant Cotton 
in Skip-Row Patterns . . . .
. . . . 7
Added Returns ..
7
Added Costs.. . . . . . . .*. . . a * a a.a a * * a . J0
Appendix Tables
1. Net Income Per Acre of Cotton Allotment 
for Allotments of
10 Acres or Less with Projected Yield of 
400 Pounds Lint
Per Acre . . . . .*,*,*"*,*. * * * , ........ 
.. 18
2. Net Income Per Acre of Cotton Allotment for Allotments 
of
10 Acres or Less with Projected Yield of 500 Pounds Lint
Per Acre . . . . . . . . . . ... . . . . .
. . 19
3. Net Income Per Acre of Cotton Allotment for Allotments of
10 Acres or Less with Projected Yield of 600 Pounds Lint
Per Acre . .*.*.*.*.*.*.. .*,*. . .20
4. Net Income Per Acre of Cotton Allotment for Allotments
Over 10 Acres with Projected Yield of 400 Pounds Lint
Per Acre . , 1 , . ., . . . , . . ... . . . . . . . . . 21
5. Net Income Per Acre of Cotton Allotment for Allotments
Over 10 Acres with Projected Yield of 500 Pounds Lint
Per Acre . . , , . , . . . .. . . . . 22
6. Net Income Per Acre of Cotton Allotment for Allotments
Over 10 Acres with Projected Yield of 600 Pounds Lint
Per Acre . . . . , . . . . . . . . . a * . . * , , . * . . 23
7. Net Income Per Acre of Cotton Allotment for Allotments
Over 10 Acres with Projected Yield of 700 Pounds Lint
Per Acre . . a. . . . . . ,* . . , . , .* . .a . 24
8. Net Income Per Acre of Cotton Allotment for Allotments
Over 10 Acres withPrjce Yield of 800 Pounds Lint
si
SUMMARY
The objectives of this study were to analyze the profitability of
three diversion rates specified by the 1966 cotton program as well as
that of planting in skip-row patterns. A computer was used to consider
costs and returns that might result from all of the meaningful combina-
tions of expected actual yields, projected yields, variable costs,
opportunity costs of skipped rows, and additional yields from skip-row
planting patterns. The following generalizations can be made based on
this study:
(1) If the expected actual yield is 150 pounds above projected
yield, it will usually pay to divert 12.5 per cent on large allotments
or zero per cent on allotments of 10 acres or less.
(2) If expected actual yield is equal to projected yield and
variable costs are less than $80 per acre of cotton planted solid, it
will pay to divert 12.5 or zero per cent depending on allotment size.
(3) Twenty-five per cent is never a more profitable diversion
level than 35, 12.5, or zero per cent.
(4) Planting a skip-row pattern of four-four is more profitable
than solid planting if the expected actual yield is above 380 pounds
on a solid planted acre, and 35 per cent is the best diversion level.
Planting four-four is more profitable than solid planting for any level
of diversion if the expected actual yield is above 700 pounds on a solid-
planted acre.
(5) Four-four is the best of the skip-row 
patterns to plant under
most yield conditions if opportunity costs are between zero and $35 per
acre. If opportunity costs do not exist but instead opportunity returns
are possible because of productive use of skipped rows in some other use
or because payments result from some other program, then two-four planting
should be compared with four-four planting by 
the methods outlined. Land
that was profitably planted two-two in 1965 should 
in most cases be planted
four-four in 1966 for maximum returns.
AN ECONOMIC ANALYSIS OF 1966 COTTON PLANTING ALTERNATIVES*
B. R. Miller and S. C. Bel-l*
Cotton legislation effective with the 1966 
crop, has posed two
difficult decisions for most cotton farmers. These decisions 
are (1)
whether to divert 12.5, 25, or 35 per cent 
of their allotment, and (2)
whether to plant solid or to use one of the skip-row 
patterns. In many
individual farm circumstances, there will be several dollars difference
in the profit resulting from one decision as compared with another.
Every farmer should give careful consideration to all pertinent data
for his farm before making his decision on the number of acres to divert
and whether to plant solid or use a skip-row pattern.
Decision to Divert Cotton Acreage, Solid Planting
There are a number of factors that should be considered by a farmer
when making his decision on how much of his cotton acreage to divert.
These factors are projected yield, expected yield, variable cost, and
allotment size, Fixed costs do not affect these decisions because they
do not change as acreages or yields change. Only variable costs are
used because these are the costs that change as a farmer reduces the
number of acres of cotton he produces.
*The work of Victor M. Yellen, Graduate Assistant, Department of
Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, in programming and use of
the computer in connection with analyzing various alternatives under
the new cotton program is gratefully acknowledged.
**Assistant Professor and Associate Professor, respectively, Depart-
ment of Agricultural Economics and Rural Sociology, Agricultural Exper-
iment Station, Auburn University.
2
Projected yield is the yield that the county Agricultural Stabili-
zation and Conservation Service office assigns a farmer based on 3 years
of yield data. (For 1966, the years used are 1962, 1963, and 1964.)
Expected yield is the yield that the farmer expects to produce in 1966.
Variable costs are the costs that vary as acreages and yields change.
The following is an example of the variable costs to produce an acre
of cotton with two yield levels:
500-pound yield
Costs per acre
Seed $ 2.88
Fertilizer 15.62
Insecticide 13.65
Pre-emergence oil 1.50
Post-emergence oil 1.50
Fuel , oil and repairs 7.80
Equip. & oper. exp. 1.50
Custom picking 30.00
Ginning 12.75
Total variable costs
per acre $87.20
750-pound yield
Costs per acre
Seed $ 2.88
Fertilizer 17.62
Insecticide 13.65
Pre-emergence oil 1.50
Post-emergence oil 1.50
Fuel, oil and repairs 7.80
Equip. & oper. exp. 1.50
Custom picking 37.50
Ginning 19.12
Total variable costs
per acre $105.08
Which Diversion Level to Choose?
The 1966 cotton program allows farmers to choose a participation
plan based on their individual farm situations. As there are three
diversion levels to be considered for each of the many combinations of
variable costs, projected yield, expected, yield, and allotment size,
the problem of choice can become complex. One way of solving this
problem is to develop budgets for the alternative choices. An example
of data to use in budgeting follows:
3
Budgeted Outcomes for Four Levels 
of Participation
in the 1966 Cotton Program
Assumptions
(1) 10-acre effective allotment
(2) Projected yield 500 lb.
(3) Expected yield 750 lb.
I. Value of cro
a. Lint 750 lb. @ 21 .... $
b. Seed .7 ton @ $45.00 .
c. Total receipts per acre
d. Number of acres
e. Total receipts ...... $1,
II. Support payments
500 lb. (p. y x 9.42c
x 6.5 a. (65% of allotment)
III. Diversion paymet
5007lb.(pj-. Tx .5
x 3.5 a. (35% of allotment)
IV. Additional diversion payments
500 lb, .(.y.JT10.5
x diverted acres .... 
V. Total income and payments $2,
VII. Total variable costs (also
includes conservation costs,
if any) ""............$1,
VII. Income minus costs
(10 acres) .............. $1,
Income minus costs per
allotment acre .f......f.. $
Levels of diversion
122/0
$ 157.50
31.50
189.00
8.75
$1,653.75
306.15
183.75
65.62
$2,209.27
$ 919.45
$1,289.82
$ 128.98
25%
$ 157.50
31 .50
189.00
7.50
$1,417.50
306.15
183.75
131.25
$2,038.65
$ 788.10
$1 ,250.55
$ 125.06
The most profitable level of diversion under 
the above assumption
is the zero level. This same budgeting procedure, however, will show
that the 35-per cent level of diversion 
is the most profitable if ex-
pected yield is 500 pounds and variable costs are $87.20 
per acre.
35%
$ 157.50
31 .50
189.00
6.50
$1,228.50
306.15
183.75
183.75
$1,902.15
$ 683.02
$1,219.13
$ 121.91
There are so many alternatives that budgeting all of them would be
practically impossible. A computer, therefore, was used to derive a set
of tables to simplify the problem of choosing the most profitable level
of participation. Appendix Tables 1 - 8 show income minus costs on an
allotment acre basis.
The tables can be used to determine which level of diversion would
be the most profitable for a farmer based on his actual yield and variable
costs. Each table represents one level of projected yield. Appendix
Tables 1, 2, and 3 should be used by a farmer with a 10-acre allotment
or less, and Appendix Tables 4, 5, and 6 should be used by farmers with
more than a 10-acre cotton allotment.
How to Use the Tables
To determine if you should divert 35 per cent or none of your 10-acre
allotment, let's take an example and see how to make a decision using the
tables. Let's assume that your projected yield is 500 pounds with an
expected yield of 600 pounds, and your variable costs are $90 per 
acre.
Therefore, to determine which alternative would be most profitable,
let's look at Appendix Table 2, which is for your projected yield of 500
pounds per acre.
Refer to the last line in the table and the column of figures above
the 600-pound expected yield. Draw a line straight 
upward at right of
this column of figures until you come to the $90-dollar variable cost
per acre figures at left side of the table. Draw a horizontal line below
the $90-dollar level to the right until it intersects the vertical line.
Label this Point A. Point A is to the right and below the stair-step
5
line, which indicates it would be more profitable 
for you to plant your
entire allotment of 10 acres.
The figure $110.10 represents the return above variable cost per
allotment acre for no diversion or a total of $1,101.00 for 10 acres.
The $107.09 represents return above variable cost per allotment acre if
you divert 35 per cent or a total of $1,070.90 for the 10 acres.
The stair-step lines on the tables represent the divisions between
diverting the minimum and maximum acres to get the greatest profit. All
points below and to the right of these lines indicate that it is more
profitable to plant all your allotment. The area above and to the left
indicates it is more profitable to divert 35 per cent of your allotment.
The top figure in each set of two in the tables indicates the net
income above variable costs for no diversion and the bottom figure is
for 35 per cent diversion. To determine the most profitable decision
for you, use the table that represents your projected yield. Draw a
line upward from your expected yield and a line to the right from your
variable costs. The intersection of these two lines determines which
decision would give you the highest net income per allotment acre.
If your allotment is greater than 10 acres, then you need to use
Appendix Tables 4, 5 and 6. These are used in the same manner as
Appendix Tables 1, 2 and 3. For example, assume your projected yield
is 600 pounds with an expected yield of 600 pounds and a variable cost
of $100 per acre. Using Appendix Table 6, select your actual yield of
600 pounds and your variable cost of $100, Draw a vertical and hori-
zontal line. The line will intersect at Point B, which is above the
6
stair-step line. Point B indicates that you would have 
a higher net
income per acre if you diverted 35 per cent of your allotment. The
figures $92.01 and $89.33 represent the net income per acre for 35 per
cent diversion and 122 per cent diversion, respectively.
Your variable costs and expected yields are very important in
determining which alternative is the more profitable. In the case of
the last example, it would have been more profitable to divert 
only 122
per cent if your variable costs were only $80 per acre. On the other
hand, if your expected yield was 700 pounds (with variable costs $100),
it would have been more profitable to divert only 122 per cent.
In general, the higher your expected yield is in relation to your
projected yield the more it will pay you to plant more acres or divert
the least acreage. In most cases, if your expected yield is 150 pounds
above your projected yield, it will pay you to divert 122 per cent or
zero per cent for the farmer with 10 or less allotted acres. Also,
relatively low variable costs will indicate that your most profitable
decision is to divert the minimum amount. In general, if expected yield
is equal to projected yield and variable costs are less than $80, it
will pay you to divert the minimum (12.5 or zero per cent).
In conclusion, for solid planted cotton (1) if your yields are low
and variable costs are relatively high, you should divert 35 per cent;
and (2) if yields are high and variable costs are relatively low, you
should divert 12 or zero per cent. It is never more profitable to
divert 25 per cent, although the net incomes per acre near the stair-
step line in the tables are approximately the same for all three levels
7
of diversion. An important point to remember is that your expected yield
should be such that chances are you will be equally as likely to have a
yield above as below it. Chances of gaining by choice of a particular
diversion plan will tend to be offset by risks of losing.
Decision to Plant Cotton in Skip-Row Patterns
The decision to plant cotton in a skip-row pattern depends primarily
on four factors: (1) additional yield obtained from planting additional
land in cotton, (2) additional costs of preparing more land and harvesting
and ginning more cotton, (3) the forgone returns (opportunity costs) from
other crops or enterprises for which the additional land could have been
used, and (4) rules of the 1966 cotton program that relate skipped rows
to diverted acreage. A possible fifth factor, the effect on future pro-
jected yield of planting skipped rows, will be discussed later in this
section since this factor is related to decisions to be made for more
than one production period.
The four primary factors may be placed in either added costs or
added returns categories. Factor 4 in the rules can be interpreted as
affecting opportunity costs and, thus, the decision to plant in a skip-
row pattern depends on a comparison of added returns, factor I, with the
added costs, factors 2, 3, and 4.
Added Returns
Greater yields per acre of allotment have been consistently obtained
from planting cotton in patterns of two rows skipped, two rows planted;
two rows skipped, one row planted; two rows skipped, four rows planted;
8
and four rows skipped, four rows planted. Increased yields have averaged
50 per cent greater for the two-four and the two-two patterns 
and 33 per
cent for the two-one and the four-four patterns. Other patterns are
possible, but on the basis of acceptance by farmers they have not
appeared profitable. Most skip-row plantings are of the patterns de-
scribed above. The two planted-four skipped pattern was specifically
analyzed because of a 1966 program rule that nullifies the effect of
increased yields from the two-two pattern.
The new rule says, essentially, that 1.54 acres of land or 0.77
acre of cotton planted two-two will count as 1.0 acre of cotton allotment
when formerly 2.0 acres of land or 1.0 acre of cotton planted would have
been counted as an allotment acre. The rule says 1.16 acres of land or
0.77 acres of cotton planted two-one will count as 1.0 acre of allotment.
Fifty per cent increased yield under the old rule for two-two would have
meant: 0.50 times yield of 1.0 acre (solid) plus yield of 1.0 acre
(solid) = 1.5 times the yield of 1.0 acre (solid). Fifty per cent in-
creased yield under the new rule means: 0.50 times yield of 0.77 acre
(solid) plus yield of 0.77 acre (solid) = 1.15 times the yield of 1.0
acre (solid). The real effect of the new rule, therefore, is to cut the
actual increased yield of two-two planting to only 15 per cent greater
yield on allotment than could be obtained by planting solid. A similar
analysis of two-one showed that the actual increased yield on two-one
1
Sturke, 0. G., and Boseck, J. K., Skip-Row Cotton Produces Highest
Yields, Highlights of Agricultural Research, Vol. 9, No. 4, Alabama Agri-
cultural Experiment Station, Auburn, Alabama, 1962.
9
would be only 3 per cent. The relevant added yields on allotments that
must be used for comparison with solid planting are 15 per cent greater
for two-two, 3 per cent greater for two-one, 50 per cent greater for
two-four, and 33 per cent greater for four-four. A comparison of two-
one with two-two indicated that two-two will always be the most profit-
able, and two-one was dropped from the analysis.
Added returns may be defined as added yield times price or actual
yield on solid-planted cotton times the percentage increase in yield
from skip-row planting times price per pound. Price per pound under the
new program is 21 cents since diversion and support payments are not
related to added yield in any year. Added return is affected by level
of diversion, however, and must be accounted for, as follows, to obtain
a complete picture of added return on lint cotton:
Lint added return = increased yield on skip-row planting (15, 33, or
50 per cent) times actual yield on solid-planted cotton times
21 cents times percentage of allotment planted (0.875 or 0.65 acres).
Added return on seed may be calculated in a similar way. Approxi-
mately 1.86 pounds of seed are obtained for each pound of lint and if
seed sells for $45 per ton, a value of 4.2 cents in seed is obtained for
each pound of lint. For example:
Seed added return = increased yield on skip-row planting (15, 33, or
50 per cent) times actual yield on solid-planted cotton times 4.2
cents times percentage of allotment planted (0.875 or 0.65).
10
Added Costs
Ginning and harvesting costs increase as yields increase from skip-
row patterns of planting. Land preparation and opportunity costs change
also according to the skip-row pattern used. Added ginning and harvesting
costs were estimated in the following way. Ginning and harvesting costs
were assumed to be 8.7 cents per pound of lint harvested and added cost
was calculated as follows:
Ginning and harvesting added cost = increased yield on skip-row
(15, 33, or 50 per cent) times 8.7 cents 
times percentage of allot-
ment planted (0.875 or 0.65).
Added costs attributed to foregone returns (opportunity costs) and
land preparation costs are not related to actual yield. Added land pre-
paration costs are affected significantly, however, by the skip-row
pattern. Opportunity costs are significantly related to program rules
on use of skipped rows as diverted acres.
The two-two pattern requires more cost for land preparation 
than
solid, but because only 0.77 of an acre of cotton is planted 
other variable
costs of production are less. Increases and decreases are such 
that on
the average they tend to balance each other and added land 
preparation
costs were treated as zero for the two-two case. Land preparation 
costs
are not cancelled in the four-four case and added costs were 
budgeted at
$10 per allotment acre. (See fuel and equipment expense 
on page 2.) Two
additional acres must be prepared for each allotment 
acre planted in the
two-four pattern and added land preparation costs were 
budgeted at $20
per allotment acre.
11
Opportunity costs in Alabama are likely to be represented by 
al-
ternative returns from corn or soybeans. Thirty-five dollars per acre
was the highest opportunity cost considered in this study. 
The cost
represents the return that might be earned 
on yields of 65 bushels of
corn or 30 bushels of soybeans per acre of idle 
skipped rows. Different
effects of opportunity costs ranging from zero 
to $35 were also studied.
Added land preparation costs and opportunity costs 
were designated as
follows:
Added land preparation and opportunity costs 
= added land preparation
costs (zero, $10, or $20) times added 
land greater than the amount
used for solid-planted cotton plus opportunity costs (zero 
to $35)
times added land greater than the 
amount used for solid-planted
cotton.
The definition of added land 
greater than the amount used for 
solid
planting is complicated by 1966 program 
rules. These rules state that
farmers planting skip-row patterns 
containing at least four skipped 
rows
may count skipped rows as diverted 
acreage. Two rows or one row skipped
cannot be counted as diverted 
acreage. Added acres of 
skipped rows that
contribute to opportunity costs 
thus can be reduced by the amount 
of
diversion in the case of four-four 
and two-four, but not for two-two.
The following cases indicate this effect:
Added land greater than the amount used for 
solid planting = acres
two-two, four-four, or two-four minus acres solid 
times per cent
diversion minus skipped rows counted as diverted 
acres.
Two-two: (1.54 - 1.0) x 0.65 - 0.0 = 0.351 added 
acre for 35 per cent
diversion
12
(1.54 - 1.0) x 0.875 - 0.0 = 0.471 added acre for 12.5 per cent
diversion
Four-four: (2.0 - 1.0) x 0.65 - 0.35 
= 
0.30 added acre for 35 per cent
diversion
(2.0 - 1.0) x 0.875 - 0.125 = 0.75 added acre for 12.5 per cent
diversion
Two-four: (3.0 - 1.0) x 0.65 - 0.35 
= 
0.95 added acre for 35 per cent
diversion
(3.0 - 1.0) x 0.875 - 0.125 = 1.625 added 
acres for 12.5 per cent
diversion
All possible combinations of added land preparation and opportunity
costs can be calculated using the foregoing procedure. These combinations
were calculated as well as net added returns stated as follows:
Added net return = added lint return + added seed return - added
ginning and harvesting costs - added land preparation and opportun-
ity costs.
The decision to plant a particular kind of skip-row pattern depends
not only on whether added net return from skipped rows is positive but
from which pattern net return is greatest. Some comparisons of added
net returns are presented in Table 1.
All significant possibilities of comparing skip-row patterns,
diversion levels, actual yields, variable costs, and opportunity costs
may be made by use of Figure 1. Figure 1, a summary diagram, indicates
highest net revenue is obtained by planting solid or four-four. Use the
figure as follows: Estimate your expected actual yield and draw a line
upward from the bottom of the chart. Estimate your variable costs of
production and draw a line from this cost to the right. The intersec-
tion of these two lines (Point A, Figure 1) is interpreted as follows.
13
TABLE 1, ADDED NET REVENUE FOR PLANTING FOlR-FOLK, TWO-TWO, AND TWO-FO
FOR DIFFERENT LEVELS OF ACTUAL YIELD, DIVERSION LEVELS
AND OPPORTUNITY COSTS
Per cent of
allotment
Opportunity costof
land is $'35/acre
4x 4 2x1 2x4
Opportunity cost of
land is $0/acre
4xA 2x2 2x4
(Dollars)
-14.68 -7,54
.66 -5.65
-60.50
-30.80
-9.93 -5.30 -53.28
4.19 .-3.97 -25.43
-5.16
7.74
-3.06
-2.32
39 -. 82
11.*28 -. 66
-46.06
-20.08
-38.85
-14.70
4.36 1.42 -31.63
14.82 1.02 --9.32
9.12
18.35
3.65
2.67
13.90 5.89
21.89 4.34
"'24.r40
-4.00o
-17.18
1.*37
11.56 8.95 -3.62
11.16 6.64 2.45
16.32 11.19 3.60
14.69 8.32 7.82
21.09 13.43
18.24 9.97
25.86
21.78
30.61
25.32
10.82
13.17
15.67 18.00
11.63 18.55
17.91 25.25
13.31 23.90
35.37 20. 14
28.85 14.96
40.15 22.38
32 .39 16.63
32,648
29.25
39.70
34.62
Actual
yield
for solid
planting
400
500
600
700
.875
.65
.-875
.65
.875
.65
.875
.65
.875
.875
.65
.875
.65
800
900
1,000
_nLI
Projected yield (lb. lint per acre)
' All areas left of a particular
projected yield are 
maximum
diversion and to 
right minimum
diversions. (Less than 
10 A.
Max. = 35%, Min. = 0%; 
more than
10 A. max. = 35%, min. = 12.5%).
Plant
4 x 4
$15-
140-
130-
Plant
Solid
120-
Plant
4X 4
U
(U
LL
0
U
-o
"r
(U
110
100
90
80
70
60
Figure 1.
Actual Yield (lb. lint) Per Acre Planted Solid
Chart for use in deciding on most profitable alternatives 
under 1966 cotton program.
15
If the intersection is to the left of your projected yield line, you
should divert the maximum possible. If it is the right, you should
divert the minimum possible. The minimum will be 12.5 per cent if your
allotment is more than 10 acres and zero per cent if your allotment is
10 acres or less.
The intersection of lines for actual yield and variable costs also
gives additional information about skip-row planting alternatives. If
the intersection of the two lines you draw is to the right of the solid
vertical line on the chart (a break-even line based on $35 per acre
opportunity cost), net revenue as defined for four-four planting gives a
more profitable situation than solid planting. Furthermore, added net
revenue from four-four planting is greater than added net revenue from
two-one, two-two, or two-four. If the intersection is to the left of
the broken vertical line on the chart, solid planting is probably the
most profitable.
Point A on Figure 1 is an example of an intersection point between
the vertical broken line and the vertical solid line. One of two con-
clusions about skip-row planting is reached : (1) plant 
solid and
divert 12.5 or zero per cent (depending on allotment size) because the
point is to the right of the projected yield line representing 500
pounds, or (2) plant four-four and divert 35 per cent because the point
is to the left of the projected yield line representing 600 pounds. In
general, if expected actual yield on solid planting is between 380 
and
700 pounds, the decision to plant a skip-row pattern is inter-related
with the decision to divert the maximum or minimum amounts of acreage.
Both decisions can be made, however, with the help of Figure 1.
16
One may move the vertical lines at 700 pounds and 380 pounds actual
yield toacccmmodate levels of opportunity cost different from $35 per
acre. The solid vertical line moves to the left at a rate of 11.7
pounds actual yield for every dollar reduction of opportunity cost. The
broken vertical line moves to the left at a rate of 6.3 pounds actual
yield for a dollar reduction of opportunity cost.
Planting two-two and two-one would never be profitable under the
assumptions of this study. Planting two-four would be the best alterna-
tive if opportunity costs were zero and expected yield on solid planting
was over 900 pounds per acre. Two-four becomes even more profitable in
relation to four-four if there are opportunity returns possible from the
skipped rows.
Projected yields other than in 100-pound units may be used by drawing
in new projected yield lines in Figure 1. Skipped row net revenue may
be estimated closely by adding the appropriate added net revenues from
Table 1 to revenues from solid planting in Appendix Tables 1 through 8.
The possible fifth factor affecting skip-row decisions is that
diversion and support payments are made on the basis of projected yield.
Projected yield at present is the average of 3 years actual yields
regardless of whether they were obtained from skip-row or from solid
planting. The economic implications are that if the decision this year
is to plant solid as opposed to skip-row planting in the past, then
future accumulated added returns of solid over skip-row planting must
outweigh the future accumulated sum of reductions in support and diversion
payments because of reductions in future projected yield. The situation
17
as described, however, is unlikely to occur in view of profitability
indicated by four-four pattern in Figure 1. An individual who is already
planting skip-row is not likely to face conditions that would indicate
solid planting. Accumulated added returns from four-four planting must
also outweigh the future accumulated reductions that might occur because
of choosing four-four over two-four. Only producers who have expected
yields in the neighborhood of 900 pounds for solid planting or who have
opportunity returns from skipped rows should consider this alternative.
Methods used in this analysis can be used to answer this question.
APPENDIX TABLE 1. NET INCOME PER ACRE OF COTTON ALLOTMENT FOR ALLOTMENTS OF
10 ACRES OR LESS WITH PROJECTED YIELD OF 400 POUNDS LINT PER ACRE
.-5.25
25.00
4.75
31.50
14.75
38.00
24.75
44.950
Divert 35%
34.75
511.00
$120.
1 1 0
-30.44
-8.63
-20.44
-15. 13
-10,44
21.63
-.44
28. 13
9.56
34.63
19.56
41.13
29.56
47.63
39.56
54.13
49.56
60.63
45.12 70. 30
57.74 74.11
55.12 80.30
64.24 80.61
65.12 90.30
70.74 87.11
75.12 100.30
77.24 93.61
19.93
4'1.37
29.93
47.87
39.93
54.37
49.93
60.87
59.93
67.37
69.93
73.87
79.93
80.37
89.93.
86.87
99.93
93.37
110.30
100. 11
No Diversion
120.30
1o6.61
130.30
113, 11
140.30
119.61
150.30
126. 11
600
Expected yield (pounds of lint) per acre, solid planted
85. 12
83.74
95. 12
90.24
105. 12
96.74
115.12
103.24
125. 12
109.,74
t0
U
0
U
r--
L
(U
44. 75
57.50
54.75
64. 00
64.75
70.50
74.75
77.00
S70 
6
95.49
90.48
105.49
96.98
115.49
103.48
125.49
109.98
135.49
1 16.48
145.49
122.98
155.49.
129.48
165.49
135.98
175.49
142.48
700
00
120.67
106.85
130.67
113.35
14+0.67
119.85
150.67
126.35
160.67
132.85
170.67
139.35
180.67
145.85
190.67
152.35
200.67
158.85
800
APPENDIX TABLE 2. NET INCOME PER ACRE OF COTTON ALLOTMENT FOR ALLOT
10 ACRES OR LESS WITH PROJECTED YIELD OF 500 POUNDS LINT PER A
$120 -20.64 4.54 29.73 54.91 80.10
22.11 38.48 
54.85 71.22 
87.59
11 -10.64 14.54 39.73 
64.91 90.10
28.61 44.98 61.35 77.72 
94.09
100 -.64 24.54 49.73 74.91 
100.10
35.11 51.48 
67.85 84.22 
100.59
Divert 35%
90 9.36 34.54 59.73 
84.91 110.10
41.61 57.98 74.35 90.72 107.09
80 19.36 44.54 69.73 
94.91 120.10
48.11 64.48 
80.85 97.22 
113.59
No Dvrso
> 70- 29.36 54.54 79.73 104.91 130.10 152 8.
54.61 70.98 87.35 103.72 120,0913.652
60 39.36 64.54 89.73 114.91 140.10 152 9.
61.11 77.48 93.85 110.22 126.59 129 5.
50 49.36 74.54 99.73 124.91 150.10 152 0.
67.61 83.98 100.35 116.72 133.09 194 6.
40 59.36 84.54 109.73 134.91 160.10 
152 1.
74.11 90.48 106.85 123.22 139.5915.672
0
+7
47
33
+7
'7
33
47
33
+7
r3
r+
Expected yield (pounds of lint) per 
acre, solid planted
r
r
APPENDIX TABLE- 3. NET INCOME4 PER ACRE 
'OF COTTON ALLOTMENT FOR ALLOTMENTS 
OF
10 ACRES OR LESS WITH PROJECTED YIELD OF 600 POUNDS LINT PER ACRE
14.34
51.95
24.34
58.45
34. 34
64.95
Divert 35%
44.34
71 .45
$120
110
10.84
35.58
.84
42.08
9. 16
48.58
19.16
55.08
29. 16
61.58
39. 16
68.08
49. 16
74.58
59.16
81.08
69.16
87.58
64.71 89.90 115.08
84.69 101.06 117.43
74.71 99.90 123.93
91,019 107.56 125.08
84. 71 109.901358
104.19 120.56 136.93
110.69 127.06 143.43
39.53
68.32
49.53
74. 82
59.53
81.32
69.53
87.82
79o53
94.32
89.53
100.82
99.53
107.32
109.53
113.82
119.53
120.32
500
139.90
133.56
149,90
i4o~o6
159.90
146.56
169.90
153.06
60
No Diversion
165.08
149.93
175.08
156.v43
185.08
162.93
195.08
169.43
700
140.27
133.80
150.27
140.30
160.27
146.80
170.27
153.30
180.27
159.80
190.27
166.30
200.27
172.80
210.27
179.30
220.27
185.80
~1~
800
Expected yield (pounds of lint) per acre, solid planted
114.71
117. 19
124. 71
123.69
134.71
130. 19
144.71
136.69
L
'U
U
.r.
-D
50.
40
0
54.34
77.95
64.34
84.45
74.34
90.95
84.34
97.45
94.34
103.95
tV
31,
APPENDIX TABLE 4. NET INCOME PER ACRE OF COTTON ALLOTMENT FOR ALLOTMENTS OVER
10 ACRES WITH PROJECTED YIELD OF 400 POUNDS LINT PER ACRE
12.89 34.93
26.67 43.04
21.64 43.68
33.17 
49.54
Divert 35%
30.39 52.43
39.67 56.04
39.14 61.18
46.17 62.54
47.89 69.,9 3
52.67 69.04
56.64 78.68
59.17 75.54
65.39 87.43
65.67 82.04
74.14
72.17
96.1i8
88.54
56.996
59.41
65.71
65.91
74.46
72.41
83.21
78.91
91.96
85.41
100.71
91.91
109.46
98.41
118.21
104.91
79.00O
75.78
87.75
82.28
101 .04
92.15
109.79
98.65
96.50 118.54
88.78. 105.15
Divert 12.5%
105.25 127.29
95.28 111.65
1 14.00
101 .78
122.75
108.28
131.50
X 14.78
140.25
121.28
136.04
118.15
144.79
124.65
153.54
131 .15
162.29
137.65
Expected yield (pounds of lint) per acre, solid planted
$12b1
11i (3-
I o0
0
07
6o-
0
123.67
108.52
131 .82
115.02
140.57
121 .52
149.32
128.02
158.07
134.52
166.82
141 .02
175.57
147.52
184.32
154.02
145. 11
124.89
153.86
131 .39
162.61
1 37.89
171 .36
144.39
180. 11
150.89
188.86
1 57.39
197.61
163.89
206.36
170.39
N\)
Hot / ,CY P~Y ~ fY ~ I I)- -
t
400
50
600 700
8b
900 1 ,b00
APPEDIXTABL 5.NET INCOME PER ACRE OF COTTON ALLOTMENT FOR ALLOTMENTS OVER
10 ACRES WITH PROJECTED YIELD OF 500 POUNDS LINT 
PER ACRE
$120 20.32 42.36 64.40 
86.44 108.47 130
36.47 52.84 69.21 
85.58 101.95 11
110 29.07 
51.11 
73.15 
95.19 
117.22 13.26
42.97 59.34 
75.71 92.8 
184 2.2111
Divert 35%
100 37.82 59.86 81.90 
103.94 125.97 148
49.47 
65.84 82.21 
98.58 
114.95 131
9041 46.57 68.61 90.65 
112.69 134.72 156
? 55.97 72.34 
88.71 105.08 121.45 
13
o 
Divert 12.5
80 55.32 77.36 
99.40 D21.44ivert4
691 
70 
64.07 
8611 
108.15 
130.19 
152.22 
172
68.97 85.34 101.71 118.0o8 
134.45 150.2171
60 
72.82 
9h.96 
116.90 -
138.94 
160.97 
183.01 
205.05.112,5 
1o.5 
5
50 81.57 103.61 125.65 
147.69 169.72 191.6238
81.97 98.34 114.71 131.08 147.45 163.2109
900050 
0 
1,0000
Expected yield (pounds of lint) per acre, solid 
planted
APPENDIX TABLE 5.
>13
APPENDIX TABLE 6. NET INCOME PER ACRE OF COTTON ALLOTMENT FOR ALLOTMENTS 
OVER
10 ACRES WITH PROJECTED YIELD OF 600 POUNDS LINT PER ACRE
27.76
46.27
36.51
52.77
45.26
49.80
62.64
58.5 5
69.14
767.3
675.6
$120.-
110-
100-
90
70
400 500
71 *83
79.01
80.58
85.51
89.33
920
98.08
98.51
106.83
105.01
115.58
111 .51
124.33
118.01
133.08
124. 51
600
93.87
95.38
102.62
101 .88
111.37
108.38
120.12
114.88
Divert
128.87
121.38
137.62
127.88
146.37
134.38
155.12
140.88
700
Expected yield (pounds of lint) per acre, solid planted
Divert 35%
54.01 76.05
65.77 82.14
62.76 84.80
72.27 88.64
71.51 93.55
78.77 94.14
80.26 102.30
85.27 1 101.64
89.01 1 111.05
91.77 1 108.14
L
V
0
V
L
t6
115.91
111.71
124.66
118.25
133.11
124.75
142. 16
131 .25
12.5%
150.91
137.75
159.66
144.25
168.1
150.75
177.16
157.25
800
6{
50
0
137.94
128. 14
146.69
134.62
155.44
141 .12
164. 19
147.62
172.94
154.12
181.69
160.62
190.44
167.12
199. 19
173.62
900
159.98
144.49
168.73
150.99
177.48
157.49
186.23
163.99
194.98
170.49
203.73
176.99
212.48
183.49
221 .23
189.99
N
W.A
1 I 0
p
I rl ~ I ~ rr ----- -
APPENDIX TABLE 7. NET INCOME PER ACRE OF COTTON ALLOTMENT FOR ALLOTMENTS OVER
10 ACRES WITH PROJECTED YIELD OF 700 POUNDS LINT PER ACRE
$120 
4I
40
57.23
72.44
65.98
78.94
74.73
85944
35%
83.48
91 .94
92.23
98.44
79.27
88.81
88.02
95.31
96.77
101 .81
105.52
108.31
114.27
114.81
35.20
56.07
43.*95
62.57
52.70
69.07
Diver
61 .45
75.57
70.20
82.07
78.95
88.57
87.70
95.07
96.45
101 "57
500 600
rt
760
Expected yield (pounds of lint) per acre, solid planted
110*-
80
70~
111.44127.8
117.94 140.52
r 118.48 134.41
0)
0
0
L
101.31
105. 18
110.06
111 .68
118.81-
118.18
127.56
124.68
Divert_
136.31
131.18
145.06
137.68
153.81
144.18
162.56
150968
50{
0,
123.24
121 .55
132.09
128.05
140.84
134.55
149.59
141.05
12.5%
158.34
147.55
167.0
154.05
175.84
160.55
184.59
167.05
900
145.38
137.92
154. 13
144.42
162.88
150.92
171 .63
15 7.42
1 80.38
163.92
189.13
170.42
197.88
176.92
206.63
183.42
167.42
154.29
176. 17
160.79
184.92
167.29
193.67
173.79
202.42
180.29
211.17
186.79
219.92
193.29
228.67
199 .79
1,000
~I I ( 7 C~ ~ Iv ~ II- --
1\)
TO 0
APPENDIX TABLE 8. NET INCOME PER ACRE OF COTTON ALLOTMENT FCR ALLOTMENTS OVER
10 ACRES WITH PROJECTED YIELD OF 800 POUNDS LINT PER ACRE
$120- 42.63 64.67 86.71 108.74 130.78 152.82 174.85
65.86 82.24 98.61 114.98 131.35 147.72 164.09
110- 51.38 73.42 95.46 117.49 139.53 161.57 183.60
72.36 88.74 105.11 121.48 137.85 154.22 170.59
1000 60.13 82.17 104.21 126.24 148.28 170.32 192.35
v 78.86 95.24 111.61 127.98 144.35 160.72 177.09
u 
Divert 
35%
> 90- 68.88 90.92 112.96 134.99 
157.03 179.07 201.10
0 85.36 101.74 118.11 134.48 
150.85 167.22 183.59
u Divert 12.5%
, 80- 77.63 99.67 121.71 143.74 165.78 187.82 209.85
1 91.86 108.24 124.61 140.98 157.35 173.72 190.09
S70- 86.38 108.42 130.46 152.49 174.53 196.57 218.60
98.36 114.74 131.11 147.48 163.85 180.22 196.59
60- 95.13 117.17 139.21 161.24 183.28 205.32 227.35
104.86 121.24 137.61 153.98 170.35 186.72 203.09
5 0
j 103.88 125.92 147.96 169.99 192.03 214.07 
236.10
111.36 127.74 144.11 160.48 176.85 193.22 209.59
0 400 500 600 700 800 900 ,boo
Expected yield (pounds of lint) per acre, solid planted