BULLETIN No. 262 BULLETIN No. 262 APRIL, 1947 APRIL, 1947 Fruit and Vegetable CONCENTRATION MARKETS in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama AGRICULTURAL EXPERIMENT STATION of the ALABAMA POLYTECHNIC INSTITUTE M. J. Funchess, Director Auburn, Alabama FOREWORD This regional research study has been a joint activity of the Agricultural Experiment Stations of North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, and the Georgia Agricultural Extension Service, with the United States Department of Agriculture, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, cooperating. The project was begun in 1939. At that time, a cooperative agreement was drawn up between the cooperating parties. A member of the staff in each state was designated to conduct the research in that state while the representative of the Bureau proceeded to work actively and directly in planning the procedure, developing the schedules, coordinating the work, and preparing the preliminary drafts of the manuscript. A tentative report giving the results of the study was completed early in 1942. Unfortunately, however, transfers of personnel to war agencies and the armed services prevented completion of a final publication at that time. This delay was unavoidable and is regretted. Since, however, conditions of supply and distribution after the immediate postwar adjustment period may closely resemble those at the time of the early work on this study, the findings of this survey may be of as much or even more interest than data pertaining to more recent years. Furthermore, as materials for building new facilities have been largely unavailable, and as the attention of personnel chiefly concerned with building programs for marketing facilities has been absorbed with other matters, issuance now may actually prove more timely than if it had been made available during the war years. Since this study was begun, State Experiment Stations and Extension Services in cooperation with State District Offices of the War Food Administration have pursued somewhat similar studies to obtain additional information on market needs and requirements in the area. CONTENTS Foreword ------------------=- 3 4 Summary ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Method INTRODUCTION Purpose and 7 of Study--------------------------------8 - PRODUCTION AREAS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON CONCENTRATION MARKETS-General Importance of Fruit and Vegetable Location of Commercial Areas Crops--------------10 ------------ 10 -__-15 Importance of Fresh Produce _____________---------- ORGANIZATION FEATURES, OPERATING METHODS AND RESULTS-17 Ownership and Control ---------------------------------------Types of Facilities 17 ---------------------------------------- 19 -27 31 Cash Expenditures for Physical Facilities---------------------26 Areas of Supply and Distribution _________----------------Operating Methods --------------------------------------- Operating Results----------------------------------------40 ESSENTIALS FOR SUCCESSFUL CONCENTRATION MARKET OPERATION ------------------------------------- 46 Volume Location ------------------------------------------------- 47 49 ------------------------------------------------ Transportation--------------------------------------------- 50 51 Facilities-------------- ------------------------------------ Regulations------------------------------------------------53 Financing and Management--------------------------------___54 CURRENT DEVELOPMENTS IN MARKETING AND THEIR POSSIBLE EFFECT ON CONCENTRATION MARKETING FACILITIES -___56 Agricult ural Experiment Stations of North Carolina, South Carolina, This publication represents the results of a joint study by the Georgia aud Alabamua, the Agricultural Extension Service of (Gcorgia and the Bureau of Agricultural Economics, United States Departmient of Agriculture. SUMMARY Since about 1925 concentration markets have been a factor of increasing importance in the assembly of fruits and vegetables from small-lot growers in North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, with city wholesalers and jobbers, independent shippers, chain store buyers, commission buyers, merchant truckers, retailers, and others obtaining substantial portions of their requirements through purchases at these markets. While fruit and vegetable production is not a chief source of agricultural income in any of the states studied, it is the major source in localized areas of each, and provides supplemental cash income on a large number of general farming units. Returns from fruit and vegetable crops, exclusive of potatoes, amounted to about 5 percent of the value of all farm produce sold or traded from the area in 1939, ranging from 3.2 in North Carolina to 7.6 in Georgia. The four states covered by this study realize certain advantages in the production of fruits and vegetables for the fresh market. Advantages include mild climate, permitting early maturity and premium prices; light well drained soils; generally adequate labor; and relative proximity to large consuming centers. For the 10-year prewar average, 1932-1941, about 91 percent of harvested acreage was for the fresh market, and there appears to have been little shift in proportions since that period. Concentration markets are not of particular significance in marketing fruits and vegetables to processors. Among owners and operators of concentration markets are included states, counties, municipalities, private individuals, cooperative associations, buyers, businessmen, chambers of commerce, civic clubs, banks, and grower organizations. About 80 percent of the 26 auctions surveyed in 1941 reported estimated cash outlays of $1,000 or less on physical facilities, and about half of the nine country private-sale markets reported $2,000 or less. Estimates from the eight city markets ranged from $5,000 to about $150,000. These figures offer little indication of the investments which may be necessary for a properly equipped facility, particularly since labor, land, building materials, and equipment have in many cases been donated or provided at nominal figures. Most of the markets in 1941 offered no grading or packing equipment and no storage space or accommodations for buyers. Three-fourths of the market managers estimated that 90 percent or more of volume sold originated within 25 miles of the market, there being considerable difference in the area of origin between the country markets and the city markets. Over three-fourths of the markets reporting estimated that 75 percent or more of sales would move out of the state to areas of distribution ranging up to 35 states. In the four states there are over 500 fruit and vegetable packing houses and shipping sheds located on railroad lines, often in connection with a general freight depot. These facilities are seldom FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 5 part of a concentration market facility but are located in lrge tree-fruit, potato, and cabbage areas and serve largely private shippers, large commercial growers, and cooperative sales agencies. Bases of charges varied among markets. Fifty-seven percent charged by the package, 19 percent on the dollar volume of sales, 19 percent on the load or by the day. The remainder made no charges whatever. Charges per package averaged 1.6 cents and 3.1 cents for private-sale and auction markets respectively; as a percentage of sales the average was 7.0 and 4.8 respectively. Charges per load or per day averaged 37 cents at private-sale markets. Auctions did not use this method of charging. Flat charges per package tend to penalize the low .value commodity and a flat percentage of sales, the high value commodity. Equitable variations are possible. Regulatory practices, usually in the form of fees and licenses, are designed by market managers and by local governments to correct fundamental difficulties. These, however, may be used by resident groups to protect themselves from competition, as, for example, when the transient buyer is permitted to avoid an excessive license requirement only by trading through a licensed local buyer. Less time is required by growers for selling on auction markets, the average load of produce being approximately 40 minutes compared with the average of 31/2 hours at private-sale markets, a difference attributable partly to the fact that hours for trading are not regulated on the latter. Managers in four-fifths of the auctions and in one-half of the country private-sale markets estimated that 70 percent or more of total sales were to resident buyers. Resident buyers operating in the immediate area of the country market purchase on an average an estimated one-half to three-fourths of their produce at concentration markets. Operating season of the auctions reporting averaged an estimated 2.7 months, with seasons for private-sale markets averaging considerably longer. Gross profit per package averages about one cent in the reporting country markets. A market selling only one commodity and operating for only a brief season can return a reasonable profit per package if (a) high volume of that commodity is available, or (b) fixed charges are low, even though volume may not be high. This does not mean, however, a reasonable profit to the market as a whole. On the basis of this study, essentials for successful market operation relate to adequate volume, suitable location, available transportation, adequate facilities, competitive regulations, and impartial financing and sound management. The adequacy of volume to support a country market may be estimated by determining concentration of acreages grown, specific BULLETIN 262 kind produced for the fresh market, volume produced by individual growers, adequacy of existing marketing agencies, and the attitude of all concerned toward the need for the facility. The country market should be located so that the le.gth of haul for growers will not exceed 25 to 30 miles. Care should be exercised to avoid location at closer intervals than justifiable by available volume. Also, since city markets possess superior drawing power; country markets should not be in too close proximity to them. Any market should be located in the area at a point which will make it easily accessible to all available transportation facilities and as nearly as possible at natural concentration points. Facilities should be laid out with room for expansion; should observe certain basic principles of design with regard to platform height, extension of roof, width of streets, accessibility of rail sidings, etc.; should be equipped to perform a maximum number of services for sellers and purchasers. However, excessive investment in facilities should be avoided especially until the existence of adequate volume is established. All restrictions and regulations should be examined carefully to avoid discriminatory licenses, taxes, fees, and credit restrictions. Similar problems are encountered in construction or improvement of both country and city concentration markets. Areas of supply and distribution vary greatly, however, and the needs of each city market constitute a complex and individual problem. The lack of coordinate grouping of all assembly and wholesaling functions within the same area, the lack of rail connections, and the general congested conditions of streets within the market are among the chief problems of design upon which the planners of city markets should focus attention. Method of financing should be kept impartial because in practice it has been found difficult to separate financing of facilities from management. Regardless of what agency or group finances and constructs a market or market system, there should be assurance that duplicating and unnecessary facilities will be avoided; the facility will be properly located, designed, and equipped; costs will be held to a minimum so that any savings through increased efficiency may be passed back to the grower or forward to the consumer; and all regulations upon the use of the facility will be pointed to the interest of the entire produce industry and of the consumer. Two current developments in the distribution of fruits and vegetables are consumer packaging and air transportation. Until these two interrelated practices become widespread in the produce trade and among retailers, neither may directly affect the small-lot growers who chiefly supply country markets in the Southeast. However, such changes should be taken into consideration when new markets are built. FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 7 FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS IN NORTH CAROLINA, SOUTH CAROLINA, GEORGIA, AND ALABAMA' INTRODUCTION A number of factors have contributed to the growing interest in fruit and vegetable concentration markets. Some of them are: (1) improved highways, which have increased the possibilities for hauling produce from farm to market by motor truck; (2) increased efficiency of motor trucks; (3) needed outlets for expanded commercial production in some areas; (4) dissatisfaction with farmretail price spreads in fruit and vegetable marketing and with the ratio of prices received for farm products to prices paid for implements, fertilizers, rent, and farm power; (5) dissatisfaction with services performed by existing marketing agencies; and (6) relatively low cost of selling through concentration markets and the low margins taken, particularly by auctions, as compared with other agencies. Since 1925, concentration markets have been a major factor in performance of the concentration fuction for produce from smalllot growers in certain Southeastern areas, with independent shippers and packers, chain store buyers, merchant truckers, commission buyers, and other agencies obtaining substantial portions of their needs through purchases at these markets. The concentration function as a phase of marketing is here used with reference to the act of assembling small lots into carlots or trucklots for intermarket shipment, and includes the function of grading, packing, inspection, hauling, and sale to first receiver. 2 The chief concentration function performed through use of country markets in the four-state area is sale to the first receiver. Other functions such as grading, packing, storage, and shipping, incident thereto, are usually performed before or after the produce passes through this facility, although it is believed that much often would 1 The following are co-authors of this bulletin: Clarence P. Austin and Hugh L. Cook, Bureau of Agricultural Economics, United States Department of Agriculture; G. W. Forster, North Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station; W. T. Ferrier, South Carolina Agricultural Experiment Station; N. M. Penny, Georgia Agricultural Experiment Station, and L. E. Farmer, Georgia Agricultural Extension Service; J. N. Mahan, Alabama Agricultural Experiment Station. Helpful suggestions beginning from the inception of the study to its final publication have been received from sources too numerous to mention. For all such contributions and assistance the authors are fully conscious and extend grateful acknowledgment. They alone, however, accept responsibility for what has been written. 2 The term "hauling" is used to distinguish transportation to packing houses or processing plant, or up to the point of loading upon intermarket carrier, as opposed to intermarket transportation. BULLETIN 262 be gained by providing facilities for performance of these additional functions within the facility. 3 City and country markets located in this four-state, surplusproducing area perform essentially the same functions, except that in the smaller community little of the produce assembled is required for local consumption. As a consequence, some of them perform only minor wholesaling functions. This difference in functions is reflected in the design of the facilities in the different markets. In well organized city concentration markets, for example, wholesale stores are provided in addition to facilities for growers and truckers and for buyers who ship by rail. Country markets, on the other hand, contain facilities largely if not entirely for growers and truckers. 4 For convenience, facilities located in cities in excess of 50,000 population in this area are called "city concentration markets." Facilities in communities of less than 50,000 are referred to as "country concentration markets." The real distinction, however, lies not in the size of the community, but in the layout of the market and in the proportion of produce assembled for local consumption. Major emphasis in this survey has been placed on concentration markets. No effort has been made to analyze marketing of heavy commercial fruit, or of potatoes in the commercial sections where producers with large acreage handle much of their own packing and marketing, or where it is done by cooperative associations and sales agencies. Since very few of the trading facilities in the four-state area are owned by cooperative associations, the activities of these organizations have been given only incidental attention. Some indication bf the significance and growth of various types of fruit and vegetable concentration markets in the Southeast may be seen by reference to Table 1. Sixty percent of the markets in the area studied had operated five years or less prior to 1940, the last normal prewar year. Purpose and Method of Study Further improvement in concentration market operation and in existing facilities in the Southeastern States calls for examination of market organization and facilities now existing.5 3 Since this survey was made, for example, a limited number of grading machines has been installed in Georgia State Farmers' Markets at country points. 4 Local produce shippers sometimes maintain a wholesale store in a country market area. 5 In this publication the term "Southeastern States" refers in particular to North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama. FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 9 Table 1.-Method of sale in 40 fruit and vegetable concentration markets, classified according to years operated, for Southeastern States, 19401 Method of sale Years operated Years 1- 5 6-10 11-15 16 -20 All Auction Number 11 7 4 3 25 Private sale Number 13 2 Total Number 24 9 4 3 40 Percent of total Percent 60.0 22.5 10.0 7.5 100.0 IFor 15 explanation of method of sale see pages 31-33. The general purpose of the study is to note the fruit and vegetable production of the area, examine methods of marketing, and investigate present facilities in order to determine how needed concentration markets should be located, laid out, equipped and operated, and how existing facilities may be improved. More specifically the purposes include such things as the following: Examining the position occupied by concentration markets in the assembly of fruits and vegetables in the Southeast; evaluating the nature of fruit and vegetable production in specific areas to determine whether such crops may be more efficiently and more profitably marketed through concentration facilities; obtaining information as to organization features and operating methods of concentration markets; appraising the operating results from these markets; observing the attitude of various growers, ma"heting officials, and marketing agencies toward markets; and on combined bases of data and observation, determining those factors which contribute toward success or failure of a concentration market. Market managers were interviewed personally by representatives of the cooperating states and of the Bureau.of Agricultural Economics during 1940 and the spring of 1941. An effort was made to visit all markets during the .peak of their operating season. Data were obtained from 41 fruit and vegetable concentratiohn markets. Findings obtained in this manner were supplemented by interviews with county agents, fruit and vegetable growers, dealers and trucking companies in the more concentrated fruit and vegetable producing areas, and by information obtained from the various state extension services, the state marketing agencies, the state highway departments, and the railroads. Certain materials have been incorporated which reflect current and future developments in fruit and vegetable marketing within the area. These include photographs of markets established and of grading equipment installed since the date of the field survey, and an analysis of the possible effect of prepackaging and air transportation upon the design of concentration facilities. These current marketing trends experienced marked developments during the war period. 10 1ULLETIN 262 PRODUCTION AREAS AND THEIR INFLUENCE ON CONCENTRATION MARKETS General Importance of Fruit and Vegetable Crops There were over two million acres of fruits, nuts, vegetables, and potatoes grown in the four states, North Carolina, South Carolina, Georgia, and Alabama, in 1939, with a value to the area of over 100 million dollars. Some of this, of course, was used on the producing farm and did not enter commercial market channels. The value of vegetable crops, with the addition of white potatoes and sweet potatoes, amounted to approximately half of this figure, and that of the white and sweet potatoes above about 30 percent. The value of the fruit crops, of which peaches and apples were most important, was over 20 million dollars. While fruit and vegetable production is not a chief source of agricultural income in any of the states studied, it is the chief source of income in important areas of each state. For the four states, returns from fruit, nut, and vegetable crops (exclusive of potatoes) amounted to $24,020,557 in 1939, or about 5 percent of the value of all farm products sold or traded.6 By states the range was from 3.2 percent in North Carolina to 7.6 percent in Georgia (Table 2). Table 2.--Value of farm products sold or traded in four Southeastern States, 19391 Product Value Dollars North Carolina Percent Total Percent Value Dollars South Carolina Percent Total Percent Value Dollars Georgia Percent Total Percent 19.8 69.2 2.9 4.7 1.1 2.3 Value Dollars Alabama Percen Total Percen 24.8 68.2 1.7 2.4 1.1 1.8 Livestock and livestock products Field crops2. Vegetables harvested for sale Fruits and nuts Horticultural specialties Forest products 25,763,530 163,451,078 3,637,272 2,804,711 1,135,830 2,299,641 12.9 82.1 1.8 1.4 0.6 1.2 10,480,975 70,672,899 3,352,393 1,771,467 305,047 787,469 12.0 80.9 3.8 2.1 0.3 0.9 24,249,246 84,558,439 3,574,302 5,717,820 1,338,081 2,841,796 19,054,687 52,450,394 1,330,139 1,832,453 859,456 1,425,541 Total 199,092,062 100.0 87,370,250 100.0 122,279,684 100.0 76,952,670 100.0 1 Source: Census of Agriculture, 1940 2 Includes value of Irish and sweet potatoes Yearly the area furnishes northern and eastern markets with substantial quantities of fresh produce. In addition to the cash value returned to the producer from local and inter-regional sales, fruit and vegetable crops furnish valuable foods for on-farm consumption. Location of Commercial Areas Vegetables.-While vegetable production is widely distributed over the four states, much of the commercial acreage is concentrated in a few areas in each state. On a commodity basis generally, the important commercial vegetable and potato areas are confined to 6 Value of fruits and nuts are listed together in the Census of Agriculture (as are planted fruit and nut trees, See Figure 5) and are often treated as one general classification. However, the quantity of nuts sold through concentration markets is almost negligible. FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 11 the Coastal Plains, while the fruit acreages are confined to the Piedmont region. In other areas where vegetable crops are grown largely for home use, small surpluses are also available for market. The major part of this produce is disposed of in or near the location where it is produced. Over 30 vegetable crops in addition to Irish potatoes and sweet potatoes are grown in these areas for sale, though the production Inof many of these items would not classify as, "commercial." cluded are asparagus; beans-lima (green); beans-snap, string or wax; beets (table); broccoli; cabbage; cantaloupes; muskmelons, honeydews, etc.; carrots; collards; corn (sweet); cowpeas (green); cucumbers; kale; lettuce; okra; onions (dry) ; peas (green) ; peppers -sweet and pimento; radishes; spinach; squash; tomatoes; turnips; turnip greens; watermelons; and mixed vegetables. In some sections acreage is confined almost entirely to one or two crops while in other sections a wide variety of vegetables is grown. U. S. DEPARTMENT AGRICULTURE OF NEG. 42087 BUREAU OF AGRICULTURALECONOMICS Figure 1 Irish potatoes.-Irish potatoes are grown generally over the four states for home use and small surpluses are marketed locally. However, the region has some large and very important commercial areas particularly in the coastal sections. It is estimated that approximately two-thirds of the 1939 crop was sold, chiefly from the important commercial areas, with only 12 BULLETIN 262 IRISH POTATOES ACREAGE, 1939 I. OF U. S DEPARTMENT AGRICULTURE J NEG 42088 BUREAU OF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS Figure 2 I SWEETPOTATOES AND YAMS ACREAGE. 1939 I U. S. DEPARTMENT OF-AGRICULTURE NEG 42080 BUREAUOF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS Figure 3 FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 13 small quantities from sections where potatoes are grown largely for home consumption. Sweet potatoes.-Sweet potatoes are grown extensively over the four states. Most of the production is for home use, with only an estimated one-fourth of the 1939 crop being sold. Strawberries.-Commercial strawberry acreage is largely concentratgd in North Carolina and Alabama. A small acreage is grown around Atlanta and Augusta, and a large acreage in a few northwestern Georgia counties. The largest acreage in South Carolina is in Horry county, adjacent to North Carolina's heavy producing section. Acreages in the western third of North Carolina, though important in the cash crop production of the county, are small compared with those in six or seven counties in the southeastern part of the state. Strawberry acreage in Alabama is largely concentrated in three areas-Butler, Conecuh, and Escambia counties in the southern part of the state; Chilton county in the central part; and Cullman county in North Alabama. These are all important commercial sections. STRAWBERRIES HARVESTED ACREAGE. 1939 ri-) U S DEPARTMENT AGRICULTURE OF L' \' NEG. 42090 BUREAUOF AGRICULTURAL ECONOMICS Figure 4 Tree and Vine Fruits and Nuts.-The most important tree fruits of the area are apples and peaches, the latter being more important in quantity and value. In many sections the production is for home use, with only small surpluses for sale. However, there are some very important commercial areas. (Figure 5) The heavy concen- 14 BULLETIN 262 LAND IN BEARING AND NONBEARING FRUIT ORCHARDS, VINEYARDS, AND PLANTED NUT TREES, ACREAGE, APRIL 1, 1940 Each dot represents 250 acres U. S. DEPARTMENTOF AGRICULTURE NEG 45768 BUREAUOF AGRICULTURALECONOMICS Figure 5 tration of dots in central western Georgia is the center of Georgia's peach belt. Smaller acreages occur from there toward the northeastern corner of the state. The concentration in northwestern South Carolina is the important commercial peach belt of that state, largely in Spartanburg county. The concentration of dots in south central North Carolina indicates another area of heavy commercial acreage. Commercial apple production is confined largely to the eastern front of the Blue Ridge Mountains, in the west Carolinas and north Georgia. In Alabama most of the apples and peaches are grown for home use. Unlike the other states, no large sections in Alabama can be termed important commercially. In the central part of the state (Chilton county) there is a small locality where commercial peach acreage is increasing rapidly, and a few counties in the northeastern part of the state have limited surpluses for market. North Carolina is the major grape state in the area. Largest number of grapevines occurs in the Nort Carolina counties of Buncombe, Burke, Gaston, and Polk; in the South Carolina counties of Chesterfield, Greenville, Lexington, and Spartanburg; in the Georgia counties of Walker and Pike; and in the Alabama counties of Blount, Cullman, DeKalb, and Morgan. Georgia is the heaviest producer of pecans in the area, with major plantings concentrated in the southwestern counties of Crisp, FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 15 Dougherty, Lee, Macon, Mitchell, Peach, Sumter, and Tattnall. Trees in North Carolina are largely in Wake and Columbus counties, and in South Carolina largely in Florence and Orangeburg. Fairly heavy plantings occur in the Alabama counties Montgomery and Mobile. Importance of Fresh Produce The Carolinas, Georgia, and Alabama enjoy certain advantages in the production of fruits and vegetables, particularly in production for the fresh market. These are mild climate; light, well drained soils; generally adequate labor; and relative proximity to large consuming centers. Mild climate is perhaps the region's most valuable asset in production for the fresh market. In most of the area, early fruit and vegetable crops mature two to eight weeks earlier than in more northern areas, thereby commanding premium prices. Likewise, a fall crop is often possible, because of a longer growing season. In addition the light well drained soils desirable in the production of certain kinds of fruits and vegetables are scattered throughout the area. These soils warm quickly and may be cultivated with less expense than heavier soils. Though unfortunately fertilizer is usually necessary, the cost is offset in part by the relatively low cost of land. The farm labor supply is generally adequate. Though the distances involved are significant, the four-state area is nearer the large consuming centers of the northeast than are major fresh market areas of Florida, Texas, and California. Much of the area is within 24 hours by motortruck of Washington, Baltimore, Philadelphia, and New York. For example, the distance from South Georgia to Philadelphia is 980 miles and to New York, 1068 miles. South Carolina's principal vegetable-producing is only 680 (overnight) from Philadelphia. :region Only very small quantities of crops grown for processors move through any type of concentration facility. A brief comparison of acreages grown for processing as compared with production for the fresh market is desirable, however, for the reason that (1) there is a tendency for persons estimating volume produced in the area of a proposed facility to include all production regardless of the market for which it is grown and regardless of whether any advantage may be gained by marketing through a concentration facility, and (2) some marketing specialists in the area see a growing emphasis upon processing. If fresh production should be deemphasized, effects upon concentration facilities should be examined. Table 3 shows a comparison, by states in the area, of acreage, production, and farm value of commercial truck crops harvested for the fresh market as compared with the processed market, for the 10-year prewar average and for 1942. Table 3.--Truck. crops, commercial: acreage, production, and farm value of commercial truck crops for fresh market and for processing, four Southeastern States, 1932-41 (average) and 19421 North Carolina South Carolina Georgia _________ ________ Average 1932-41 For fresh market Acres ' 11942 I Average 1932-41 ' 1942 63,100 117,072 -I T I Average 1932-41 95,430 217,346 2,791 Alabama Average 1942 68,610 190,218 4,475 1932-41 12,010 Total 4 States Average 1942 8,200 33,566 1932-41 1942 Prod. Prod. - 49,090 106,792 (tons)- Value (1000$) For processing Acres (tons) 2,663 4,760 9,810 232 53,850 116,602 2,895 44,450 110,669 3,881 9,200 15,590 510 53,65( 0 126,25U 4,391 67,070 127,820 3,217 1,940 3,850 56 i 44,943 488 1,820 2,930 75 5,271 5,850 7,510 232 68,950 124,582 5,503 634 1,880 2,910 70 10,080 36,476 704 I 223,600 496,901 9,159 23,400 33,400 860 247,000 530,301 10,019 I 184,360 451,525 14,261 37,880 52,005 1,918 rgia ----- Value (1000$)-- 14,880 16,810 497 110,310 234,156 3,288 20,950 25,995 1,106 89,560 1 3 r Total Acres-------------_ _ Prod. (tons) Value (1000$)Fresh as percentage of total Acres-------91.16 Prod. (tons) Value (1000$) z O 69,010 131,670 3,273 216,213 5,581 13,830 47,873 563 222,240 503,530 16,179 91.59 91.99 82.85 87.65 88.38 97.19 97.08 98.29 91.52 93.97 86.51 92.82 84.88 95.78 1 Source : Agricultural Statistics, 1944 i 76.61 87.98 80.18 l n I 86.84 93.88 86.68= ~l-J 81.35 92.02 90.06 90.53 93.70 91.42 82.96 89.67 88.15 FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 17 There appears to have been a slight increase in the acreage grown for processing as compared with that for fresh sale when 1942 is compared with the average for the 10 years preceding. However, this can hardly be called significant, and it remains to be seen whether the trend continues after the postwar adjustment period. Comparisons with the war years subsequent to 1942 become increasingly difficult as abnormal influences such as rationing, price ceilings, labor and transportation shortages, and alternative uses for capital make themselves felt. As a consequence, it is tentatively assumed that prewar production ratios are most nearly representative. For the 10-year prewar average (1932-1941), about 91 percent of harvested acreage was for the fresh market, the largest proportion (97 percent) being in South Carolina, and the smallest (86.5 percent) being in Georgia. On the basis of the 10-year average, the important crops for processing were peppers 89 percent of the acreage harvested; cucumbers 30.7 percent; tomatoes 18.7 percent; green lima beans 6.6 percent; and snap beans 4.8 percent. In addition, relatively minor quantities of beets and cabbage were processed in certain years. Utilization data on strawberries, grapes, and tree fruits for this specific area are not available. However, in most instances rough estimates may be made. The 10,870 acres of strawberries harvested during the average 10-year period probably were sold largely to the fresh market, only small quantities being packed by producers of jams, preserves, and ice creams. Small quantities were packed frozen, largely for institutional and commercial sales. All quantities packed probably were not in excess of 4 percent. Probably all of the one to one and a half million bushels of market pears usually produced are sold to the fresh market. Most of the 10 to 11 thousand tons of grapes produced are sold to fresh markets. Quantities sold to processors would seldom amount to 10 percent of total quantities marketed. The proportion of the peaches processed would seldom equal 7 percent, and perhaps at times is less than 1 percent, due to the premium prices this early fruit commands Not more than 35 percent, and seldom more in the fresh than 10 percent, of the usual 15 million bushels of apples (produced chiefly in North Carolina) are canned, dried, or processed into vinegar, cider, and juice. market. ORGANIZATION FEATURES, OPERATING METHODS, AND RESULTS Ownership and Control Many agencies in commercial producing regions have interested themselves in marketing, an interest which has frequently resulted in the establishment of some type of concentration market. It has not been uncommon to find markets sponsored or financed by one group and operated by another. 18 BULLETIN 262 Of 43 concentration markets surveyed in 1940, eleven were privately owned (eight by buyers); 12 were owned by municipalities; seven by states; seven sponsored by civic-minded groupschambers of commerce, civic clubs, businessmen, etc.; three were owned by cooperatives; and one each by a county, a railroad, and a growers' organization (Table 4). Ownership and control are frequently not in the hands of the same agency. Although seven of the 12 municipalities owning markets were actively engaged in their control, some preferred to establish the facilities and turn them over to a board made up of growers and buyers, or to some local buyer or civic group. In Georgia, for example, funds for building state farmers' markets often come from local regions in which the market is to be established. After construction, the facility is either deeded or leased to the State Bureau of Markets for operation. A manager is then furnished by the Bureau and operation is supervised by it. Table 4.-Ownership and control of 43 fruit and vegetable concentration markets by method of sale, four Southeastern States, 1940 Auction Private-sale Agency State Municipality County Private (buyers, etc.) --Cooperative -------------Businessmen, chambers of commerce, banks, etc. Railroads Boards Growers' agency Total Ownership , Number 2 -___-____10 8 1 Control Number 2 5 9 1 Ownership Number 5 2 1 3 2 3 1 17 Control Number 5 2 1 2 3 1 2 1 17 4 5 1---------------4 26 26 In this study some markets privately owned by buyers were controlled by the owner. Two markets owned by private persons, other than buyers, were controlled and operated by the owners. One privately owned market was turned over to a cooperative association to operate, and one to a board of farmers and buyers. Of the seven markets owned by civic groups, five were controlled by the same type of management, and one sponsored by a civic group was turned over to a board for control and operation. Civic groups also controlled one municipally owned market. Three of the markets were cooperatively owned and controlled, and one privately owned market was leased and operated by a cooperative association. Of the remaining markets, one was owned and operated by a county, one was owned by a railroad and leased to private persons, one was owned and operated by a growers' organization, and one municipally owned market was operated by a buyer. FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 19 In brief, states, counties, municipalities, private individuals, cooperative associations, businessmen, chambers of commerce, civic clubs, banks, and grower organizations are all engaged in ownership or operation of concentration markets. All except the informal groups of businessmen and railroads are actively engaged in operation of markets within the area. Markets sponsored by chambers of commerce, local civic clubs, informal groups of businessmen, and similar groups often begin with a suggested idea. A local committee visits a market reputed to be successful and makes a report; the idea seems good, money is raised, and a facility is constructed. The design is often very similar to that of the market visited; the facility may be neither adequate nor the right type for efficient use in that area; it may bear idiosyncrasies of those promoting the enterprise and may be too elaborate or expensive for the volume of produce handled. After the construction is under way the next problem is, "How is the market to be managed?" Often the sponsors prefer to step aside and turn the facility over to someone else to operate, and thus the sponsoring agency assumes the role of promoter only. Some buyer or private person may be willing to operate it. It may be placed in the hands of a board made up of farmers, buyers, or both, or perhaps of a cooperative association. Securing efficient management is one of the most difficult problems of establishing a market, and is often the difference between a successful market and a failure. Markets operating throughout the year are in much better position to attract capable managers than many of the country markets operating for only a few weeks or months, where it is often difficult to get the type of person needed for so brief a period. Establishment of market facilities should be extended only after careful consideration of the need in each case and with due regard to the services expected to be rendered. There is danger in having too many markets or in having them poorly located with regard to sources of supply and distribution. Additional markets may lower the volume available to existing facilities, cut down on the number of buyers and sellers and result in several uneconomic markets where a smaller number could have operated with profit. The expansion of markets should proceed with expansion of production and the need for facilities. The failure of a market may discourage establishment of a market in the same trade center even after expanded production fully justifies the existence of such a market. Types of Facilities Many types of facilities are being used for concentration markets. Lack of uniformity in design may be explained in a number of ways: Methods of selling, whether auction or private-sale; location of the market, whether in country or city; and the needs of the community. Some variations can be explained only by the fact 20 BULLETIN 262 that buildings not intended for markets have been adapted to them. In still other cases, those designing the layout and facilities have been inexperienced in marketing. For the purposes of this discussion, types of facilities will be grouped into three general classes: (1) Country concentration markets selling at auction, (2) country concentration markets selling by private-sale, and (3) concentration markets in cities. Figure 6 shows location of 26 auctions, 18 private-sale markets, and 35 cooperative marketing associations and sales agencies. Locations of cooperatives, as a factor in total market organization, are shown, although these organizations are not subjects of the survey. 7 In some cases facilities located on this map may have discontinued operation or others may have been established since 1941. However, the list is believed to be reasonably accurate as of that date, except for a few small markets which may or may not be classified as "concentration markets." COOPERATIVE CONCENTRATION MARKETS, FRUIT AND VEGETABLE MARKETING .ASSOCIATIONS, AND SALES AGENCIES, 1941 IN NORTHCAROLINA. SOUTHCAROLINA.GEORGIA. AND ALABAMA Eizabeth - oClInCS ~t EAsheville sme E Waynesville as r , t.bHO COO Fio R.nGoHldsboCroto DValhalla Spartanburg dbu Blue Ridge "villa lyo Ellijay '-Clarksville. Lrs Columbia Dahlonega' ,Cullman Lk Ct ,Oneonta~ Bimingham ~ Montt. Atlanta igte S*ackvll Augusta W st Holly Hill ranchll rSmok Walterboroo Thosby., Canton Coumbus r Clstos Savnna~h ""'Auctions .Cordele B*xely " Private sale :Garland .Castleberry Atmoe *Syveter " Douglas *Adel Vadost " Thomasvlle . . oso O Cooperative City markets 5 Mb~i Figure 6 7 Auctions were located at the following points in 1941: North Carolina-Goldsboro, Mt. Olive, Faison, Clinton, Warsaw, Turkey," Rose Hill, Wallace, Burgaw, Chadbourn, Tabor City, Cameron, Vass, Jacksonville, Beaufort, Val Halla, Elizabeth City ; South CarolinaBlackville, Holly Hill, Charleston, Loris, Lake City, Kingstree ; Georgia,-Gleu~nville, Claxton ; Alabama-Castleberry. Private-sale, South Carolina-Columbia, Branchville, Walterboro; Georgia. Atlanta, Macon, Savannah, Augusta, Adl; Alabama-Mobile, _Birmingham, Oneonta. Cooperative, North Carolina-Asheville, Burgaw (2), Waynesville. (3),. Wilmington Norlina, Ridgeway; South Carolina-Ridgeland, Monetta, Spartanburg (2), Smoaks, Williston ; Georgia-Dahlonega, Clarksville, Clayton, Elberta, Foley' (2), Garland (2), Jemison, Robertsdale, Summerdale, Thorsby. Columbus. Cordele. Sylvester. Thomasville, Boston, Valdosta, Douglas, Baxley, FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 21 Soic duplications occur as a result of attempts to separate types (f facilities and markets. Country concentration markets selling at auction.-Country auctions lake use of one of two genieral t\pes of facility-tile auction block and tile platform. The most colmnion of the two is the so-called iuction hiock," wich ill this area is usually an open shed that wXill accoimmodat e two lines of traffic. The tendencyi is to construct a small stand with ov erhanging root. The vellicles pass under the roof on either side of the stand, which is occupied by auctioneer, buyers, and clerks. In about 40 percent of the eases, I'igure 7.-State F'armers' Market (auction) at Glenniille, Georgia. Auction block may be observed in foreground. at which buyers assemble loads Larger shed is facility samples are removed from the truck or wvagon and plael on tile stand for inspection at the time of sale. After sale to the highest bidder, drivers deliver their produce to the point where the buyer is assembling his purchases. Facilities providing for two liles of traffic expedite selliug in that the load on one side of tile stand may be sold while tie vcicle 0on tile other mlovQesinto) plaic. This also permits opportunity to display samples from one vehicle while the sale is being made from another on tile oppositc side of tile stand. In order to avoid( congestion from bystanders, platforms for visitors are frequently coistructed outside the lines of traffic but under the shed. Height of stand usually ranges from about 18 inches to tlhe height of a truckbed. The latter facilitates lifting samples on the stand and returning them to the vehicle. If stands are built at lower levels, more inconvenience is incurred. The other type of facility- used for country anction markcts w ill be referred to here as the platform type, so called because tle auction is held on a long platform instead of the "block." This type of facility may be an open shed or enclosed construction. BULLETIN 262 Tlie shed at Fiaison, North Carolina, is an example of the former. 'lie platform is covered by an open shed and occupies the entire a tea of the roof. ines ot traffic pass (m >'prlitesides .,f tM4ii IV O .^ , Figure 8.-Open shed platform tSpe North Carolina auction market facility at Faison, platform occupied by buyers, auctioneer, and clerics. To avoid coongestion, a place for visitors has been penned off the end of the platform. The market at Lake City, South Carolina, is an example of the enclosed platform type. The building is an enclosed brick building approximately 80 x 200 feet, with two driveways and a platform between running full length of the building. Between each drive and the outside w all there is another platform, utilized for drink stands, offices, and by buyers wx care to rent space. ho Vehicles are admitted until there is a continuous line in each driveway the full length of the building. Samples from each load are placed on the platforn hetween the driveways, after which the market manager ings a hell to inform buyers and sellers that trading is to begin. The auctioneer, buyers, and clerks start at the opposite end of the building from which the buyers entered and more from sample to sample selling the loads. As soon as each lot is sold, the grow er returns the sample to his vehicle and (Iries oat of the building. If the farmer accepts the hid, the load is delivered to the buy er. When all the produce in the building has been sold, the lrocedure is repeated as many times as necessaryto sell all the offerings. Growers mor e into place in order of arrival. If offerings are small, sales are usually held on the hour. The enclosed brick strueture at Lake City cost approximately $25,400. The open platform sheds can be constructed for a small part of this figure. With the exception of the market office and perhaps the drink concession, it is doubtful if the side platforms are as useful as an equiNvalent amount of space arranged otherwise. FRUIT AND VEGETABLE CONCENTRATION MARKETS 23 Presumably, the side platforms were designed for use by buyers in assembling loads. Since walls prohibit loading from the outside, all loading and unloading must be from the lanes where selling is taking place, rendering the side platforms almost useless for assembling loads. If the building is to be used exclusively for marketing fruits and vegetables, it is doubtful if this facility has any advantages over open construction with overhanging roof, to which trucks may also back up. At this type of market facility, additional sheds are sometimes provided where buyers may assemble their loads. When such provisions are not made for assembling loads rent free or at a nominal charge, a buyer frequently assembles loads at his trucks, at some nearby vacant building rented for the purpose, or*atthe railroad station. If building accommodations for assembling produce are needed by buyers, it would appear desirable to build them in connection with the market and, at the same time, locate them so they will be convenient for shipment by either rail or truck. In a few places fruits and vegetables are being sold at auction in other facilities, such as tobacco warehouses, railroad station platforms, etc. At Goldsboro, North Carolina, for example, loaded vehicles pass by a small platform projecting from a side door of a large tobacco warehouse. The auctioneer, buyers, and clerks occupy the platform. A sample is examined and the load sold and delivered to the place the buyer designates. In another area a small platform was constructed near the middle of a tobacco warehouse. The wagons and trucks enter one side of the building, pass by the platform, and after the produce is sold, vehicles leave the building by another door to avoid congestion. Some buyers assemble their loads in the warehouse, others outside. Country concentration markets selling at private sale.-The simplest type of facility for a country concentration market selling at private-sale usually consists of an open shed platform where produce may be displayed and offered for sale by growers. Such sheds are similar to the platform type of auction facility. The platform, which can be approached from either side, permits the grower to back his truck up to one side, display a sample, or if he wishes, unload the entire load on the platform. An overhanging roof ordinarily protects the grower's-load from the weather. Buyers walk along the platform and deal directly with the growers; or in the event the market manager has charge of the selling, with the market manager. If growers occupy one side of the platform, the other side may be used by the buyer for loading purposes. The overhanging roof is quite popular, but if it is too high the rain may blow under it, or if it is too low, trucks with stationary tops are unable to back under it. Experience seems to indicate that the roof should be as low as possible to permit large trucks to back under. A desirable height is generally conceded to be about 13 to 14 feet. BU~LLETIN 262 i ~ ;t 1 ! igue c - 1 It ii en14('co-i . i I ,h fiLUAg Fig ure 10.-Fatrnicrs' M~ar ket at Xaldosta, Georgia ittelmie 0 a eileentrinl market seetini cmo iil~n, eo shedds andi ilisllav platforms for rinxxer', and truiker, and, ini somtie cases. parking. shieds with diriect rail conleet ins fotr ouitbondii shipmitets; ani'_' ( s,ectioni foi frit aind vegetable wholesalers'. Concentration markets in cities.- ( thle 4:3 mtarketing facilities~ 'els>ive of packing houes mni shippintg. sheds) su